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.
Its about to end… either something shows up by final closeout of WMILT in March or not… the good news is this.. after March no more theories on WMILT
The WMILT can issue directions to the brokers..
Also the WMILT can just as easily just post the payments into DTC and preset… they will get to the destination…
If they are positive no final payment happens so be it…
However I do agree that 0.3% is a dumb F&R however… most of the time common get nothing in BK’s. Not that that is a consolation prize… however I can’t imagine a 10 year+ situation F&R being 0.3% is the end…
I think the reason why escrows are being removed from certain brokerages is because the definitive payment is coming back. The brokers were probably made aware… they can opt to close markers if they wish if money is noticed in transit… watch for the March deadline followed by a release of funds…
Brokers can keep what is called internal list…
An insider usually doesn’t sell at the high… they usually sell at the support levels… and also… they arent allowed to “know” and “sell” in their benefit… meaning meaning the price is most likely predicted to rise on good incoming news.
Regardless those shares are part of the insiders compensation package and so they are allowed to sell over time provided either the 1% rule every 90 days or a contract plan with the broker to sell on their behalf so they don’t have any say where its sold and therefore aren’t breaking insider trading rules…
Its clearing a buy stock IMO
Im thinking closer to $20 if and i mean “IF” the money is properly distributed to escrows…
I personally hope the escrows get final distribution apart from what has already been paid.
Lets say we are getting something back through “some sort of mechanism that lets COOP utilize the BK CUSIPS” and lets say that long lost P/L that no one even saw during the signing of the releases for that messily 30 something page release shows up as a specific number in these trusts... and lets say we as former equity are given a piece of the very large pie of these trusts... how exactly would that be beneficial to the orchestrators to simultaneously be proving WAMU had substantial assets to remain open as a bank... to save the bank if it were in dire need it could have sold some of its assets to save itself then rebuild... all of this hoopla is ridiculous... WAMU had feds coming in etc.... all that would be mute if it actually had assets to cover itself... and even in with its corporate structure the parent company could have helped the bank.... no way are these people running the DST are going to give common holders a piece of that large pie... not when the greed to let the bank collapse was sufficient to bring us to this point.... also there are states that don’t recognize DST trustees as above being individually sued... Georgia is one state... the ruling is set forth as a president.
https://www.nclc.org/images/pdf/unreported/National_Collegiate_Student_Loan_Trust_v_Clayborn.pdf
Also, the DTC issued the markers as they were with regards to a holding related to the original company... to have the WAND merger actually include “US” in the large payout would be tantamount to proving the relation between the DST and the BK and the exit had a long running scheme to reconsolidate and pay out... by not including us in knowing what we owned even if it was indirect ownership is still a legally murky area and i think this is a valid argument...
So if I own my escrows why an I upset?...
Answer: I should be.
If i own my markers why shouldn’t i hope for the best?
Answer: “when all i have is hope... then fine, ill hope?...
Do I think Alice Griffin made her case in the wrong venue?
Answer: No, she started in the right venue... to get conclusions sometimes you must seek answers starting somewhere. What she found was a stone wall... we all saw that unfold so its undisputed
Is it complicated going after a DST?
Answer: yes! Absolutely! It is ridiculously hard. But it has been done successfully.
Every court case is won by being the best at proving a point.
There are cases where collusion can be prosecuted after its been carried out... especially if that collusion is stealing or limiting basic information without merit.
Also, just because I’m asking these questions doesn’t mean I’m wrong... to a degree the responses i have had are without a doubt the most responses i have ever had on this board... clearly i touched on something that is a fine line...
So what does this tell me... I Don’t think many people have a good idea how to go about dealing with a DST that was bankruptcy remote then landed right back in the exit company years later... clearly no one is thinking this is just luck... everyone agreed this was planned... but yet... that doesn’t strike anyone as legally murky? Not worth looking into state presidents?
I know that if i run a public company and i make a deal or collude prior to exit of a bk but i do not inform all interest holders.. this will be against the law...
I think the reason why i am bringing this up is... i see a board where no one even wants to really go down this path... not because they do not think assets exist, or that they don’t feel entitled... its that a fight to gain access to even “yes you have interest in this DST” or “no you have no interest in this” would be the final end all and be all to legacy payout.
