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.
If they are aware of the event...even if its a year away, they must
disclose it
BBANBOB, as a public company Coop would have to issue an 8k stating that possibility if that is the case...as it is a material event for all current Coop shareholders...especially now that the LT is closed.
I really think Coop must be totally financially separated from the old estate...otherwise they would need to issue an 8k now.
If we are to get anything back from remote bk, I would imagine it would be cash payments for escrow to catch us up for the last 13 years, and they cash dividend going forward if anything left after.
I doubt Coop would materially benefit from those assets...otherwise 8k should be out by now.
Yes, and they haven't been paid yet...The question is can FDIC-R clawback money from remote bk assets to pay class 17? Does escrow need to wait until FDIC close out the receivership?
This is a bs hit piece. They couldnt get retail to sell at $35 so they thought they shake the tree a little to loosen some retail shares.
Good news is, I think Coop will most likely run up into the 40's after the earnings. I think the shorts are trying to cover...with a little help with this hit piece.
Bad news is we are still waiting on escrow...and no one here knows how much longer...
Boris, what's really puzzling is that class 17 still hasn't been paid...even though that whole lawsuit between DB, JPM, and FDIC was settled years ago... yet crickets from class 17? No lawsuits?
My biggest fear is people in the know, knows how to access those assets without retail knowing....what if having those escrow markers is not enough...what if additional administrative claims need to be filed to access those remote bk assets in addition to owning the markers.
We really need a professional familiar with the remote bk assets and how to access them. I think sitting on our assess pass this point, after the LT has shut down, is becoming risky.
You mentioned you have an attorney working looking into it. Any updates?
Boris, I dont think Coop has control over the remote bk assets...I think they may be waiting to release until FDIC closes the receivership...Otherwise, the receivership may clawback those remote bk assets for the benefit of class 17?? maybe...
I think someone is helping shorts to cover. $1 downgrade??
Volume has been very thin for the last few sessions. They might be expecting Coop to run after the earnings....
Libor lawsuits were engineered by FDIC to delay the closing of the receivership. Look at all the settlements so far. They are in the millions not billions...peanuts
I always wondered if Kerry Killinger ever read this board. He obviously is still upset enough about the whole JPM/FDIC robbery of his Wamu bank ..his legacy...that he published a book on it after 13 years.
Mr. Killinger, sir, if you are reading this, we could sure use some guidance just about now.
Alice Griffin was most likely employed by the big boys to delay the closing of this by another 2 years. She is intelligent enough to not waste time on the silly 1% argument and could have served herself and all of us much better to ask the court to disclose all the bk remote assets since bk was pretty much done in 2018.
This whole silly 1% argument is too suspicious. No way she was really fighting for 1%. She had a hidden agenda to delay us 2 more years.
Is it reasonable to think that any attorney is stupid enough to argue for 1% more payout and waste 2 more years after supposedly had waited for 11 years for her payout..she supposedly had lits of class 19 escrow...No one can be that inept
No, the only reasonable conclusion is that she had a hidden agenda to delay this another 2 years
That's what we need to find out. Get legal representation that is familiar with these remote bk structures and see if we can force a disclosure of such assets now that the bk is supposedly done.
I dont think $300B is realistic but $30B to $80B is possible. If such assets are witheld in remote bk and Coop is able to use it as collateral, they can easily get a $3B to $8B loan at super low interest...
Remember, how did WMIH get $3B bridge loan at 3% interest to buy Coop when it was a shell with no income??
Yes, I agree 99% (would still like to see filing confirming) that LTI is done...kaput. But is it possible for legal filing against the various subs that maybe holding ohr remote bk assets? If escrow truly is the beneficiaries of those remote bk assets, do we have any legal right to discloaure of such assets now that the LTI is "kaput"?
Again, I dont know enough. We need a professional legal advice who is familiar with these remote bk structures.
If the hedgies have inside info on the true value of their escrow holding, they can afford to delay. With their inside info, they can use their escrow holding as collateral to get funding from the investment banks. You and I cant...1) we dont have inside info on the true worth if our escrow markers, and 2) we dont have personal relationship with investment banks to use our markers as collateral to get cheap loans.
