current
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Bbanbob, you said the following:
Now what they did IMHO retain were beneficial interest in and to a PORTION of the returns those assets generate....... And those returns have been going into the DST
———————
Exactly as I have always posited the DST will play a vital role in our eventual distributions
Xxx
Exactly: Now, let this sink-into some investors and yes this would absolutely include any and all Safe Harbor, Bk Remote assets
“ with equity now very last in tranche six."
P's and U's = equity
Xxx
PROOF of WaMu Assets To Be Distributed At Some Point TO SOME INVESTORS:
1) An investor can argue the timing and amount
2) An investor may be even able to argue who will receive the distributions
3) There may even be a few more articles an investor MAY challenge
***BUT, BUT, BUT***ONE ACTION/FACT CANNOT BE ARGUED INTELLIGENTLY as THERE MUST BE ASSETS TO OPEN A DST!
4) That is, there ARE ASSETS in the WMI DST and NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH THE NOW CANCELED (12/31/2021) WMILT or the DST COULD HAVE NEVER BEEN OPENED During the first two weeks of March 2012 Prior to the (ED) Effective Date of 3/19/2012- PROOF FOLLOWS:
_________________________________________
"As I (Dmdmd1) posted numerous times, bgriffinokc's $ 20 was WELL SPENT and APPRECIATED to affirm WMI becoming a DST prior to BK emergence which in turn ESTABLISHED/FIXED its "ASSETS" distribution scheme via the 2 SEPARATE EINs:"
_________________________________________
Ask yourselves:
1) Why would WMI convert into a Delaware Statutory Trust (DST), prior to BK emergence on March 19, 2012, from a Corporation and also get a distinctly different EIN/Tax ID#?
IMO...My answer is simple: the bankruptcy remote assets (beneficial interest in MBS Trusts) owned by WMI would be housed in the new DST.
__________________________________________
The following is a list of the Seven Deadly Sins of a Delaware Statutory Trust (meaning all seven conditions below need to be true in order for a DST to be a legal entity):
https://seracapital.com/1031-exchanges/the-seven-7-deadly-sins-of-delaware-statutory-trusts-dsts/
"The Seven Deadly Sins of Delaware Statutory Trusts (DSTs) Explained
ONLY POSTING NUMBER 6 Of The 7 Deadly DST SINS:
6. All Cash, Other Than Necessary Reserves, Must Be Distributed To The Co-Investors Or Beneficiaries On A Current Basis. According to the IRS regulations, DSTs are allowed to keep cash reserves on hand to cover emergency maintenance and repairs issues. However, they are required to share the earnings and proceeds realized from the DST to its beneficiaries within the agreed distribution date. This deadly sin prevents trustee misappropriation of funds and protects beneficiaries’ rights to receive their earnings promptly.
XXX
MadBadger, you said the following.
You can’t Ignore that writing in the Plan, and also, not include that the Agreements got Amended, Altering the Payout Waterfall. Good Day Lodas and Thank You for Making Me Better.
____________________________________________
This is like saying POR 1-7 control when there was a an AMENDED POR 7 signed by the court on 2/23/2012 which IS THE CONTROLLING document and if the amended part changed anything which id did, then this is the controlling document even though some of the same actions MAY have been carried through to the amended document.
An interesting thing is there were daily changes made to the final document during the last three weeks leading up to Amended POR 7. These changes such as the payout Matrix among several other issues put equity in the enviable position that the Crooks were in when they were trying to zero out equity in PORs 1-7.
This being the very last in line to RECEIVE ALL SPOILS THAT THE PERPS PLANNED ON LEGALLY STEALING from equity BUT WERE caught and punished with Piers ultimately being capped in tranche four with equity now very last in tranche six.
xxx
Newflow, again excellent research!
I do believe from the ten thousand foot view what you wrote in the following paragraph will be very close to the end plans for WMI and LBHI. To me, this also explains WMI delays waiting on LBHI to get ready so they can both move forward simultaneously!
Also do not forget the multitude of tens of billions in a mixture of tax attributes and NOLs that will be able to be used dollar for dollar. My guess is for the combination of LBHI and WaMu around 35 to 70 billion in various tax attributes before any taxes are paid. Yes, these people are that smart to get this kind of deal done
This would also explain why we have not seen any adversarial filings from the BIG PLAYERS!
—————————————
LBHI and WMI estates could become a giant REIT IMO,Mathew Cantor worked for both.Time is ripe IMO.Both have DST liquidating Trusts.Weil and A&M have fingers in both cases.
