Democracy starts with you, tag your it! ...Thom Hartman
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.
"Wanna guess where the rest is, or is going? "
It's pretty telling when DB and Tranquility were the only security investor/trustee related claims against WMI/WMIIC......That tells me that WMI consolidated retained the vast majority of this income stream.
Issuers do hold a large percentage. JPM holds 90% in this newer one.
3/2016 http://www.wsj.com/articles/j-p-morgan-readies-mortgage-backed-deal-1457997755
I find some key points in the article, that many of us have been proponents of here, such as:
1) JPM keeping 90% of the cert interest; the senior tranches. How much did WMI keep on their MBS if this is what JPM keeps? Probably just as high; yet I know we have been more conservative on WMI's held % in past discussions.
2) Built with new and refinancings.........how many were from 8 years of cherry picking off WMI?
3) 'Safe Harbor' specifically mentioned as a legally isolating strategy for both JPM and investors. WMI did the same.
- "J.P. Morgan is using the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.’s safe harbor, which isolates them from the assets and protects investors if the mortgages go bad"
That doesnt explain why my preferred escrows show up in my bonds trading page at
schwab. But I guess non-escrow holders wouldnt know that.
Certainly makes me wonder if all the cert income from illiquid returning assets will be distributed this way. Just like having my own % share of the total monthly income.
You don't think it cost JPM at least a few million bucks to prep for receipt of just WMI's mortgage servicing portfolio......really? The reverse is just as true. It could've cost WMIH easily now $11M in a failed or postponed acquisition, between the NASDAQ uplist, attorneys, A&M, CSC, etc. to prepare for taking over what was once theirs?
Yes that 70% is now liquid (JPM R-203 10-k). There are 2 parts: 1) Illiquid and 2) liquid of legacy WMI mortgage assets.
1) Anything illiquid, actual mortgage assets where homeowners are making monthly payments on, and investors like DB, Tranquility collected their pro-rata % of the monthly income stream, as serviced by JPM, imo are coming back to WMIH (Fairfield & Gallagher) to service and manage.
2) Anything liquidated through refinance, foreclosure, pay off, etc. is liquid CASH, and with interest accruing for 8 years on the liquid portion, is returned to those who released and were granted escrow tracking markers.
I'd say so at some point.......There is a 30 day window between mortgage payment collection and servicing, where an entity could tag team in and take over.
Everything is computerized...its not like its typewriters, candlelight, and an overworked scribe with an ink quill making copies, lol.
I think WMIH gets its keys to the car back, that JPM has just been bridge bank squatting on for 8 years. The business servicing shell (maybe one of the 4 listed in the DOJ agreement?), computers, staff, books, records, accounting, etc. arrive ready to drive.
Think how quickly JPM assumed the 'servicing as bridge bank' in 2008 at receivership? Stepped right in and carried on seamlessly. There is absolutely no reason WMIH couldn't perform the same operation in reverse, and carry on. Especially no excuse, now that the the overall portfolio left illiquid, is about 70% smaller than 2008 when JPM got it.
1) That's what I'm watching for now - with regards to about $30B in illiquid legacy WMI mortgage assets. Either WMIH will have to file something, or JPM gets an extension...again. The best way to find an answer to both, is to watch the thousands of assignments and other mortgage servicing documents being recorded after 9/28/16.
2) If there is no power of attorney in the next 45 days, and JPM keeps servicing, then it could also be possible JPM bought these legacy mortgage assets - as they have a right to do per the Purchase and Assumption Agreement.....they may purchase at BOOK VALUE.
WMIH's Fairfield & Gallagher combined skills and experience, tells me option 1) is where to look for answers
It probably needed to be done before the 'failed' acquisition last September/October, 2015.
WMIH? Think Fairfield and Gallagher.......All footnotes on assignments and other servicing filings, say JPM's expiration is over end of day 9/28/16. So back to your question....who is performing these ongoing tasks?
