Dime Bancorp Inc (fka DIMEQ)

[bkshadow]

JMW and the TPS Opinion

TWACOWFCA

I refer to the JMW has not favorably on such matters, ask TPS with a wide but broad brush as TPS and DIME LTW are not the same, but they have some matters in common.

TPS Summary Judgment

http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812229/0812229110110000000000008.pdf

They each have a trigger which became a source of argument. With TPS, where the underlying mortgage portfolio interests were severed and replace by WMI with theoretical preferred stock and an immediate transfer to WMB of the TPS; according to JMW. All as it related to the identification of the trigger events and with no consideration to the "actual events" in that the conditional exchange was to be a factor to protect the TPS and to bolster WMBs capital.

To what end. If the bank subsidiary has been seized, what benefit is the capital contribution? In the recent Colonial bank bankruptcy, where the FDIC bases its claim on the parent holding company cash, tax refunds, etc. for failure to maintain sufficient capital, the Judge ruled {I believe in August} that it makes no sense to hold the parent of a bank subsidiary under an obligation to maintain capital if the FDIC-R has already taken the bank.

So, IMO, JMW really ignored the actual events and focused soley on the trigger and the resulting conversion to preferred equity.

They each have a result. Re: DIME LTW, it would be a concern for the last part first, that the resulting conversion is to common equity. She did not rule SJ for the debtor, but I believe it was more on the debtor clear errors and missteps and tactics than her assessment on the merits {not mine, but hers}. So JMW will allow the adversary to continue and she will examine the trigger and appropriate result of the trigger.

The fact that she let JPM take ownership of the award is puzzling. She separated the asset from the imbedded obligation; as she did with TPS. To a reasonable person, the trigger hasn't taken place yet, the final award.

So will JMW look at the WMI BOD as responsible for not protecting the LTWs and allow it based upon that claim. Maybe, it would allow her to correct her mistake on letting JPM have the related assets unencumbered. Hopefully, there won't be much "may" or "shall."

I don't know if this helps. Each issue is tough, the TPS is $4B at face but most at or after the petition date. The DIME LTW is much less and as some have posted, longer and closer holding.

I don't know what will happen, but the Judges logic on the TPS is just a concern.

Again, just IMO.