This is not a specific reply to your last post. I just don't know how to post it without hitting the "reply botton" .
I wrote this note, which I intended to submit to the Court. After pondering its value I decided to let everyone on this board read it first. There is no substantive evidence in this letter, so I don’t think that it will impact the Judge ....but who knows. I’ll expose myself to a vote on whether the bloggers agree to submit or not.
Honorably Mary Walrath
I am a registered owner of Dime Litigation Tracking Warrants (due 2059).
I have been closely following the Confirmation Hearings to accept the Global Settlement Agreement proposed by debtors of WaMu,WMB, and WMI.as dictated by JPM and the FDIC.
I listened to Defendants’ blatant disavowal of LTWs holders in a most dismissive and pejorative way, without even the guise of basic understanding of the Facts. Using out-of-context quotations from the original and amended terms of issue of these LTW, attorneys for the defendants flippantly make out-of-hand dismissal of the obvious facts and demonstrated proofs provided by the Plaintiffs. Sorry to say, Defendants attorneys either don’t understand the issues at hand, the administration of Contract Law, or, more likely, they are blustering and posturing the system, to maliciously hijack the property rights of the LTW holders. I am not a lawyer and cannot claim to be an expert on contract law, but, after listening to Defendants attorneys portrayal of the facts , I now consider myself head-and-shoulders above their meager understanding, which is offensive to the intelligence of a layman and, surely, even more so, this august Court.
Without repeating what others have previously stated, as attested by the numerous Court filings, the long and tortuous route that the LTWs holders have endured for the past ten years, I will try to get to the meat of our position.
WE ARE NOT OWNERS or CREDITORS of WaMu, WMB,or WMI. There are very real and troubling issues dealing with the rapid and orchestrated collapse of that great institution. I wish the equity and debt holders all the luck in obtaining just relief for their loss. As an LTWs owner, though, I and my fellow holders, are not affected one iota by this great American tragedy.
Our LTWs instrument were distributed to us ten years ago. We were, and still are, divorced from equity ownership in WaMu. For, our case is completely independent of the course of events that befell WaMu.
“So?” You might ask. “What are we doing here, in this Court? Are we here to waste the Court’s time?”
The answer is, that, by all means, this issue should never have entered the Court’s jurisdiction as we are far removed from Bankruptcy consideration. In fact we are sitting on a valuable asset, a rightful claim to 85% of Judgement of at least $364 Million and as much as $600 Million awarded to us, or pending, in both US Court of Claims and US Appellate Court against the FDIC.
What got us into this Court, was a nefarious subterfuge on the part of JPM and the FDIC to deny us our rightful claim to disbursement from this judgement. By asserting that we are equity holders in bankrupt entity(ies), JPM can step in into our shoes and grab another “prize” in its wonderful aggrandizement of windfalls emanating from the raid on WaMu.
Now, how in the world can this happen? The Dime distribution Statement and its Amendments make it very, very, clear that an asset was transferred in the form of an instrument artificially named “ LTWs”, with a real and extent language that make it crystal clear as to what it represents. And, if there should be doubt as to the ownership and long life existence of this instruments, clauses were inserted to guarantee, beyond the shadow of doubt, that this is a free and clear distribution of rights to collect the net proceeds accruing from litigation to recover losses suffered as result of Regulatory malfeasance. A detailed catalogue of the rights granted to the LTWs were amply articulated to this Court by the able Plaintiff Attorney, Arthur Steinberg, to explicitly guarantee that this asset cannot be sequestered, minimized, diluted, assigned or stolen, by any succeeding inter-veiling circumstances. It is, explicitly ours to keep, as long as the Anchor case is active. How can I be more clear? - The Anchor case is 85% ours and ours alone.
It is as though I gave my daughter, a minor, my cherished antique car as a gift. While waiting for her to reach driving age, I arranged to keep this car in my neighbor’s garage. I promised that on the date that she picks up the car I will pay for the long term storage. Through some circumstances, the neighbor loses the house to foreclosure. The assignee to the house notices the valuable antique and immediately takes possession to the vehicle. That car belongs to my daughter, period. I may have to remove it, pronto, and, I might still owe my neighbor storage fees, but, I never surrendered the rights to the car to the property assignee. If the house assignee touches the car, has he not acted illegally? Is he not guilty of conversion?
From where, on God’s earth, does JPM come to nullify my just rights? How do they have the temerity to grab an asset that has long been detached from their prey? The shear arrogance is galling!
These, are essentially, the reasons that they are openly and covertly assert in Court as their justification.
Because, it is a behemoth entity that shares its bed with the FDIC and other regulatory entities!
Because, it has unlimited resources to out-gun me with highly paid adversarial lawyers in this and any other Court...forever!
Because, it was able to collude in the set-up and capture of the largest savings institution in the Country, with an insulting payment of a paltry one cent on a dollar of assets “ purchased”! That’s right! one cent on a dollar of asset! ($188Billion in assets $1.8Bliion Price).
Because, after it pounced on this victim, it found itself flush with new and rich rewards, courtesy of the IRS largess (which rewards dumb corporate maneuvers with rich refunds and carry-forward net operating losses, to shelter and offset future income)!
Because, it can, and does, assert that it is the rightful owner of these NOLs, and further, to lay claims to $2.5Billions in refunds as well!
The Defendants presented the most hilariously, idiotic, clownish, amateurish show that I have ever heard. Yes, in this Court. By displaying three or four “executives” and industry so called “experts” to stipulate in some “declaration” that in “their opinion” the Global Settlement is fair. Please...pay any street-walker ten Dollars and she will declare the same. When questioned, NONE ( I suffered through the same tribulations as this Court in listening to the long winded tapes) were even remotely familiar with the LTW instruments. They were disgraceful buffoons, all of them. That these “witnesses” were paid millions for this disgraceful showing is a crime in itself.
Just like the automobile example, if JPM attaches my asset, it is guilty of stealing.
I submit that the Global Settlement offered by Defendants should be dismissed with an admonition to not waste the Court’s time with frivolous filings and offer a real and meaningful recompense to the claimants as well as to free the LTW from the claws of the JPM Juggernaut.
If, when you read this, Your Honor, you find yourself saying, “this is some angry nut!”, then you will have captured my deep-felt feelings at what this country endured, and is enduring, during these past 2 years of gross corporate chicanery. As a nation, and , as a people, we cannot let our Courts be tarnished by this outrageous behavior.
I sincerely apologize to this Court for the deep anger exhibited and solicitous language used to describe some of the characters. I sensed that Plaintiff attorneys felt the same as I, but, refrained from expressing such, due to Court norms and decorum. If this is not so, I apologize to them as well.
Let’s be real, there are many, who share my feelings and are too polite to express their outrage. I speak for them as well. I hope that those who agree with me but are too busy or timid to address the Court will forgive me as well if the language was too harsh for them.
Respectfuly submitted,
Philip Max