None can provide just 1 simple document showing an extension on assignments going forward from 9/28/16. And there is at least $30B in illiquid legacy WMI mortgage assets needing servicing. So someone is doing it, and I think its WMIH, and I hope to see it reflected in filings for dates after 9/28/16.
Either the illiquid portion left of the overall WMI ABS asset portfolio is being left unattended, and all the investors are just sitting there quietly not complaining about the lost income (LMFAO - just look at how BD and Tranquility whined in court about lost $$$), or someone has taken it over.
I say its WMIH/Fairfield/Gallagher.....and that's just the illiquid portion, lol.
I agree. Look at the list I posted of all the ABS, RMBS, MBS in the same SIC CODE......and.......other liquidating trusts like our LT coincidently. And, KKR Financial Holdings, which KKR took private about the same time that WMIH changed to the same SIC CODE.
Does WMILT have a SIC CODE?
Thx for your comments T, CB, and Bob. The code change timing is irrelevant. What is relevant is that it changed last year to reflect what WMIH felt was its business going forward from 2015. 6 months, 1 year, whatever......All that matters is recently, the SIC CODE was changed to the same SIC CODE as KKR Financial Holdings - now operating in private, as well as hundreds of ABS, RMBS, and MBS trusts.
Tanja, check out page 4 http://www.sglawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/233.pdf?lbisphpreq=1
"Asset Protection
As discussed above, by virtue of its structure as a single legal entity containing a number of individual ring-fenced separate series, the Series LLC offers asset protection and liability segregation though the use of a single LLC entity. The Series LLC also provides flexibility with respect to distributions because a series can make distributions to its members regardless of the financial condition or obligations of other series within the Series LLC, provided that, once such a distribution is made, the liabilities of that series do not exceed the fair value of its assets. Note, however, that Delaware law does appear to allow a distribution that would, in aggregate, render the Series LLC insolvent as long as the distributing series remains solvent.
Historically, if one wished to form a legal structure that would shield multiple assets owned by an organization or entity from the liabilities of other assets or entities within the organization or entity, one would have formed multiple traditional LLCs; each such traditional LLC would have its own member(s), assets, and so forth, and each LLC would be insulated from the other LLCs’ obligations, debts, liabilities, etc."
Howzit Tanj! Thinking about past years of Alvarez & Marsal blending and folding WMI subs (like the 3 Thackeray's, etc.), future WMIH acquisitons/mergers, and the different RMBS, MBS and other ABS - each filing as individual LLCs with individual prospectus'.... Here's an interesting link about Hedge Funds and Series LLC strategies called "Ring Fencing" that a friend pointed out to me.
http://www.sglawyers.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/233.pdf?lbisphpreq=1
Definitely what and how things get shuffled. As long as its in our direction eventually....
That's just for the illiquid assets. Then there's all that cash and interest on the side, lol.
Well, as to whether the 8-k is nothing interesting, I beg to differ.....
- WMIH's SIC code was 'bank charter' for a long time, now its SIC CODE is '6199 financial services'.
- click on other 6199 SIC code business and you see lots of ABS, RMBS, MBS, and other trusts including liquidating trusts, as I listed from that page.
- I also find KKR Financial Holdings, that KKR took private and dark a couple years ago, having the same SIC code 6199 interesting...considering their involvement in WMIH.
- IF WMIH were to inherit the non-liquid ABS that JPM (as prior bridge bank/servicer) no longer performs maintenance on, as of September 28, 2016, I find it quite coincidental now.