It would answer “Money coming” or “No money is coming”
I want to be clear, i rebought into COOP and so i know theres something coming back to at least COOP and inadvertently COOP shareholders. Mostly because the evidence of the WAND merger is irrefutable. And the company is growing as time passes.
And I strongly wish ESCROWS to receive something more back as well to get closer to what many of us deem as “Fair and Reasonable”
However,
These greedy people are literally just walking in a straight line through all the gun fire so to speak because they feel that there will be zero resistance because none of us on this board truly want another delay like Alice Griffin and none of us are sitting here with 6 figures (disposable) to feel like we want to pursue it... but the reality is... there are rare cases where DST are not absolute and can be challenged... all DST are based on contract with a trustee... but the scope of that bare minimum knowing what or who the beneficial owners are is a murky area.. this clearly was pointed out to degree in past filings who the initial offering holders were...However I cant see it as coincidence that so many fairly astute and experienced people in this board all agree something is there, and there might be a payment at the very least..
apparently courts have to decide on what information trusts have to disclose or not. The organizing of the trust always has a set of rules it must follow. And generally trustees opt to disclose bare minimum ... they can be held to account if even an indirect beneficiary is assumed to have interest. A court can force disclosure if the beneficiary is found to own but not have known...
Generally non-accredited investors especially are given latitude in federal courts... in this particular case I would say many people here are unaccredited..
So my point is... in essence... how many of us here have said this was carefully orchestrated? How many of us said the bank was stolen? And how many of us are placing our hopes on “if”?
I think this should be pondered...
So if they can then... that kinda explains we gad a stake in it... which means the original point i made is that we can get information because there is some sort of connection to those trusts and “US” that those CUSIPs can be utilized...
Direct or indirect was my stance... suggesting we even had the ability to be paid... i.e a mechanism that those trusts can use...
If so we can prove we have right to information and this was a plan long in the making that tied “US” in as shareholders
Yes but... im
Not a shareholder or owner in those DST unlike... technically it seems i should be with these DST’s... because why else would I even have something coming back if I and everyone here weren’t...
Az-
Direct or indirect...people that have any interest have rights... what is being claimed is that our escrows are entitled to something (escrows created after POR 7 was initiated) also a deal was formulated from old company and created remote assets... those assets were then merged back in for some sort of interest... COOP technically wont pay our CUSIPs unless they have a mechanism to doing so tieing back to the old company....because thats how we got the escrows to begin with is by being part of the old company and signing off. So either COOP cant give us something back because they are unable to... or they can because we were a direct stake holder in those assets...
“~ Well ?, The Individual, Now The WMIH Subsidiary Networks, (COOP's) Managing "Trustee(s), Won't Respond, Unless You Are A Direct Participant and subsequently a Direct Recipient Of Their Original "Packaged" Offering', Those ABS-Cert Trusts, Can Be Tracked and Have Continued Methodically To Function, Service and Distribute Every 25th Day Of Every Month', Many Have Now Been Zeroed Out ?, or Have Been Seriously Diminished ~ “
I mean... yeah... thats exactly why i am making my point.
My goal right now is to get enough people yo realized they could technically inquire. The trusts cant say “the courts bar us from saying anything”... ? Seriously...
They have accounting practices that may be allowed but not legal barriers from inquiry... and if... and this is a big if... we inquire to the trusts and they pull a legal scope of reason preventing inquiry... we can fight that... because the BK court holds zero jurisdiction in safe harbored assets... also it would inadvertently force the BK court to be simultaneously admitting presence of knowledge to the trusts assets... which would make this whole thing even more slimy... this might be all those missing P/L items we never saw on our joke of a 36 page (roughly) releases we signed...