Xxx
Ron, why were the UWs given an extra year to sign releases?
Ron, let the following SINK-IN!
All one really needs to know regarding the 75/25 is actually very simple. This is the VERY WORK the UWs perform.
The UWs KNOW EXACTLY where the monies were/are, which is why they got a one-year extension over EVERYONE else to sign releases...
PLUS spent tons of money and time defending their position IN CLASS 19 against Alice and all others to keep their PLACEMENT IN CLASS 19...
YES THE UWs KNOW all about the big monies in this case
Have I told you lately how much more I really love my Timely-Signed Releases which continue to grow immensely every single day forward?
xxx
Bbanbob, you said the following:
OH and ya DON'T THUNK that the UW's KNOW FULL WELL there is NO AMBIGUITY since they spend several mil $$ to maintain thier current positions in CLASS 19
COMMON SENSE AND LOGIC USE THEM THEY WORK
_________________________________
All one really needs to know regarding the 75/25 is actually very simple. This is the VERY WORK the UWs perform.
They KNOW EXACTLY where the monies were/are, which is why they got a one-year extension over EVERYONE else to sign releases...
PLUS spent tons of money and time defending their position IN CLASS 19 against Alice and all others to keep their PLACEMENT IN CLASS 19...
YES THE UWs KNOW all about the big monies in this case
Have I told you lately how much more I really love my Timely-Signed Releases which continue to grow immensely every single day forward?
xxx
"Class 19’s Claims were satisfied before the implementation of the Plan."
Any reason these 'satisfied' claims are still unpaid?
Ron, you can not have it both ways. So, if Class 19 was already satisfied prior to the Ownership Change (yes, this has been confirmed long ago) AND the (ED) Effective Date of 3/19/2012, then Preferred would have had their monies just like higher Classes.
However, once the ED kicked in on 3/19/2012, the OC happened along with the Estate being owned by Preferred and Common Equity Interests. Remember changes made to Amended POR 7 almost daily up till the very day the court signed Amended POR 7 on 2/23/2012.
xxx
newflow, all very valid points! Again, there is no way some of the best lawyers in the world completed filings leaving ambiguity where there is a multitude of ten of billions at stake...there is no way PERIOD there is ambiguity just unfortunate investor choices trying to rewrite history.
xxx
xoom, agree and the docs speak for themselves but unfortunately, these docs do not meet some investors' investment choices and selections.
Further, there is ZERO ambiguity. There is no way some of the best lawyers in the world were involved with this case and there is no way they left ambiguity where there is potentially a multitude of tens of billions at stake.
xxx
Ron, according to Amended POR 7 that was signed on 2/23/2012 (nothing prior matters), the following is what is found in the filings that count.
Yes, YOU ARE PARTIALLY CORRECT. Your commons own the company BUT, BUT so does preferred since the ownership changed everything from the (ED) Effective Date of 3/19/2012 forward. So if filings mean anything to you then the following words in the filing SHOULD BE self-explanatory
____________________________
Treatment of Preferred and Common Equity Interests
NOTICE BOTH ARE CONSIDERED EQUITY WHICH DOES OWN THE FORMER ESTATE
xxx
BBANBOB, this self-explanatory for those who want the truth and if words in a filing mean anything then these following few words should tell the investor the TRUTH
Treatment of Preferred and Common Equity Interests-NOTICE BOTH ARE CONSIDERED EQUITY WHICH DOES OWN THE FORMER ESTATE
LIGHTBULB MOMENT - Effective Date FOR WMIH 3/19/2012 - SEPARATION FROM BK COURT - THEN WMIH 8K FILING EXPLAINING 75/25 on 8/1/2012 MONTHS AFTER BK COURT SEPARATION
Possibly not shown investors the LIGHTBULB moment by pointing out WMIH issued 8K clarifying the 75/25 almost five months after separation from BK court (3/19/2012) meaning no way would they have issued the 8K if 75/25 was NOT inclusive of the entire estate, SAFE HARBOR/BK REMOTE or NOT
***75/25 Preferred and Common Equity Interests Explanation***
Remember the final POR 7 was signed 2/23/2012 with daily changes made to the POR up-to and including the final day 2/23/2012. The last documents and changes will control.