I could go on....
new SIC code 6199 Finance Services (They finally it changed from banking). Same SIC code now as other Asset Backed Trusts like:
CIK Company State/Country
0001386926 KKR Financial Holdings LLC :D
0001021970 CAPITA PREFERRED FUNDING L P NJ
0001021971 CAPITA PREFERRED TRUST NJ
0001141298 CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE TRUST 2001-A VA
0001162825 CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE TRUST 2001-B VA
0001171327 CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE TRUST 2002-A VA
0001128700 CAPITAL PARTNERS II LTD LIQUIDATING TRUST TX
0001116550 CENTEX CREDIT CORP HOME EQ LN ASSET BACKED CERT SER 2000 B TX
0001224457 CENTEX FUNDING LLC CENTEX HOME EQ LN AST BK CERT SER 2003-A TX
0001165930 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LN ASSET BK CERT SER 2002-A TX
0001136747 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN ASSET BACKED CERTS SERIES 2001 A TX
0001109352 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2000-A TX
0001123743 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2000-C TX
0001163173 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2001-C TX
0001180241 CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2002-C TX
0001036071 CFI MORTGAGE INC FL
0001169702 CHEC FUNDING CENTEX HOME EQ LN ASST BK CERT SER 2002-B TX
0001142608 CHEC FUNDING LL CENTEX HOME EQUITY LN AS BACK CERTS SER 01 B TX
0001129939 CHEC FUNDING LLC CENTEX HOME EQ LOAN ASSET BK TRUST 2000 D TX
0001209644 CHEC FUNDING LLC CENTEX HOME EQUITY LOAN TRUST 2002 D TX
0001366727 Citigroup Capital XIV NY
0001366726 Citigroup Capital XVIII NY
0001318281 Citigroup Funding Inc. NY
0000778171 CITY INVESTING CO LIQUIDATING TRUST
0001137109 AMERIQUEST MORT CO FLO RATE MORT PAS THR CER SE 2000-1 TRUST MD
0001175125 AMERIQUEST MORT SEC INC ASS BK PAS THR CERTS SER 2002 2 CA
0001182887 AMERIQUEST MORT SEC INC ASSET BCKD PS THR CERT SER 2002-AR1 CA
0001197212 AMERIQUEST MORT SEC INC ASSET BK PASS THR CERT SER 2002-C CA
0001163415 AMERIQUEST MORT SEC INC FLO RATE MORT PAS THR CERT SER 01 3 CA
0001143992 AMERIQUEST MORT SEC INC FLOAT RATE MORT PA TH CER SER 2001-1 CA
0001214855 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC ASSET BACK CERT SER 2003 AR1 CA
0001208367 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC ASSET BACKED THRU CER SER 2002-5 CA
0001208999 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC ASST BACK PS THR CERT SER 2002 D CA
0001219083 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC ASST BACK PS THR CERT SER 2003-2 CA
0001217751 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC AST BACK PS THR CERT SER 2003-1 CA
0001117150 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SEC INC FLOAT RATE MO PA TH CE SE 2000-2 CA
0001205737 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC AS BK PS THR CRTS SE 02-4 CA
0001169556 AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE SECURITIES INC AS-BK PS-TH CT SR 2002-1 CA
0001185174 ASSET BACKED PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES 2002-3
0001052083 FINANCIAL ASSET SEC INC MORT PART SECURTIES SER 1997-2 TRUST MD
0000036548 FIRST MORTGAGE CORP /UT/ UT
0001113903 FLOATING RATE MORT PASS THROUGH CERT SERIES 2000-1 CA
0001160220 FLOATING RATE MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERT-SERIES 2001-2
....and many more securities and mortgage holdings.....
Well, BK, REIKO, Mordi, etc. haven't shown me any servicing extensions of the Power of Attorney like we've seen before. It expired last monday. So until I see otherwise, just one loan assignment for example with a footnote granting JPM an extension, from Monday going forward, then JPM is gone.
So either there is complete anarchy regarding the mortgage file and Billions of mortgage paying value are left in the dark and security investors collection certificate income are abandoned (lol - of course not) , or someone else is doing (from now going forward) what JPM has provided for the last 8 years.
Lets see......who has Fairfield and Gallagher as distressed mortgage asset managers on their team? We do (WMIH). Who owns the equity appreciative value going forward? We do (WMIH).
Now, icing on the cake? who owns the asset value that WMIH owns the equity appreciation of? We do - THOSE WHO RELEASED that is.....