Az.. they be granted those accounting allowances but what mechanism barres us from getting information of those trusts... remember those trusts were not acquired until the last couple years but were formed years ago.. my memory is a little fuzzy on this but i think someone on this board found like 21 original trusts consolidated onto like 6 trusts or something prior to 2016... again for all this time of creation which was 2008 i believe of those trusts... many years prior to COOP actually carrying out the WAND merger.. no one even thought to go ask the trusts... they arent being protected by the courts... never were protected
It might be a simpler answer.. we never were barred from knowing but because the courts were in session And these were BK remote (Safe harbor) trusts... they didnt have to say anything and no one knew about them and everyone was focused on the BK... however nothing has ever been safe harbored on this scale before so theres not too presidents to go on. Also... i think they were counting on us bickering amongst ourselves for so long that not enough of us would organize together and fight for information where the least protection took place.. also whats protecting those trusts now to bar us from inquiring? Formally? I see zero BK courts standing in our way? No statute to stop us... Alice griffin did only one thing... she showed us we cant get information from the BK courts and they are adamant nothing is left... so lets go to the trusts directly...
If they are BK remote assets that are not within the jurisdiction if the BK court... then any protections the court gave should be completely obsolete... a formal inquiry to the trusts can be mounted without too much push back... unless of course we have no stake... that would be eye opening because that would indicate assets were put into safe harbor and “no value” was given to the original holders of WAMU... which means the DTC cusips wont get a dime... and the COOP shares we received was all we got for our value ... so basically they wanted to pay as little as humanly possible to the escrows and retain the value back into the reorganized company for pennies.... which sounds alot more like how shareholders in commons get treated... we were insanely lucky to even get what we got... so its hard for me to fathom these trusts actually were owned in whole or in part by us at any point...
I signed releases to the Estate mentioned.... nothing even remotely close was ever stated to me about my ownership of the trusts...and the formation of the trusts was done so calmly and quietly without any mention that it makes me uneasy as a shareholder in the original WAMU... since theres literally 10’s of BILLIONS of dollars if not 100’s of billions of assets in those trusts (more than likely).
I want to know... who else wants to know?
Not even uninformed of the trust value... we were never formally given anything that suggested we were stakeholders of any kind in the trusts... at least nothing mailed to me.... i have 125,000 original WAMUQ cusips... so technically why wasn’t I informed. Actually this bothers me greatly.... I figured we might get something back through some sort of mechanism eventually but the more i assessed the information the more i realized. Not once was i ever told “Alex you own 0.##% of XXXXXX delaware statutory trust company” or something to the like. If we indeed own something or some sort of stake at any point in the last 12 years then why were we never informed specifically from the trusts.... this should be grounds for a class action lawsuit. Without a doubt and everyone who owned something in this should be pi##ed off! Actually what is more interesting to me, why was Alice Griffin going after the estate in the manner she was instead of seeking information through the trusts... technically there is paper trails explaining the trusts creation and that something such as assets existed inside those trusts... and those trusts were part of WAND merger... so why are all of us so quiet about this... theres well over 35 of us here... more than enough to mount a class action inquiry formally... i mean we never even started with a “demand notice” after someone on this board discovered the paper trail years ago... what this tells me is not one of us on this board has ever talked to a good lawyer Because if we had earlier then it would have been the easiest solution... a formal demand letter would garner a reply if we were deserving or entitled to an answer formally...as shareholders in the trusts...
Why wont I issue the demand letter... because to put it simply.... no one else is even considering this yet.... not one person with all the knowledge and insight... i want to float this idea before i start...
Best
If Alice Griffin wanted to really find the money... why couldn’t she just sue the trusts individually to find out who they belong to instead of the estate... if the trusts are outside the BK protection I.e they are safe-harbor assets... if i was going to spend 100k+ in legal fees thats where i would start... my grounds to doing so would be simply the lack of notification that i held interest in certain assets that were once in a company that now is held in trust.. look up trust law... shareholders of trusts are entitled to information...
Best
Perhaps since the BK dissolving date is 03/19/2021 they legally have until the following quarter to report since its near the end of this quarter 1 2021... there might be some sort of loop hole that allows the company to report the following quarter. That said that means we wont know until at least May 15, 2021 possibly.
I know there is jurisdictional timeframes in some cases. After all it would be hard to account for that since Audits can take 4-6 weeks to complete... they could be obligated to complete it “BY” March 19, 2021 which means as far out as the close of day March 19, 2021... which might give them another quarter...
Do you think the escrows will get money or more shares back?
I am asking what you specifically about potential payment to former equity...