If Coop stands to directly benefit from the closing of the bk, they would have reported that by now in an 8k....They simply cant launder money and report WMI assets as profit from their business...I think that may result in jail time.
Thus my conclusion is that, Coop is somehow using our escrow assets as collateral for getting cheap loans. As long as those assets can be delayed returning to escrow via "remote bk" excuse, they'll keep witholding and keep using it as free collateral to get cheap funding for Coop business.
We really need to find out if we have any legal right to force the disclosure of remote bk assets now that the bk is officially done.
We need professional legal advice.
Biz, I do not have the expertise to know whether the trustees of our remote bk assets are abusing their rights or simply following orders from JPM/FDIC/hedgies, or simply lazy...If the LT is truly disbanded as of this month, I think we need to figure out ASAP what our actions need to be...We need professional advice from somone who truly understands what our rights are in regards to those remote bk assets. I simply cannot afford to wait another 10 years guessing and hoping...We need to know now if we are getting nothing or if we need to proceed with some actions to pursue what we are legally entitled to...need solid professional advice on our options now.
We need two actions for escrow immediately!
1) Need a verifiable document or statement stating WMILT has been completely dissolved for good.
2) We need an attorney or a CBA with expertise to investigate how much longer can the remote bk assets can be legally hidden. Is there a time period after bk is done that they must disclose the beneficiary info? If they can legally stay hidden for 10 more years then we will need to plan for a lawsuit...because we aint getting a cent without a fight.
But first we need some intel...paid professional advice on our option. Clearly, waiting is no longer an option .. since many are claiming that LT is gone now...and yet we see no action or disclosure on escrow front. We need to know what the smart action is next.
Boris, thanks for sharing any info he may dig up. You will do us all a great service if your attorney can force the disclosure of the remote bk assets and the timeline of their release to the escrow markers.
Did your attorney give you an approximate timeline on his investigation into this? Will we know something by May or June?
I agree. We dont need to litigate right now. We just need an attorney who understands how these remote bk assets are shielded from the bankruptcy and explain to us what we need to do here...
1) sit tight and wait? 2) file some claim forms , or 3) litigate. I hope its not 3. If its 3, we will be waiting for another 10 years.
I hope it is 1. If it is, I would like to know the timeline of the wait.
Boris I agree with you regarding getting representation -- not necessarily to start a new lawsuit, which could take years -- but to at least find out if we need to do something administrative to claim those remote bk assets or to find out what the wait time going forward is definitively.
I have tried to bring this up a few months ago and it didnt seem like there was much interest on the board so I've kept silence. I hope you can rally the board much better than me. Please let us know once your attorney has signed up to "investigate" our case. Maybe we can all help with some crowdfunding just to find out what we need to do going forward...
Again, I'm not advocating a huge multi year lawsuit to rehash POR7, but rather just to get some professional advice on what to expect going forward with regards to the remote bk assets coming back to escrow...is it a few months more? is it years? do we need to file some forms to claim them? or will they return automatically to our escrow markers.
Again, I'm just promoting we get legal advice to make sure we are not missing any claim paperwork. NOT PROMOTING AMBULANCE CHASING LAWSUIT!
I am in no way arguing that there is nothing in remote bk. I am in the camp of big money in remote bk!
I am just wondering if we are missing any paperwork to access to assets. We retail do not have any legal counsel like the big boys.
Yes, they are fighting Alice Griffin for something. But are they fighting AG for us? or just for themselves?
It would be prudent for us to get professional legal advice at this time.
I'd be happy to sit on my ass and wait further if the legal advice says so...but if it says otherwise?? maybe file some claim paperwork?? then we need to hurry up before its too late and our markers are deleted.
RD, I don't understand why anyone would not think its prudent to spend a little at this point to get some professional legal advice just to make sure we are not missing any administrative paperwork to get access to those remote bk assets. We have a possible (maybe not probable according to some) threat of our markers being deleted in March.
That's only 2 months away!!
Why not be a little careful and get some legal advice to make sure we are not missing any paperwork?
I am not promoting a lawsuit!!