Filing # 9659 Date; 02/13/2012
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229120213000000000024
67. The Seventh Amended Plan provides for payment of Allowed Claims and, if appropriate, Post-petition Interest Claims on account of Allowed Claims. Distributions to claimants will be made in Cash, Liquidating Trust Interests that represent the right to receive future Cash distributions from the Liquidating Trust and, in certain circumstances, Runoff Notes and/or Reorganized Common Stock. As set forth on pages 4-5 of Exhibit C to the Disclosure Statement, no Class is projected to recover more than one hundred percent (100%) on account of the Claims or Equity Interests, as the case may be, classified in each Class.
Filing # 9697 Date; 02/16/2012 View actual pages 59 and 60 or PDF 84 and 85
http://www.kccllc.net/wamu/document/0812229120216000000000003
PROVISION FOR TREATMENT OF PREFERRED EQUITY INTEREST (CLASS 19) 23.1 Treatment of Preferred Equity Interests: Commencing on the Effective Date, and subject to the execution and delivery of a release in accordance with the provisions of Section 41.6 of the Plan, each holder of a Preferred Equity Interest, including, without limitation, each holder of a REIT Series, shall be entitled to receive such holder’s Pro Rata Share of seventy-five percent (75%) of (a) subject to the right of election provided in Sections 6.2(b), 7.2(b), 16.1(b)(ii), 18.2(b), 19.2(b) and 20.2(b) of the Plan, the Reorganized Common Stock, and (b) in the event that all Allowed Claims and Postpetition Interest Claims in respect of Allowed Claims are paid in full (including with respect to Allowed Subordinated Claims), any Liquidating Trust Interests to be redistributed; provided, however, that, in the event that, at the Confirmation Hearing and in the Confirmation Order, the Bankruptcy Court determines that a different percentage should apply, the foregoing percentage shall be adjusted in accordance with the determination of the Bankruptcy Court and be binding upon each holder of a Preferred Equity Interest. In addition, and separate and distinct from the distribution to be provided to holders of the Preferred Equity Interests from the Debtors, pursuant to the Global Settlement Agreement, and in exchange for the releases set forth in the Global Settlement Agreement and in Article XLI herein, on the Effective Date, JPMC shall pay, or transfer to the Disbursing Agent, for payment to each Releasing REIT Trust Holder its pro rata share of Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000,000.00), determined by multiplying (a) Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000,000.00) times (b) an amount equal to (i) the principal amount of REIT Series held by such Releasing REIT Trust Holder on the voting record date with respect to the Sixth Amended Plan divided by (ii) the outstanding principal amount of all REIT Series (which is Four Billion Dollars ($4,000,000,000.00)); provided, however, that the release of claims against the “Releasees” delivered in connection with the solicitation of acceptances and rejections to the Sixth Amended Plan shall be deemed binding and effective for each Releasing REIT Trust Holder; and, provided, further, that, at the election of JPMC, the amount payable to Releasing REIT Trust Holders pursuant to this Section 23.1 and Section 2.24 of the Global Settlement Agreement may be paid in shares of common stock of JPMC, having an aggregate value equal to the amount of cash to be paid pursuant to this Section 23.1 and Section 2.24 of the Global Settlement Agreement, valued at the average trading price during the thirty (30) day period immediately preceding the Effective Date. While JPMC’s maximum liability pursuant to this Section 23.1 and Section 2.24 of the Global Settlement Agreement is Fifty Million Dollars ($50,000,000.00), JPMC’s liability shall be reduced to the extent the Re
PROVISION FOR TREATMENT OF COMMON EQUITY INTERESTS (CLASS 22) 25.1 Treatment of Common Equity Interests: Commencing on the Effective Date, and subject to the execution and delivery of a release in accordance with the provisions of Section 41.6 of the Plan, each holder of Common Equity Interests shall be entitled to receive such holder’s Pro Rata Share of twenty-five percent (25%) of (a) subject to (i) the right of election provided in Sections 6.2(b), 7.2(b), 16.1(b)(ii), 18.2(b), 19.2(b) and 20.2(b) of the Plan[/i] and (ii) the rights of holders of Dime Warrants pursuant to the LTW Stipulation, the Reorganized Common Stock and (b) in the event that all Allowed Claims and Postpetition Interest Claims in respect of Allowed Claims are paid in full (including with respect to Allowed Subordinated Claims), any Liquidating Trust Interests to be redistributed; provided, however, that, in the event at the Confirmation Hearing and in the Confirmation Order, the Bankruptcy Court determines that a different percentage should apply, the foregoing percentage shall be adjusted in accordance with the determination of the Bankruptcy Court and be binding upon each holder of a Common Equity Interest.