I own COOP shares so i am not in disagreement the value will be fine as we progress.
However i also have escrows from the old WAMUQ shares i held previously.
I am wondering if you think there is some sort of prior equity payment coming.
Where is the response letter from AG? And when will the next court hearing take place?
Best
Stocksss
Anyone know when Alice griffon case is scheduled next?
Best
Sub
Sounds fair to me
No problem, yeah I have run a few publicly traded companies, sometimes like this extreme special circumstances are at play. Silence will happen.
LP,
Yes, I can still see it in my alerts. The alert is there to stay. I have verified that alert so many times, from Etrades end, from the Transfer agent and confirmed it was forward looking.
Best
Cura, I believe you might be correct. Clearly a payment in stock is upon us, Mr. Cooper is the one calling the shots with regards to alerts. If it was another company buying the assets the alert would have derived from the other company...
Clearly something is being paid from Mr. Cooper.
However assuming assets are purchased,
Where does all that cash go that JPM has been collecting as the services?
Does Mr. cooper collect all the assets including cash in exchange for shares?
I’m pretty certain the shares that has to be paid out is at least book value for assets
Actually...
Xoom At least a few good sushi nights
As I thought....well my due diligence is correct then.
mad4... Etrade said there is nothing else to be given with respect to the LTI payment. They are not handling fractional shares. TDA might be the same situation. However the Alert "This is not the final payment" was given and confirmed to fall outside the LTI payment situation by both the Brokerage firm Etrade and the Computer share the Transfer agent for Mr. Cooper.
Please remember I confirmed this all the way to the directives.
yes, however Etrade did not distribute a fractional share payment using cash in lieu of shares....And they won't.
On Monday of this week, I had made a call to Etrade to specify when or how I would be receiving my partial share (Fractional share) payment.
Etrade had told me that the instructions were to only give out the shares and they were not to give out the fractional shares (cash in lieu). you can call etrade or your brokerage firm to request more information pertaining to this.
It is unfortunate, however I did find out because they were instructed to not give fraction share payments that they also were under no obligation to disseminate this fact, largely unless shareholders call in and request further information pertaining to fractional share payments then you will be waiting forever for something to never come.
Actually I also confirmed that with Etrade...Unfortunately Etrade was instructed to not give fractional shares. I am going to make a post about this as well.
Yesterday I took some time to contact the head of trading department at E*TRADE to clarify and confirm a couple facts.
1. To triple check that the Alert stating “this is not the final payment” was not a mistake.
2. That the statement in the alert “This is not the final payment” was forward looking.
3. Confirm the date of the Alert and who originated it.
What I found was:
1. The Alert was a directive from the “Agent” and therefore the statement did not originate from any of the brokers.
2. The Alert was in fact a forward looking alert as it was given to the brokerage firm from the “Agent” simultaneous to the release of the shares we received at the close of the LTI as the scheduled “final distribution” on the 10th of January. This payment hit accounts sooner or later depending on the institution.
3. The “Agent” who sent the alert was in fact Computer share. Computer share is the Transfer agent for Mr. Cooper. They can be found here:
http://investors.mrcoopergroup.com/TransferAgent/Index?KeyGenPage=430633
Then I decided to call computer share since I am a share holder and they house shareholder information. I am allowed to speak to the transfer agent with regards to my shares, and ask questions with regards to “Alerts” they sent to my brokerage firm to forward to me.
What I found was quite interesting after the verification process:
Me: Q. My brokerage E*TRADE confirmed there was an Alert stating “This is not the final Payment” coinciding with my last payment of shares that was paid on the 10th of January. Can you confirm that this alert is correct.
TA: A. Mr. “Blank”, hold on while I check the status of the company Mr. Cooper for that date.... on my screen it says the last payment from the Litigation was paid on that date. So those shares should be the final payment.
Me: Q. Yes, however, this “Alert” stating this is not the final payment was confirmed to have been instructed by Mr. Coopers Transfer agent. Is that not Computer Share?
TA: A. Yes, Sir, We are.