LT and WMIH are gonna have to work together to sort out shared ownership of WMIIC assets. So if LT owns the base asset value, and WMIH gets the appreciate equity from the base value, hows WMIH gonna get control and maximize their value going forward?
Haha, I know......who has 3.5B shares authorized? WMIH. WMIH needs to buy out escrow's base asset value to maximize their appreciative equity value. Cant have 2 cooks in the kitchen.
HLCE to us, and happy trails to those who didn't release.
Whaddup Plissken?!?!! Thanks for your transparency the other day. It'd be much easier if we all kept too the same ID's across multiple MBs.
.....recent filings state the appreciative equity of WMIIC belongs to WMIH, and the asset base value of WMIIC belongs to the LT.
WMIIC and WMIH and the LT are intertwined like a braided rope, at the most foundational layer. The new estate WMIH has never been irretrievably separated from its legacy assets. These 3 will have to 'work something out'.
WMIIC is now finally being dissolved.....so WMIIC equity to WMIH, and WMIIC asset base value to the LT. But how can WMIH manage this equity value without ownership of the assets?
Did I hear 3.5 Billion WMIH shares authorized? No KKR/CITI dilution? It must be Yuuuuuge, and coming soon!
Happy Trails.
The Purchase & Assumption Agreement says your wrong. JPM didn't get all the assets.
"From the P&A Agreement (page 6 of the PDF)
"Assets" means all 'assets of the Failed Bank purchased pursuant to Section 3.1.
Assets owned by Subsidiaries of the Failed Bank are not "Assets" within the meaning of this
definition.
http://www.fdic.gov/about/freedom/Washington_Mutual_P_and_A.pdf
Revisiting a thought I had recently:
[quote author=boarddork link=topic=10046.msg153434#msg153434 date=1474644164]
Thanks for your thoughts. I'd add another possibility related to your 1), in that from my court objection research on JPM's 10-k 2008-11, is that JPM 'took' certain and multiple servicing subs. What if what JPM 'took' can actually be returned, per 118 pg. PAA?
Maybe we don't need to find an 'unfamiliar' servicing unit from someone else to buy thru M/A, if there is a 'familiar' servicing unit(s) we know that comes back as part of the FDIC brokered bridge bank package.
If things drag on into November with no announcements, maybe this is the direction things are headed.
This type of scenario also could explain all the waiting.....if JPM needed more time to gas up and detail the car, before giving it back in the same condition as they received it.
[/quote]
IF, this long wait is because we are waiting for 'something familiar to be returned', then are there any clues to the 'what', that we've already seen?
I've been thinking about the DOJ/JPM $13B settlement agreement and why the specific mention of a few WMI consolidated entities that were included in the settlement where JPM had to admit, it DID NOT become successor in interest to. Could they be the ones coming back? Especially when I consider from my court objection days, how many subs (30+) did show up and disappear on JPM's 10-k.....
[color=blue][/color] DOJ settlement. page 6 Item #13. https://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/51720131119202421482972.pdf
[color=blue]"Nothing in this Agreement or the DOJ Agreement shall constitute an admission or imply that JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, or any of its subs or affiliates became successor-in-interest to Washington Mutual Bank, WaMu Capital Corp, Long Beach Mortgage Securities Corp, and WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp or assumed any particular liability of [the same] when JPMorgan Chase Bank NA purchased the assets and assumed certain liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank pursuant to the Purchase and Assumption Agreement dated Sept 25, 2008 between JPMorgan Chase Bank NA and the FDIC in its Corporate capacity and its capacity as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank."[/color]
So, WMB, WaMu Capital Corp, Long Beach Mortgage Securities Corp, WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp, of the more than 30 other WMI subs that were swallowed up and disappeared as evidence by JPM's 10-ks up through 2012.....these few remain, specifically referenced by the US Dept. of Justice. JPM is just a bridge bank for these particular subsidiaries........