The above 75/25 percentage discussion is also further explained in this 8/1/2012 8K filing
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/000090951812000255/mm08-0112_8k.htm
Annex C - Item 1.01 Amendment of a Material Definitive Agreement.
Annex C to the Agreement was revised to clarify that holders of Preferred Equity Interests and Common Equity Interests will be issued Liquidating Trust Interests in Tranche 6 on account of those interests when Tranche 2 through Tranche 5 Liquidating Trust Interests have been satisfied in full, AND that the distribution to Tranche 6 will be shared 75% and 25% pro rata between claims on account of Preferred Equity Interests and Common Equity Interests, respectively.
xxx
Ron, AZC or ANYBODY, how do you explain the following?
1) WMI became a DST the second week of March in the year 2012 which still exists in my view and will play a VITAL ROLE in our distributions...Remember, one cannot open a DST without assets however we can argue how much and when BUT cannot argue there are assets
2) On the (ED) Effective Date of March 19, 2012, there was an (OC) Ownership Change which include all Safe Harbor, BK Remote assets
3) An OC means a change of title and potential investors who own this stock which became final on 3/19/2012. So, there can ONLY be one way for the former Estate assets to travel and that is the Chain of Title following the ownership of the stock.
This was set in the bk court which would have to include all Safe Harbor, Bk remote assets of the former Estate OTHERWISE, there would be two sets of ownership for the assets which would NEVER happen in a Delaware BK court
xxx
Year 2050
Newflow, thanks and this makes a lot of sense. The delay appears to have been aligning both Lehman and WaMu as opposed to other delays we may have thought.
Hopefully, we at least get some sort of confirmation within the next days, weeks to a few months.
Xxx
newflow, very good diligence, and thanks for sharing. Many here have thought that there must be something in the original plans as Weil, Gotchal and Manges were handling both Lehman and WaMu bk cases which happened two weeks apart from each other during mid to late September of the year 2008.
Both Estates have billions and billions in tax attributes and if a way is found to legally use them, this is the same as printing money as there will be NO TAXES OWED on future profits.
Remember, Alice tried to get the Amended Liquidating Trust agreement but the PERPS challenged her with all of their powers running back to the BK court crying foul to get MAMA Walrath to keep Alice at bay which was successful.
The question is why in January of the year 2020 did WMILT NOT want ANYONE to know what was agreed to in the Amended Trust Agreement, especially since there is NOT supposed to be anything in Safe Harbor or elsewhere? Also, on 1/23/2020, BOTH Bk cases were officially terminated and closed after Judge Walrath signed for their closure on 12/20/2019.
In my view, there is NO DOUBT this Amended Trust Agreement has something to do with Safe Harbor assets and/or the actual ownership of same otherwise there would have been no reason to amend the trust especially since it was being terminated and closed on 1/23/2020.
Once again, time passing, and filings will show us the way forward.
xxx
Ron, look at the following.
1) WMI became a DST the second week of March in the year 2012 which still exists in my view...Remember, one cannot open a DST without assets however we can argue how much and when BUT cannot argue there are assets
2) On the (ED) Effective Date of March 19, 2012, there was an (OC) Ownership Change which include all Safe Harbor, BK Remote assets
3) An OC means a change of title and potential investors who own this stock which became final on 3/19/2012. So, there can ONLY be one way for the assets to travel and that is the Chain of Title following the ownership of the stock. This was set in the bk court which would have to include all Safe Harbor, Bk remote assets OTHERWISE, there would be two sets of ownership for the assets which would NEVER happen in a Delaware BK court
xxx
Yes, the investors who signed timely releases by 3/2012 are the new owners of the former WaMu Estate PERIOD and yes 75/25 to the END!
Xxx
Bbanbob, this is exactly correct! What the Sand Guru wants to ignore is the (OC) OWNERSHIP CHANGE that occurred with the court approved and signed documents that occurred on (ED) Effective Date of 3/19/2012.
The OC change effects both bk cases which also includes any Safe Harbor, BK Remote anssets, otherwise there would be dual ownership of assets and that could NEVER happen especially in the Delaware BK system.
Xxx
Yes, ole Eddie Lambert had the Kmart and Sears deal all figured out
Great comparison with astute facts to back up your statements. As usual, great diligence snd thanks for sharing
Mad, now I think you may have destroyed that poor Lodas creature
Xxx
Even better…nice research…these are very troubling facts for some
Xxx
mwd44, you are exactly correct. The so-called investors (inside information) who were allocated Kmart stock at $25.00 a share in the new company after zeroing-out all previous investors.
