News Focus
News Focus
icon url

wowalters

09/08/15 8:30 AM

#434642 RE: WithCatz #434641

Is this the cover story, while partially true?
icon url

mufa

09/08/15 9:14 AM

#434644 RE: WithCatz #434641

How do we "know" these assets are deposits?
Thanks
icon url

bkshadow

09/08/15 10:12 AM

#434649 RE: WithCatz #434641

WithCatz, $151B FDIC Subrogated Claim is...

...misunderstood in the posted interpretations of such as CASH; it is not.

...much the same as with the $165B Mortgage Backed Securities, etc.

...if one would look to the FDIC-Receivership CLAIMS (notice, I use the term CLAIMS while the theory is that such is CASH and "is coming back"), one would note the $151,150,664 FDIC SUBROGATED CLAIM.

...so, why is there an FDIC SUBROGRATED CLAIM?

...well, that is how it works for the FDIC-C insurer protection claim on behalf of the "insured deposits" (there were almost $40B of depositor accounts that were not insured at the time; generally total $188B).

Treatment of Like Classes of Creditors

https://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/managing/history1-10.pdf

As the deposit insurer, the FDIC is obligated to satisfy deposit liabilities of a failed institution up to the deposit insurance limit. The FDIC in its corporate capacity then “steps into the shoes” of the depositor as a claimant and files its subrogated claim against the receivership estate. The FDIC, like other creditors in the same class, then is paid a pro rata share of its claim based on the liquidation value of the receivership assets.



...here is the FDIC Subrogated Claim for $151,150,664.



...other than the FDIC reference above, a more detailed explanation.



icon url

fwh3334zeke

09/08/15 10:21 AM

#434650 RE: WithCatz #434641

Kitty I wasn't referring the deposits just the off balance cash & assets owned by WM that JPM shed to beat new banking regulations & also this has got nothing to do with mortgages or deposits.