Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[fsshon]

Two Words.. AUTOMATIC STAY.. How I understand the FDIC's power under the Automatic Stay is that the BK court is resolved to handling the claims and the FDIC is basically working as a conservator (or like the capacity of the UST) in the background.

If the FDIC is able to get the court to vacate the "automatic stay" and seize the holding companies deposits, to in affect use them to pay off the claimants of the recievership, this would pierce the "corporate veil" that has already been established by THJMW in the last hearing (there is no evidence of co-mingling). If WMB is considered to be insolvent (before seizure), then it could prove the FDIC's case. But JPM has said "at no time on or before seizure was WMB insolvent." that is a pretty bold statement, coming from the accounting department of the bank who got the assets of a solvent institution. WMI maintains this assertion and claimed insolvency after the seizure, not before. Logan affidavit proves the money was WMI's.

So if THJMW states that she is not going to have any VEIL issues in her courtroom [I don't feel she mentioned that by accident], then who is going to pay the bondholders of WMB? The FDIC wants to seize the "holding companies (WMI)" money to satisfy debt that was incurred by "the child" right. Now if THJMW allows the FDIC to do this, then the Veil is pierced and she has basically back-pedalled since early feb. If she sticks to her guns and uses the fact that she has already booted FIRREA out and reiterates the claim of the holding company of collusion, corruption and malfeasance, than we as shareholders of WMI are as they say GOLDEN!

The bet is simple. Which way do you believe?
1. THJMW will leave the veil intact and not allow the FDIC to steal the holding companies money? Award SJ to WMI.
2. THJMW will pierce the veil, allow the FDIC to use the power under section 9.5 (they gave themselves) and let them seize the deposits to pay themselves and creditors of the banks. Therefore giving WMI creditors and shareholders the shaft. FDIC only held a 300 Bil bank for 1 hour after seizure, they never tried to get fair value.

I am betting on 1. Somehow I just do not feel THJMW is on the FDIC's side here. Also WMI as part of losing a ruling on SJ, could simply request a trial for the future to prove their case. The burder rests on the "moving party" in an SJ and if WMI did not prove it to her as part of the proceedings, they could simply request a trial. That to me IMO , is not an emergency.

Bop has said that WMI's attorney's are going to have to keep playing the insolvency card to prove their case for "Fraudulent Transfer."

I am placing my Money on #1..

I hope this answers all the questions I have gotten as part of the Doc I put up today..Someone like Mordicai, Ramirez or Reptile can tell it to the board in legal terms, I can just paint a picture with the paint and canvus I have. Blogging right?

GLTYA

~Fish~