Dmdmd2020 Tuesday, 04/09/19 07:57:07 AM
Re: hotmeat post# 568649 0
Post # of 598366
Hotmeat,
Per the Purchase and Assumption Agreement on page 2 under "Article 1 Definitions":
"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."
IMO...therefore, the WMB Subsidiaries that owned the Retained Interests (beneficial interests) in MBS Trusts that WMI Subsidiaries created, were not transferred to JPMC or any other entities. It also holds true that WMI non-banking Subsidiaries that owned the Retained Interests (beneficial interests) in MBS Trusts that WMI Subsidiaries created, were not transferred to JPMC or any other entities.
IMO...I contend that retained interests for bankruptcy remote MBS Trusts are owned by WMI Escrow Marker Holders and so does CBA09 (the following posts supports his views):
CBA09 IHub post #509618:
“Saturday, 02/17/18 03:18:11 PM
Re: hotmeat post# 509289 0
Post # of 568950
Ref: There is a theory where only Common Escrows, as the true owners of the original WMI estate as per pre-bankruptcy rights, benefits from the former WMI estate ie the Safe Harbor assets of WMI and Pref escrows only benefits from the Preferred Offerings that backed those securities.
I have two questions.......
1) If this is true, would Common and Pref holders who did not sign releases to elect to participate further be eligible to benefit from any returned Safe Harbor assets as they are bankruptcy remote and since releases were a bankruptcy process??? Using that theory's logic (kudos to goodietime).
Comment:
The answer is what you provided in # 2) below:
2) In the POR (pgs 59-60 quoted below) it clearly states that "ALL DOCUMENTS" pertaining to Prefs and Commons are deemed cancelled relating to WMI, (the Debtor),...not the Trusts. How could this be reconciled with the above theory???
Furthermore-
The court approved the negotiated 75/25 %. As for Non-release stakeholders, they have no standing, they do not exist.
Only released share holders, while being the last paid, will reap the greatest treasure - Safe Harbor Sssets. Some ripe and some still generating revenue. It's "abundantly" clear they are still there!
_____________________
CBA09 IHub post #504271:
“Sunday, 01/14/18 03:41:16 PM
Re: LuckyPanda post# 503177 0
Post # of 568950
Ref: CBA09, if safe harbor rules protect the assets to pre-bankruptcy ownership then its distribution should not apply to POR7. Does that mean escrow markers are moot? Will all Wamu shareholders receive a distribution including the non-releasing ones? Thanks in advance for your input. I have been wondering about this for some time.
Comment:
Liquidation of assets involves two distinct assets:
1) Property of the Bankruptcy Estate - (Por7 applies).
2) Non-Property of the Bankruptcy Estate - Safe Harbor Assets ( regular bankruptcy code procedures / priority apply).
While the above two are distinct in nature "ALL" residual interest will go to Escrow Markers. So, no, not moot. Escrow Markers are the legacy shareholders. Thereby, have final legal standing and in turn sole contractual rights / title in residual interest.
Ownership Chain -
WMI owns the assets of WMI and in turn has legal title to all the assets of it's subsidiaries. Shareholders of WMI have legal title to all the assets of WMI. All assets that end up in WMI thru it's subsidiaries are thereby assets that WMI shareholders have legal contractual rights.
Por7, thru its declarations, have addressed the distribution of liquidated Bankruptcy Estate Assets. All residual interest of estate assets will go to Escrow Markers per the 75 % / 25 % allocation.
Since our Safe Harbor Assets are outside the bankruptcy estate, those captured within SPE/Trusts will follow each respective Pooling & Service Agreement (PSA) provisions. Generally, it's Parent that receives cash flows of residuals. Note, SPE# 1 create the SPE# 2 /Trusts, SPE 1 are many times direct subsidiaries of the Parent. And, SPE # 1's have a great deal of involvement in residual interest of SPE # 2 / Trusts.
In a solvent entity shareholders cannot force a distribution. A Corporation, thru it's board, has to declare a distribution of it's profit before shareholders are to receive any distribution in the form of dividends.
PSA are compelling and indivisible - only one end stop - Escrow Markers. “
_____________________
CBA09 IHub post #503003:
“Saturday, 01/06/18 10:19:30 AM
Re: austin01 post# 502860 0
Post # of 568950
Ref: CBA09, are we hoping or is it conclusive that escrows will be the beneficiary of a hundred or so Trusts in Safe Harbor?
Comment:
I have no doubt. Do not the Hedge Funds / 100 + Institutional owners make it abundantly clear?!!!? “