Me: Q. So, what I am thinking is, the referenced “Alert” stating “This is not the final payment” is with regards to other assets that should be returning. You see from the records we have publicly, there are clearly assets that have not been distributed back to equity. I along with many other people have been trying to verify this fact. Also, if there are safe harbored assets then they must be paid for. None-the-less, if your agent gave this alert to my brokerage firm E*TRADE then that means you directly made me privy to something forthcoming. I would like to confirm if you know why Mr. Cooper being your client directed you as their transfer agency to give such an alert indicating something outside of the Litigation trusts final payment?
TA: A. Sir, I can understand the confusion, please give me some time to ask around and check. This is unusual. Can you hold for a few minutes?
Me: Response: yes, certainly.
10-15 mins later...
TA: Response: Sir, yes we sent the Alert to the brokers as part of the final Litigation Trust payment. This “Alert” was directed by Mr. Cooper. Also, I can confirm shares are being processed. I cannot give you a date, but they are being processed for distribution to certain shareholders.
Me: Response: That’s great news! So if I may confirm once more. Just to be certain. That Alert was sent by Computer share as the acting Transfer Agent for Mr. Cooper?
TA: Response: Yes, that’s Correct.
Me: Q. Can you confirm if this is common stock or preferred shares?
TA. A. I cannot confirm that.
Me. Q. Can you confirm wether these shares for distribution is connected somehow to multiple shareholders or just one? Like is this a large distribution such as in consideration for a sale or purchase from a large pool of investors? Please keep in mind, I understand the company Mr. Cooper must make information open to investors via filings, and that some information is not public, that said you have made me privy to a payment and now told me shares are in transit. It seems there is some latitude given to these special circumstances and I am trying to pinpoint if these shares are for more than let’s say 1 or 2 firms like let’s say KKR.... and more for hundreds or more shareholders at once...
TA: Response: what I was checking on earlier was with respect to such an Alert we have. Again I cannot specify how many shareholders are to be receiving these shares, just that shares are in transit. You are correct, an “Alert” was given and I believe this is the best answer I have at the moment to give.
Me: Response: I understand. Thank you for letting me know. I think I got more than enough information. Have a great day.
TA: Response: your welcome, you too.
End call.
Please note I was not able to get clarification on payment dates however, I was able to confirm the "Alert" stating "This is not the final payment" was given on January 10, 2020 to the brokerage firms by the Transfer Agent, Computer share at the direction of Mr.Cooper Group.
I was also able to confirm that the Final LTI payment was indeed done.
This is significant because it confirms Mr. Cooper is the one paying us in the future.
It also confirms there is another payment!
Best
I have not received my partial monetary payment as well.
I think the language on the link to the earnings date for COOP says “estimated” a company can release earning later or earlier at their discretion. However the historical warning dates have been on the beginning or end of the month. None have been in the 23rd....
In any case that’s just 1 Alert... the other was inclusive in the payouts and said “This is not the final payment” so it is not over. Also the markers have not disappeared and they will disappear when it’s over.
Wether the 23rd is an actual event with no relation to payout or not will not matter in the end. It’s just striking that the earnings call was scheduled for the 23rd...
Best,
Alex Leo
I called regarding this, and there is always an alert that comes in when you receive a security, payment or some sort of dividend with Etrade. It has been the case ever since 2010 when I created my account.
Etrade
It is located in the alerts on the bell icon.
I will respect this opinion as there was almost no discussion as to these remote assets that clearly have existed and the FDIC even acknowledged. That said, there were court ordered sealed docs and if they were BK remote then it could stand to reason that it did apply since the main reason we did not know is the information was under lock and key.
I want to clarify something else. The escrow markers will disappear out of the brokerage account once no more payments can be made.
I had a lengthy conversation with Etrade regarding this. I had recently moved and tried to dissolve my Etrade and they cannot move, fully close down, or even retire the escrow markers until no more payments are declared.
since we have received a final payment from the LTI it does mean there is more. and also upon the absolute final assets being brought back to the equity we will see the removal of the escrow marker.
This is the legal process the brokers will utilize.
the distribution of assets being returned outside of LTI and that being Safe Harbor assets are in fact 75/25 from here on out because the LTI already made the last payment from what they are managing.
There is no longer assets in the LTI there are only remaining safe harbor assets.