Then after 18 months or so this stock hit a high of $172.00 plus a share in 18 months.
This after they revalued in the former real estate in each of the following six quarters they purposely left out of the bk court and this was not even considered bk fraud!
Xxx
newflow, do you have any of the roughly 15B in (SD) Subordinated Debt and/or the five flavors of bonds?
xxx
ItsMyOption, even if COOP repurchased all of the 15.2 percent of the stock, this seems to be a HUGE NEGATIVE for COOP UNLESS there is another piece to the puzzle-like an 8K filing showing MORE actions that MAY involve those investors who signed timely releases by 3/2012.
Is this where COOP issues those ten million shelf-ready and authorized preferred shares to purchase assets from those investors who signed timely releases along with common shares to those investors who also signed timely releases by 3/2012?
There seems to be more going on than meets the eye in my view with Blackrock dissolving 15.2 percent of the shares.
xxx
FROM Dmdmd1-Bankruptcy-Remoteness FACTS, True Sale, Non-consolidation
FDIC Presentation & CBA09 agree on ABS “bankruptcy remoteness”
« Reply #1 on: Today at 02:36:29 AM »
Quote
I thought it would be easier to access this very important piece of information by starting a new topic.
FDIC presentation on April 27, 2022:
https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/cfr/bank-research-conference/annual-5th/kayotte-sgaon.ppt.pptx
Slide 2:
“ Bankruptcy-Remoteness:
-True Sale
- Non-consolidation
“Structured financings are based on one central, core principle: a defined group of assets can be structurally isolated, and thus…[is] independent from the bankruptcy risks of the originator”
Committee on Bankruptcy and Corporate Reorganizations of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York“
____________
Per CBA09 post on IHUB #457584:
“ CBA09
Wednesday, August 03, 2016 1:11:28 PM
Re: BBANBOB post# 457551
Post# of 687217 Go
Bob,
May be, just may be, the addressed assets in court were those within a "SPE". If designed via a specific manner those so called "hidden assets" would be protected from bankruptcy as follows:
The structured solution to the bankruptcy, true sale, and debt-for-tax issues varies by venue. For example, if a U.S. bank wants to securitize receivables, the structure requires two SPEs to avoid a federally taxable asset sale and to achieve off-balance-sheet financing and a bankruptcy remote structure. In the U.S. SPEs are usually organized as trusts (for tax reasons) under the laws of the state of Delaware or of New York. The first SPE is a wholly owned, bankruptcy remote subsidiary of the originator/seller, and the SPE buys the assets in a true sale. The assets are now beyond the reach both of the creditors of the originator/seller and the originator/seller. Wholly owned subsidiaries are consolidated with the originator/seller for U.S. federal tax purposes, so this achieves the debt-for-tax objective. The second SPE is the issuer of the debt (or ABS) and is entirely independent of the originator/seller. It is a bankruptcy remote entity.”
Per CBA09 post on IHUB:
"CBA09 Tuesday, 12/05/17 07:34:44 AM
Re: hotmeat post# 498530
Post # of 505195
Ref: IMO, WMIIC ""owned/controlled"" these Trusts on behalf of and for the sole benefit of WMI and NOW the WMI Estate/Tracking Markers.
Comments:
SPE/Trust are designed for independent ownership. Not controlled by WMI nor WMIIC.
Yes these SPE's/Trust are the "Crown Jewel" of WMI in it's capacity of being the Parent. Also Facts of great importance:
1) The bankruptcy estate does not have jurisdiction over these SPE's/ Trusts. WMI in its capacity of equity interest does.
2) WMI abandoned it's stock as worthless on record with the Estate. The Estate in turn diverted all future benefits back to WMI. A clever astute move by WMI.
A Turnover action is routine Bankruptcy procedure to bring back to WMI estate what is considered estate assets. And SPE/Trust Income is not part of the estate assets.
We are all good here with the SPE's/Trusts of the Parent - WMI. "
___________
CBA09 Ihub Post#501056:
"CBA09
Tuesday, 12/19/17 08:57:53 AM
Re: TJ0512 post# 501009
0
Post # of 550816
Ref: Couple of questions for you.
In post #498826 you made the comment
WMIIC's role was two fold:
1) Provide / Solidify assets "MBS" as bankruptcy remote. By way of "WMB" (Originator) to WMIIC (Depositor) to Trust. In effect a TWO TIER protection. Totally taking WMB out of any risk of substantive consolidation.