I am just trying to rally the board to crowdfund a few hours of legal counsel for retail to make sure we are not missing anything. I think this is a prudent risk mitigation at this time
Why are people shooting this down? AGAIN: NOT PROMOTING A LAWSUIT!! Just advocating to obtain a little legal advice
No not rubbish. WMILT is legally telling the truth when it doesn't own anything else. So those remote bk assets will not flow back through WMILT. And our signed paperwork may not applied to those assets.
It's a fair question to ask whether we need to file additional paperwork to go after those assets outside of bk.
It would be a small price to pay for everyone here to get an answer from an attorney versed in this subject matter.
Well, it might be a good idea to forward your email to WMILT and ask them why they think they can delete the markers in March and reference your email from FDIC. It will be interesting to see their response. TIA
That is possible too. It may be too late for us to file anything for those remote bk assets. That's why we need some professional legal advice to tell us if we are too late or we should hurry up and file something before our markers get deleted in March.
Pickstock, it doesn't matter who is right...Do you want to chance it, even if its a small probability that Rosen is right and the markers get deleted in March?
Now what if our markers do not automatically entitle us return of those remote bk assets?
What if we need to identify and file paperwork to claim those remote bk assets with our escrow markers as proof of claim? If such is the case then we are really risking a lot and waiting until March to see who is right and whether our markers will be deleted.
stoxjock, maybe they are repeating it to give us retail a "hint".
1) It is true WMILT does not own any such asset
2) Escrow markers in and of themselves do not entitle us to such assets
Which hints at: Maybe we need to file a claim to go after those remote bk assets not owned by WMILT and use our escrow markers as proof of claim.
Does anyone live close to SG's office where Nelson works? Maybe we can contact him for legal advice as to whether we need to file additional claim paperwork to go after the remote bk assets? I'm sure he's prohibited to represent us to "sue" the LT or anyone related to the bk...but maybe he can give legal consultation for "administrative" paper work that we can file to claim the remote bk assets.
Raju,
The following excerpt is from the trust FAQ update posted by LG today.
Nevertheless, at the request of certain legacy shareholders, the Trust’s administrators agreed to keep the Escrow CUSIPS outstanding until the Trust’s dissolution.
The trust (WMILT) dissolves no later that March 2021 according to the latest update...
So yes, there is a chance that Rosen is lying on the FAQ and he can't dissolve the markers but do you want to chance it?
Also, see my earlier post. I'm suspecting that any remote bk assets will not pass through WMILT. and hence I'm also worried that such assets may not return automatically to our escrow markers (again see my earlier post regarding the FAQ update).
We need some professional legal advice on the subject matter. Do we need to identify all the remote bk assets and file some claim paperwork to access such assets?..with our escrow markers as proof of legal claim?? If so, we better hurry before they delete our markers. Maybe the hedge funds are already doing that. They don't need to tell us. The less retail filing claims, maybe the bigger the pot left for them.
Should have asked CBA09 to hook us up with an attorney versed in the subject matter. I am not experienced enough to lead this effort but I would be willing to contribute funds to get some legal advice.
Again, this is not me calling for a giant lawsuit that will take $$$$ and time. I'm simply advocating for some legal advice as to whether we need to file some claim paperwork to access those remote bk assets that are not part of the WMILT or will pass through the WMILT.
Yes, the recovery will be outside of LT...but will those recoveries come to escrow markers automatically? or do we need to start identifying all those assets and start filing claims? before its too late...before they delete our escrow markers and we have no proof of claim.
LG, from this update there are three things that seems obvious
1) All it says in #3 is that the TRUST (WMILT) is not holding any "hidden assets". Hence any remote bk assets will not pass through WMILT
2) We know for a fact that there must be something in remote bk...otherwise why would the underwriters continue to fight Alice Griffin to keep their 1% stake in class 19? If there is nothing left why fight?
3) In #12 it states the Escrow CUSIPS do not, in and of themselves, represent an entitlement to any possible future cash distributions from the Trust, Reorganized WMI or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (either in its corporate capacity or as the receiver for Washington Mutual Bank), as the case may be.
Number 3 WORRIES ME--> this implies that ownership of escrow markers may not give us automatic return of assets from remote bk. We may have to identify such assets and file claims to them...maybe that's why the hedgefunds are so quiet...they don't want retail to hang onto their coattails. Maybe the hedge funds are already filing claims to those assets. We really need some professional legal counsel before our escrow markers get deleted in March.
