Replies to post #52673 on Mr Cooper Group Inc (COOP)

[dragon52]

oh well... sorry to bust the bubble

but all one had to do is dd.... and that is why the FDIC needs to be watched more carefully... they are dangerous when no check and balance is there and they have a free hand... anything can happen and they are excluded.... what a bummer.

[Stock Vader]

Well, IMO if there is some type of trial (fraud) and if its a jury trial, JPIG and FDIC would lose big, unless the jury is composed of a bunch of idiots. There's enough smoke with this case to see where the fire originated from.

[W3Research]

WAMUQ: Important Yahoo Post: Reversal (Sigh): WMI CAN Sue on the Constructively Fraudulent Conveyance Theory ...

Reversal (Sigh): WMI CAN Sue on the Constructively Fraudulent Conveyance Theory ...

First, I apologize for the anxiety I caused through my previous email(s) stating that 1828(u) precluded Weil/WMI's from prevailing. I should have read the statute in more depth before responding to Dragon.

Second, and the part that matters:

The limitations on 1828(u) DON'T APPLY to (1) fraudulent conveyance clauses based on ACTUAL fraud, or (2) WMI's case -- i.e., constructive fraud -- because (as far as we know) the FDIC/OTS did not send WMI a warning letter about WMB being undercapitalized.

Section 1828(u) would preclude WMI from suing on a constructively fraudulent conveyance theory IF WMI had received a FDIC/OTS warning letter about WMB's capitalization, which it didn't.

All this means is that 1828(u) doesn't hurt us!

This means that if the FDIC/OTS had sent a warning letter to WMI about WMB's capital, the FDIC would have had the protection of the statute.

I pasted the statute below for your convenience. Again, do your own due diligence. Sorry again for the anxiety.

(u) Limitation on claims
(1) In general
No person may bring a claim against any Federal banking agency (including in its capacity as conservator or receiver) for the return of assets of an affiliate or controlling shareholder of the insured depository institution transferred to, or for the benefit of, an insured depository institution by such affiliate or controlling shareholder of the insured depository institution, or a claim against such Federal banking agency for monetary damages or other legal or equitable relief in connection with such transfer, if at the time of the transfer—
(A) the insured depository institution is subject to any direction issued in writing by a Federal banking agency to increase its capital; and
(B) for that portion of the transfer that is made by an entity covered by section 1844 (g) of this title or section 1831v of this title, the Federal banking agency has followed the procedure set forth in such section.
(2) Definition of claim
For purposes of paragraph (1), the term “claim”—
(A) means a cause of action based on Federal or State law that—
(i) provides for the avoidance of preferential or fraudulent transfers or conveyances; or
(ii) provides similar remedies for preferential or fraudulent transfers or conveyances; and
(B) does not include any claim based on actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud pursuant to such a fraudulent transfer or conveyance law.

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_W/threadview?m=tm&bn=86316&tid=58172&mid=58172&tof=1&frt=2

[Shomidamoni]

What's going on? Even Bopfan is now convinced WMI can't sue
under Fraudulent Constructive Transfer? I really thought this is our ace.

Under Bankruptcy code, There are two kinds of fraudulent transfer.

The archetypal example is the intentional fraudulent transfer. This is a transfer of property made by a debtor with intent to defraud, hinder, or delay his or her creditors.

The second is a constructive fraudulent transfer. Generally, this occurs when a debtor transfers property without receiving "reasonably equivalent value" in exchange for the transfer if the debtor is insolvent at the time of the transfer or becomes insolvent or is left with unreasonably small capital to continue in business as a result of the transfer.Unlike the intentional fraudulent transfer, no intention to defraud is necessary.