2) WMIIC being the depositor would also be the provider of credit enhancement. Having what is referred to as residual interest. Holders of subordinate certificates & over-collateralized loans.
Are you making an assumption in your comments above?
Comment:
Yes, assumption. My Point / Big Picture - no matter who is the depositor - Material "Force and Effect" of two tier structures.
Ref: In all of the trusts listed in the DB lawsuit as well as numerous other trusts I have seen WMB or a sub of WMB has been the originator & depositor.
If WMI or WMIIC was neither the originator or depositor for the trusts how does that benefit the estate of WMI/WMIIC?
Comment:
Safe Harbor Assets are removed from the estate. Thus. Trustee / Creditors of WMB have no claim to them. WMI is the parent they do.
Example:
Principal Subsidiaries
• Washington Mutual Bank, FA, a federal savings association, all of the common stock of which is held by New American Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and all of the preferred stock of which is held by Washington Mutual, Inc. New American Capital, Inc. is a wholly-owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Washington Mutual Bank, a Washington state-chartered stock savings bank, a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Washington Mutual Bank fsb, a federal savings bank, a wholly owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
• Long Beach Mortgage Company, a Delaware corporation, a wholly-owned direct subsidiary of Washington Mutual, Inc.
Ref: Also, in a previous post #498722 you said:
2) WMI abandoned it's stock as worthless on record with the Estate. The Estate in turn diverted all future benefits back to WMI. A clever astute move by WMI.
Where are you seeing that WMI is receiving any future benefit from WMB with regard to the trusts or are you making an assumption?
Comment:
No assumption. First 1) WMI is the parent and rightful benefit to any / all future value of it's wholly owned subsidiaries. If you have any experience in PSA you will see that they are set up to ensure the "Retained Assets" are in fact retained within the SPE # 1 / SPE/Trust # 2.
I want to make this abundantly clear, sharing from my experience, generally the Parent's bank account is where the funds are first received from PSA accounts when the "Accounts Removable Provision" is triggered. Then the Parent has control and funnels whatever money it deems necessary back to it's subsidiaries. The Parent's control part is the "Operative Word." As no expressed contract (s) are in force so as to direct the Parent as to distribution with funds received. This adds further protection to avoid substantive consolidation by the courts. "
_____________
IMO…conclusions as of April 30, 2022 @ 0230 EST:
1) ABS/MBS Trusts are bankruptcy remote
2) WMI (parent company) and old legacy WMI equity shareholders (Class 19 & 22) are the beneficiaries (via WMI beneficial interests) of the securitized loans in MBS Trusts created by WMI subsidiaries.
XXX
FROM EXO, why do SOME need someone to explain THIS CASE again? Let me explain.
In the chapter 11 bankruptcy there was the debtor in possession part and bankruptcy remote part. Are you following? 2 parts, not one, say it with me 2 parts. Good job baby girl. The debtors in possession paid their lawyers, business people $1,000,000,000.00 + during the course of the bankruptcy ( sorry the big number is 1 billion dollars plus). They paid off the debtors in order to close the bankruptcy...So now the debtor in possession part is now legally over, done, finished, past tense ect... Understand? Go back and read it all over if not..
The second part ( remember that from earlier) was bankruptcy remote!!! In other words not part of the bankruptcy, separate from, hence the second part. This is where we stand now going forward. Since this was a chapter 11 bankruptcy they get to reorganize and continue, stay alive, carry on business. There ARE ASSETS that the court could not use (look at, take, sell...because they were protected from the debtors hence bankruptcy remote. There were so many ASSETS the FDICR went to congress to change the law. Congress did but only GOING FORWARD!!! so those ASSETS still belong to the poor old old shareholder) So now we have all these ASSETS that we KNOW ARE THERE, but are protected in such a way that the company has not YET given back to their owners. No one can penetrate the corporate shield or the MANY TRUSTS that have those ASSETS. Following?
So only a few corporate or fiduciary people know how much money is in those trusts (or SPE's specialty purpose vehicles) and they have not told what is there!!! Reread the last sentence several times!!! Now do it again!!! Since they were protected they do not have to legally say we have XYZ.