What's coincidently interesting, is that in checking JPM's 10-k subsidiary list today (2015), per a new SEC rule in 2015, only the parent subs are required to be listed. All child subs of the 15 top JPM entities no longer will ever appear publicly........consolidated privacy. So, if 1 or some or all of WMB, WaMu Capital Corp, Long Beach Mortgage Securities Corp, WaMu Asset Acceptance Corp did come back, due to an 8 year bridge bank agreement with the FDIC/JPM 118 page PAA, NO ONE WOULD EVER SEE THE TRANSFER evidence by 10-k.......and as we've seen in my Delaware corporate research, WMI subs like the 3 Thackerays were blended and folded into Thackeray III Bridge (an unassuming name if you don't know what you're looking for), Any JPM return of servicing subs could be immediately blended back into benignly named receiving entities, and the public face of the JPM/FDIC PAA remain intact. WMIH acquires a sub we think we don't know, but in actuality, we do know 'who and what's' behind the mask when we pull it back.
Thackeray III Bridge anyone? ......ready to 'bridge' the return.......of what "JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, or any of its subs or affiliates became successor-in-interest to"?
LOL, imagine DB sold to WMIH for $1.8 Dollars for $300B in assets.
that silly rabbit doesn't realize tricks are for kids. I was wondering if 'it' was going to start pumping buying DB' falling knife. Now, Dodd-Frank kills off equity in the holding company 100% no exceptions. WAMU and WMI was the last time for equity to be let into the party. that ship has sailed, and we got the last seats.
Like Geitner said, there will never be another WAMU.
You don't answer the question. We all know what the POA does. You just keep repeating it without answering who is servicing from Monday 9/26/2016 and going forward?
JPM can't 'perfect' any more assignments or servicing of WAMU mortgage assets with a POA that expired last Monday.
Keep twisting it....it is for title as JPM is the servicer. And you can't 'perfect' title with POA, when you never owned the loans to begin with. JPM is a bridge bank with temporary servicing rights that expired EOD Monday 9/26/2016.
Like I asked you the first time,and the second time........If JPM's POA expired last monday, then WHO is serving those mortgages now? I think I know......3.5 Billions shares authorized, lol.
Happy Trails.
BUT, when the Power of Attorney expired yesterday, then JPM can no longer service the loans. DUH! They can't assign, foreclose, trustee sale, etc. So we're to believe that Billions in mortgage loans are sitting unserviced from today going forward? LMAO. YIKES!
So WHO started servicing those loan portfolios today? Do you have an extension copy going today forward for JPM? I haven't seen one yet.
Those loans don't service themselves.
TIC TOC
Excellent! Way to go Neil! This aint over!
JPM's Power of Attorney AUTOMATICALLY expires end of day Monday 9/25/16. This is between the FDIC and JPM, who is servicing the vast WMI legacy estate. Will it get extended again? I doubt it. But whoever becomes the new servicer, like WMIH?, would definitely be worthy of announcement.
As a Sandridge commons only shareholder, I find it hard to believe that such precedence set in 2012 by a FEDERAL bankruptcy judge can be so quickly ignored. Broad Releases killed multiple plans of reorganization in Delaware judge Walrath's court for Washington Mutual in 2012. Same application - the debtor Sandridge can't on one hand give zero to an impaired class, and yet force them to grant broad releases with the other.
Specifically with WMI, forcing broad releases for literally 'officers and directors', killed the debtors plans over and over, till amongst other issues, they were forced to include common equity.
Officers and Directors don't get releases, so impaired class holders can sue their pants off if we wish, using the SEC investigation whistleblower as ignition. You either let us in the room, or we kick the door down.
There's more than one way to skin this cat, imo.
not true. recent filings state the appreciative equity of WMIIC belongs to WMIH, and the asset base value of WMIIC belongs to the LT.
WMIIC and WMIH and the LT are intertwined like a braided rope, at the most foundational layer. The new estate WMIH has never been irretrievably separated from its legacy assets. These 3 will have to 'work something out'.
