JHD51, you know as well as I do, ALL has to do with money...CMON MAN. Further, why did these same UWs get an entire year to sign their releases over EVERYONE else? They finaggled their way into class 19 after they discovered through the very work they do that the VERY BIG MONEY was untouchable by the FDIC (in my view) and in Safe Harbor-controlled DSTs.
I suggest you review some of these posts I captured from a former IHUB poster, CBA09, whose specialty was exactly what we are speaking of regarding Safe Harbor protected monies that were set up correctly, which I believe WaMu accomplished.
____________________________________________________
FROM CBA09
On a more positive note, I always remember the IHUB poster, CBA09 who was an admitted Certified Bank Auditor who posted for quite a while answering everyone's questions knowledgeably and professionally. He always said we MAY have to wait until the Receivership is ready to be closed before we see any returns BUT he did say without ANY DOUBT that we are GOLDEN. I will leave by posting some of his posts before he suddenly and mysteriously disappeared without any notice.
Anyone Who Doubts Large Style Money Returning Needs To Read IHUB Post #490806
***Many thanks goes subject matter experienced poster CBA09s following posts***
Ref: So will they just magically make the Escrows worth something then?
Comment:
Shrew professional investors here. Those initial & ensuing Hedge Funds did not invest and release on guesswork. Rather a keen understanding of what assets and rights to assets will prevail beyond the reaching powers of bankruptcy.
It seems many here are down to a glimmer of hope, from once having high hopes. I have been primarily silent. Why!?! No need to focus on the daily PPS. It is of no concern to me.
Do you believe these Hedge Funds & Institutional Investors are concerned with the daily PPS? Of course not, they are inured to its daily movement and the postings on this Board.
Those who have their ticket punched, namely releases, take note that you are joined in the company of those in the know. Knowing the "Final Outcome."
The key here, I strongly contend, is outside the waterfall. So those assets shielded from the Trustee's reach as follows:
1) SPE / Trusts assets ( The parent is WMI )
2) Abandonment of Stock. ( As any future value goes to WMI and is not included as an asset of the estate).
The following post by CBA09 (#490902) is also another great compelling, experienced view by a certified bank auditor such as him:
"Ref: Any idea as to timing? Are we looking at sometime before or after the end of 2018?
Comment:
I believe the timing will be twofold:
1) what happens within the finalization of receivership before the end of Sept 2018,
2) That what happens outside of the receivership, specific to Bankruptcy remote entities - SPEs. This, I strongly believe, is where the lion's share of recovery will come. Each SPE / Trust is governed by the expressed language of each PSA. There a many and most likely many have reached ripeness while others continue to carry out payment compliance to investors/certificate holders.
These stand-alone SPEs have many accounts that keep separate various types of revenue. I know from first-hand experience the amount of retained assets within can be massive. Many Trusts have 6-7 tranches with 10's of Thousands of loans in each tranche.
When a given Trust's PSA has completed its fulfillment to certificate holders a provision called "Accounts Removable" takes place. But before the actual removable is initiated a reconciliation of "Retained Assets" takes place. This is the vouching of reports to $ in the captive cash accounts along with any remaining "Over Collateralized Pooled Receivables." Then a true-up, namely $ distribution is performed by the Master Servicer. Here, from my experience, the Holding Company (WMI) would be the receiver of these retained assets.
Now the question is when will this happen. Since this is outside of Bankruptcy it could have happened with each fulfillment of PSA. Then again it could be ( for completed "True-ups" ) in tandem with the finalization of Receivership. Then of course, as those that meet fulfillment, a payout is accordingly. "
**********SOLID POST FROM CBA09****************
Now To Me - The Following Tells The Entire Story Except When
GOOD REVIEW FROM CBA09***From a Certified Bank Auditor-Subject Matter Expert
CBA09
Sunday, 01/14/18 03:41:16 PM
Re: LuckyPanda post# 503177
0
Post # of 531409
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, having 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 its subsidiaries. Shareholders of WMI have legal title to all the assets of WMI. All assets that end up in WMI through its subsidiaries are thereby assets that WMI shareholders have legal contractual rights.
Por7, through its declarations, has 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) provision. Generally, it's the Parent that receives cash flows of residuals. Note, SPE# 1 creates 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 the residual interest of SPE # 2 / Trusts.
In a solvent entity, shareholders cannot force a distribution. A Corporation, through its board, has to declare a distribution of its profit before shareholders are to receive any distribution in the form of dividends.
PSA are compelling and indivisible - only one end stop - Escrow Markers.
The legal group Akin and Gump are discussing the scope of what the Examiner can examine and what he cannot examine. We also have in their[url][/url][tag]insert-text-here[/tag] part (b) of what is to be retained, and that is because, in negotiations that we had with all of the settling parties, with the equity committee last week, with the FDIC, we did talk a great deal about the concept of the retained assets.
Now, it's my position, Your Honor, that the examiner doesn't need to know much about the retained assets other than to say the assets are retained and therefore the liquidating trust can go ahead and pursue them. They will still be there; they can be carried through. However, I understand that the equity committee is very interested in having a neutral third party do an investigation of those retained assets.
xxx
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