Thanks Fred. Yes, I forgot. Its date before month in Europe.
Thanks for the update Sportyfelix. What is the Request Number on 08.01.2021 and 11.01.2021? Did he make a typo? Should it be 2020? Or is he referring to something coming later this year in 2021?
Sportyfelix, I wouldnt say its a nothingburger. Something triggered that notice after all these years...My guess is someone might have made a mistake and triggered the notice prematurely. We may be close to something. Its odd that they cant give you an answe...Hasnt it been a week since you've asked?
Sportyfelix, any further update on your notice? TIA
RD, I'm not suggesting we get legal representation to sue anyone. That will be too costly. I think it may be wise for us to get legal counsel to see if we need to file any claim to access those assets in remote bk SPEs. There is still a chance that our escrow markers will get deleted by March and as I've pointed out in that excerpt from last year's PR release, the escrow markers in and of themselves do not entitle returns. Is that a hint suggesting that we may need to file a claim to the remote bk assets in addition to ownership of the escrow markers?
I do not know enough as most retail. We need a legal expert familiar with remote bk isolation rules of how SPEs work and see if we need to file something to claim those assets now that the bk is over....before its too late and our markers get deleted.
There has been zero disclosures and the threat of March deletion is getting closer. Should we just wait or at least organize and get some legal counsel to make sure that we are not missing any steps.
Again, this is not to sue anyone. That would be too costly. This is just to get professional legal advice as to our rights as escrow markers ownership and what we may need to do to claim remote bk assets.
If legal counsel says, just wait then we wait. However, what if the legal counsel says we need to file some claim paperwork to access those remote bk assets? Then we should hurry before Rosen tries to delete us in March...
I agree. All retail on this board should be very cautious at this point. As I pointed out in that excerpt from last year's PR release, escrow markers ownership may not result in automatic payout from the remote bk SPE's. We may need to file a claim for those assets now that the bk is done. Else, it may be too late if Rosen does end up deleting our escrow markers come March. We really need legal advice on this....not to sue the estate...but maybe understand what additional claims we may need to file with our escrow markers.
Time is running out.
All Escrow holders, please read. Is action needed?
I have gone back over the last press release from WMILT in January 2020. Is Rosen giving a hint that we may need to file some sort of claim to receive the remote bankruptcy assets under the various SPE's??
http://www.wmitrust.com/wmitrust/document/8817600200110000000000001
Please pay attention to the colored wording in the following excerpt
The foregoing notwithstanding, the so-called "Escrow Markers" or "Escrow CUSIPs" established by the
Trust upon emergence from its Chapter 11 proceedings in March 2012 for purposes of facilitating the
potential distribution of Reorganized WMI's common stock will continue to be maintained for the
foreseeable future. As previously disclosed, however, former positions represented by such Escrow
Markers or Escrow CUSIPs are not entitled to receive any distributions under the terms of the Plan and
they do not,(1) in and of themselves, represent an entitlement to any possible future distributions from (2)the
Trust, Reorganized WMI or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (either in its corporate capacity or
as the receiver for Washington Mutual Bank), as the case may be. As discussed above, no additional
distributions of cash or equity will be made by the Trust subsequent to the Distribution, other than to
one or more charities as contemplated by the Plan and Liquidating Trust Agreement.
(1) in and of themselves
This implies that ownership of the escrow markers is not enough to automatically receive. Do we need to file a claim to go after the remote bk assets in the SPE's now that the bk is over?
(2)the Trust, Reorganized WMI or the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
This implies that we will get nothing back from WMILT, WMIH(Coop), or FDIC. However, it doesn't say anything about remote bk assets in SPE's.
Putting (1) and (2) together, do we need to file a claim to go after the remote bk assets in SPE's?
I am worried if we do not file any claims to go after the remote bk assets, the SPE's can simply consider the assets abandoned and distribute them to the hedge fund boys that may have already filed claims to them. It may be too late to do anything come March, if the LT deletes our escrow markers then.
Can we try organizing and funding a legal representation to find out if we need to file a claim for the remote bk assets before its too late?