WMIIC is now finally being dissolved.....so WMIIC equity to WMIH, and WMIIC asset base value to the LT. But how can WMIH manage this equity value without ownership of the assets?
Did I hear 3.5 Billion WMIH shares authorized? No KKR/CITI dilution? It must be Yuuuuuge, and coming soon!
Happy Trails.
IS there still time to join ad-hoc and the appeal?
Its been going on for 8 years......paid not by WMIH, but for the benefit of WMIH...
I laugh at the damage control.....and who popped up. saying its Kostros money and meaningless......ya right....for WMIH a do nothing organic growth shell..LMFAO!!
Getter dun guys, before the lid blows off!
Thanks Bo for your honest input, and you are correct. Spells it out loud and clear!
Off Balance Sheet, Legal Isolation, Safe Harbor.........decades of historic precedent......the FDIC cannot hijack these assets by destroying or unraveling the trusts. Investors like legacy WMI escrow holders, will be rewarded for their portion of the income stream!
Nice twist of context. Now take it back to 2008 as I have written. 'nunc pro tunc'. If you can't see the forest for the trees even in the last 3 quarters,.........
A&M is getting paid $alottaf.n$ every quarter by WMIIC, on behalf of WMIH. WMIH better watch. out. and get their act together.
WMIIC can't breach/give away any assets to WMIH....the FDIC hasn't terminated the WMB receivership, nor the seizure and resolution of WMI consolidated's holdings. ABS, MBS, RMBS securities Assets are in FDIC legal isolation.
WMIIC and WMI's bankruptcies are still under Walrath's judicial observation.
A&M is getting paid by WMIIC $500k per quarter since 2008, to manage 'something' for WMIH, like a securities trustee would......and as a NASDAQ reporting company, WMIH better come clean as they are the beneficiary of these services. But the bill is hidden in WMIIC/b]. Major oops.
Well, I know A&M isn't getting paid for nothing since 2008 (nunc pro tunc by Walrath). So, why would WMIIC, still under Walraths supervision, be paying WMIH's Alvarez and Marsal bill? ......$500k every quarter since 2008... same amount, every quarter, like a clock.....reliable steady income for A&M matching.........and managing reliable steady incoming certificate income......like bonds, the same guaranteed income for a period of time, and so you'd see the management rate of A&M unchanged, non-variable like it is.
WMIIC was never an ABS, MBS, or RMBS securities trustee. Trustees are not, never, owners of the mortgage assets backing the securities. Trustees act like an escrow company in a home sale, ensuring all parties like the originator who pledges the assets, to the servicer, etc, follow the rules of the investor prospectus, for the benefit of the investors. Assets backing securities are pledged for use, never sold. This is true across the board with all banks, then and now.
DeutscheBank, Lasalle, etc. were trustees for Washington Mutual. WMB was the servicer, and now JPM (either temporarily as bridge bank or permanently) is for now servicer (remember, servicing alone of nearly $2T in WAMU securities was an annual $6B business for WMB). WMI through WMIIC held certificate income interests, as is a regulator requirement, not to mention just good business residual income when you know the value of what you wrote/originated. WMIIC was the manager of accounts for WMI consolidated's ABS, MBS, RMBS related investment income.
The receivership and seizure of both the bank WMB and the holding company WMI, iced these assets, off balance sheet, in legal isolation and safe harbor, as is legal and decades old historical FDIC precedent, to protect these assets from creditors and bankruptcy, should the FDIC need it or a portion thereof.
But again, Why is WMIIC footing WMIH's Alvarez & Marsal quarterly $500k bill every month since 2008? Based on my overview above, why would WMIIC a debtor still under the protection of Walraths court, be paying its parent's bill?
Is WMIIC trying to get a large IOU from WMIH, because WMIH is getting into something big soon, that WMIIC might want some shares later for, in exchange for these debts? IS JPM just a temporary servicer/bridge bank? Fairfield & Gallagher seem pedigreed to take over such a venture........