Let me repeat, WE know there are ASSETS but they were protected from the debtors and for our benefit in such a way they do not need to say we have XYZ in this trust... That is why some can say 1/2 truths and cry... The funny part is old share holders should know the truth and still can not buy or sell any shares. So the lies do not affect the outcome of billions or hundreds of billions that old share holders will receive...If you think the FDIC cried 3 weeks after the theft of WAMU to CONGRESS and that was not a important FACT then go on with your belief that nothing is coming back, I just will not believe you but that is just me.
"Well, maybe LG at some day will explain to me, how a DST can exist without the WMILT *rofl*"
DST is Delaware Statuary Trust. Most all businesses use Delaware... To save time and effort look it up. ROLF There are many, many, many , many trusts because they structure them to protect them from predators or bankruptcy's as in this case.
WMILT Easy simple answer, something different that you should know or not know and it still will not affect the outcome...hahaha
Things happen behind closed doors, nonpublic information, trade secrets, Delaware trusts, Courts redact information all the time yet we live in a free society. Just because something does not make sense to you does not mean its not true. The Earth looks pretty flat to me when I was a kid but now I grew up. I learned, studied, saw pictures and now know... tadaaa the Earth is round hahahaha My opinions are mine and I share them freely.. Take them or trash them as you wish to help you understand even though I think you do but will not accept the truth because it does not fit your agenda. I have never been to space so the Earth is round... Here is another picture... That is not real boohoohoo Facts do not matter right???
I am stepping away. Those that know, know. Those who do not seek the truth will never find it!!!
Have a great day!!!
EXO
xxx
RD, thanks for sharing. I hope you are doing well.
I hope and pray you are correct for EVERYONE who signed timely releases by 3/2012 and put a beginning and/or end to this travesty of Justice that should have NEVER happened!
Xxx
newflow, thanks for sharing. Remember, the 15 billion in (SD) Subordinated Debt is the bonds.
1) Tranche four was the Piers that the Judge capped for getting caught in Insider Trading and were not due one cent more and tranche five is where the 15B in BONDS and/or SD reside
2) Tranche Six is where the former Preferred (WAMPQ) and former common (WAMUQ) reside
3) It appears to me the FDIC may be trying to mask the payback in the 15B worth of bonds via Libor. It would seem to me those investors who signed timely releases need to do no more as we are in Tranche six
4) I have all five flavors of the SD and have not seen or heard anything...YET
5) I believe this Libor Settlement is totally separate from those investors who signed timely releases by March of the year 2012 and this may indicate we are very close to getting paid BUT I have no way of knowing if this is related or not other than it seems there may be a link
XXX
LIBOR SETTLEMENT - ANYONE CORRECT ME IF YOU THINK I AM WRONG - THIS IS A TOTALLY SEPARATE SUIT (LIBOR) THAT INVOLVES A MAXIMUM of AROUND 70M WITH ONE DEADLINE OF THE LARGER AMOUNT of 68M HAS EXPIRED AND I BELIEVE THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SIGNING TIMELY RELEASES BY MARCH OF YEAR 2012 IN THE WaMu BK CASES
https://bondholderliborsettlements.com/Home
Welcome to the website for LIBOR Bondholder Settlements, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Action”).
In 2022, the Court granted final approval to seven settlements in the Bondholder Action with an aggregate dollar value of $68.625 million (the “initial Settlements”). Bondholder Plaintiffs have reached new proposed settlements with three additional banks: Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. (now known as MUFG Bank, Ltd. (“MUFG”)), Credit Suisse Group AG (“Credit Suisse”) and The Norinchukin Bank (“Norinchukin”) (the “Subsequent Settlements”). These banks are known collectively as the “Settling Defendants.” The Subsequent Settlements, if each is approved, will create an aggregate Settlement Fund of $1.749 million.
In December 2021, the Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s dismissal of the Bondholder Action on the merits, ending the case as to the remaining non-settling defendants. That dismissal is now final, and as a result, the Subsequent Settlements are the only remaining opportunity for members of the Bondholder Class to recover on the claims in the litigation. The only aspects of the Bondholder Action remaining before the District Court are the preliminary and final approval of the Subsequent Settlements and the ultimate distribution of the total aggregate of Settlement Funds from the Initial and Subsequent Settlements to members of the Bondholder Settlement Classes, and any related ancillary matters.
If you are a member of the Subsequent Settlement Classes, your rights will be affected, and you may be eligible for a payment from the Subsequent Settlements. The Subsequent Settlement Classes consist of:
XXX
Or, poor ole Fred got locked up in the Pokey!