Still doesn't answer what services A&M is charging for that WMIIC is paying for. WMIH needs to come clean.
The FDIC has, ALREADY, the infrastructure and systems in place to manage all forms of credit card, lines of credit, residential and commercial real estate assets. Here is an interesting list of every sub-contractor hired by the FDIC to handle all receivership assets such retirement plans, mortgage securities, loan servicing, overseers of loan servicers, REO, financial advisory of portfolio assets, FDIC financial compliance review contractors, etc..... read these descriptions if you think nothing is going on.
T0 the grumpy MB posters who say the FDIC isn't on top of reconciling receivership assets.....A LOT of eyes and big names are on it. It's not like Red Green and duct tape are running cleanup.
https://www.fdic.gov/buying/goods/ListofAwardsandContractorContactInformation.html
To clarify, that's a percentage of security interest in $1.5T ABS, MBS, RMBS. not face value. Also WMI owed FHLB some $60B.
But imho, there will be at least $50Billion coming back.
WMIIC posted what cash it had, and more importantly the zero debts it had in its possession at the first bankruptcy filing. It is available to read on kccllc. Then WMI the parent filed bankruptcy secondly after its sub WMIIC. WMIIC assets and future claims on safe harbor assets, was/is protected by its filing bankruptcy first; from not only its parent WMI, but the creditors of WMI.
At the conclusion of both these bankruptcies, and there is a final exit from Walrath's oversight, whoever owns WMI can finally retrieve the legally isolated assets of WMIIC from the FDIC, just as Rosen spoke of in court. Even Rosen advised us to ultimately grant releases and receive our escrow trackers as part of the new owners of WMI, for our proportional share of the legacy estate assets, as well as ES and MW.
Any assets/cash collections relating to MBS, RMBS, ABS, etc. were effectively stripped out and removed by the FDIC receiver immediately UPON wamu the bank's receivership, and put on ICE in safe harbor and legal isolation....off balance sheet......all legal and historical measures by the FDIC to protect valuable assets for the receiverships bottom line, from undeserving creditors while the receivership is being reconciled.
Anything belonging to the holding company, the FDIC has no claim to. Anything belonging to the bank, then first receiver, lastly us.
At $1.5 Trillion written in AMS, MBS, RMBS security certificate % interests (plus 8 years and counting of refi, liquidation, compounding interest), PLUS at least $150 Billion in pledged Mortgages Held in Portfolio, there is PLENTY to go round.
Safe Harbor and Legal Isolation Refresher.
1) Yes, the FDIC has ALWAYS been active in holding and maintaining (including keeping its own profit making tranche interest) securitizations from receiverships.......OFF balance sheet, in safe harbor and legal isolation.
https://fdic.gov/bank/historical/managing/history1-16.pdf
2) The FDIC isolates securitized loan pools from a receivership for safe harbor to protect it from bankruptcy/receivership and the Insured Deposit Institution (IDI) is allowed to keep it off
the books. http://fdic.gov/news/board/10Sept27no4.pdf
"Treatment by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Conservator or Receiver of Financial Assets Transferred by an Insured Depository Institution in Connection With a Securitization or Participation After September 30, 2010.............
The Rule continues the safe harbor for financial assets transferred in connection with securitizations and participations in which the financial assets were transferred in compliance with the existing section 360.6. The Rule also imposes further conditions for a safe harbor for securitizations or participations issued after a [receivership] transition period......
The Rule defines the conditions for safe harbor protection for securitizations and participations for which transfers of financial assets are made after the transition period; and clarifies the application of the safe harbor to transactions that comply with the new accounting standards for off balance sheet treatment as well as those that do not comply with those accounting standards. .........