Xxx
Posting for those who JUST DO NOT UNDERSTAND who cannot receive assets from the former WaMu Estate.
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/8817600/8817600120507000000000001.pdf
1.6 No Reversion to Debtors. In no event shall any part of the Liquidating Trust Assets revert to or be distributed to any Debtor or Reorganized Debtor.
Xxx
EXO, you are correct. Here are some of the proof and facts.
FDIC TRULY states HUNDREDS of BILLIONS in WaMu Assets - Yes, HUNDREDS of BILLIONS
https://www.fdic.gov/about/strategic/corporate/cfo_report_3rdqtr_15/0915_cfo_report.pdf
***Bottom of page 7***
'Excludes WAMU with total assets of $299 billion and zero estimated losses to the DIF
These investment decisions had to be made prior to 2/8/2012 in order to exchange a former WaMu EQUITY investment to receive NewCo/WMIH shares multiple times and also our BELOVED Escrow shares. The following are the simplified facts about the former WaMu investment vehicles.
Have I told you lately how much more I really love my Timely-Signed Releases which continue to grow immensely every single day forward?
xxx
Stox, I posted about this more in-depth before regarding a DST. I will just speak now in cliff notes. You can look my longer post up regarding this if you choose.
1) Around the second week in March of the year 2012 WMI (yes, WMI still alive) became a (DST) Delaware Statutory Trust with William Kosturos with God-like powers as DST Trustee
2) The (ED) Effective Date of March 19, 2012, goes down in the history of this case as one of the MOST significant actions in case history
3) The ED case confirmed WMI as a DST and more than likely Safe Harbor, BK Remote assets were transferred into this DST
4) We cannot prove it but I say investors who signed timely releases by 3/2012 are BENEFICIARY RECIPIENTS of this DST and will be notified at some point
5) Remember, point number six of seven of the Seven Deadly Sins of a DST and this point describes a DST timeframe for pre-agreed distributions MUST happen in a timely manner
6) The problem is we do NOT know the pre-agreed timeframe for these distributions but there are a few cast of Characters that know and the real reason we have not seen adversary filings filed to date
xxx
ItsMyOption, the reports you speak about such as 10Q and 10Ks are nothing MORE than historical documents.
Everything that will be in these reports has ALREADY happened so nothing new and nothing more other than if the company lost and or made money in the case of a 10Q.
A publicly traded company has four BUSINESS days to report ANYTHING material in form 8K filing and these are strict filings that MUST happen in a timely fashion.
A (DST) Delaware Statutory Trust is a different animal and does not have to report filings similar to an SEC ACT 34 reporting company and the same applies to WMI. If WMI issues private placement securities to those investors who signed timely releases then WMI will not have to file SEC ACT 34 public filings either.
xxx
Thank you Cura
1.6 No Reversion to Debtors. In no event shall any part of the Liquidating Trust Assets revert to or be distributed to any Debtor or Reorganized Debtor.
Xxx
Great to hear from you, Cura. Do you still believe in returns and if so any timeline?
WMI accounts and DISPUTED accounts.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/933136/000090951811000067/ex-459pgs3_test.htm
____________________________________________
Large Green
Member Level
Re: cura asada post# 685533
Saturday, January 14, 2023 4:03:48 PM
Post#
701383
of 701408
cura, I hope you are doing fine as we have not heard from you since September of the year 2022. You wrote the following that I find very interesting and I am sure others also.
______________________________________
cura asada
Re: soundincrest post# 685256
Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:15:52 PM
Post#
685533
of 701381
We need to wait till the end of the Closing Date period. Which is 12 months after February 11 2022 the Closing Date.
_________________________________________
I believe you were discussing finishing the NSM merger with shares issued to those investors who signed timely releases by 3/2012.
Your date of February 11, 2023, for issuance of those shares, is almost upon us already, and curious if you still feel this way.
Thanks for your thoughts...LG
xxx
cura, I hope you are doing fine as we have not heard from you since September of the year 2022. You wrote the following that I find very interesting and I am sure others also.
______________________________________
cura asada
Re: soundincrest post# 685256
Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:15:52 PM
Post#
685533
of 701381
We need to wait till the end of the Closing Date period. Which is 12 months after February 11 2022 the Closing Date.
_________________________________________
I believe you were discussing finishing the NSM merger with shares issued to those investors who signed timely releases by 3/2012.
Your date of February 11, 2023, for issuance of those shares, is almost upon us already, and curious if you still feel this way.
Thanks for your thoughts...LG
xxx