The Securitization Rule provided a “safe harbor” by confirming “legal isolation” if all other standards for off balance sheet accounting treatment, along with some additional conditions focusing on the enforceability of the transaction, were met by the transfer in connection with a securitization or a participation. Satisfaction of “legal isolation” was vital to securitization transactions because of the risk that the pool of financial assets transferred into the securitization trust could be recovered in bankruptcy or in a bank receivership. If the transfer satisfied this condition, the Securitization Rule confirmed that the transferred assets were “legally isolated” from the IDI in an FDIC conservatorship or receivership. The Securitization Rule, thus, addressed only purported sales which met the conditions for off balance sheet accounting treatment under GAAP........
Statement FAS 166 provides that transfers of participation interests that do not qualify for sale treatment will be viewed as secured borrowings.....
An FDIC receiver generally makes a determination of what constitutes property of an IDI based on the books and records of the failed IDI. Given the 2009 GAAP Modifications, there may be circumstances in which a sale transaction will continue to be reflected on the books and records of the IDI because the IDI or one of its affiliates continues to exercise control over the assets either directly or indirectly. The Rule provides comfort that conforming securitizations which do not qualify for off balance sheet treatment will have access to the assets in a timely manner irrespective of whether a transaction is viewed as a legal sale.......
If a transfer of financial assets by an IDI to an issuing entity in connection with a securitization is not characterized as a sale and is properly perfected, the securitized assets will be viewed as subject to a perfected security interest. This is significant because the FDIC as conservator or receiver is prohibited by statute from avoiding a legally enforceable and perfected security interest, except where such an interest is taken in contemplation of insolvency or with the intent to hinder, delay, or defraud the institution or the creditors of such institution.....
The Rule also provides that in the event the FDIC repudiates the securitization asset transfer agreement, the FDIC shall have the right to discharge the lien on the financial assets included in the securitization by paying damages in an amount equal to the par value of the obligations in the securitization on the date of the appointment of the FDIC as conservator or receiver, less any principal payments received by the investors through the date of repudiation, plus unpaid, accrued interest through the date of repudiation......
3) Yes, the FDIC has ALREADY the infrastructure and systems in place to manage all forms of credit card, lines of credit, residential and commercial real estate assets. Here is an interesting list of every sub-contractor hired by the FDIC to handle all receivership assets such retirement plans, mortgage securities, loan servicing, overseers of loan servicers, REO, financial advisory of portfolio assets, FDIC financial compliance review contractors, etc..... read these descriptions if you think nothing is going on.
T0 the grumpy MB posters who say the FDIC isn't on top of reconciling receivership assets.....A LOT of eyes and big names are on it. It's not like Red Green and duct tape are running cleanup.
https://www.fdic.gov/buying/goods/ListofAwardsandContractorContactInformation.html
Don't forget the other bankruptcy filed first, BEFORE WMI filed second.
WMI's subsidiary WMI Investment (WMIIC) filed first to protect itself from its parent WMI. WMIIC is where all of WMI consolidated's interest in ABS, MBS, RMBS assets and cash reside, Off Balance Sheet. safe harbor. legal isolation. Legal and historical, FDIC receivership tool.
Those that speak only about the WMI bankruptcy here are misdirecting what the fight for estate control was really about.
We need to be looking and watching over our shoulders, NOW, about the other FIRST bankruptcy filing, WMIIC. Lest the 'diminished expectations crowd' attempt another hijacking of equity.
There's no problem here. Any DB investor lawsuits, can only hope to claim a portion of that $3B settlement. It's not our problem any more, it is DB's problem. These 'potential' lawsuits don't slow us down one bit.
Neither does the remaining employee claims slow us down. They have a court approved capped limit and funds set aside in the DCR (Disputed Claims Reserve). They can fight and stall all they want, and it just reduces the money available to settle, by getting sucked up in attorney and legal fees - and we've seen how fast that cow gets milked......
There are not many issues left. Things are really wrapping up. Nearly all adversarial cases are closed quietly on PACER, after Judge Walrath's repeated requests for updates in June and July of 2016.
KCCLLC is curiously slow to update their website....