Replies to post #26097 on Washington Mutual Preferred fka WAMPQ

[Chiron]

Good questions. The difference is that WMI/JPM/FDIC had zero respect for the EC. They in many cases saw them as a nuisance to be pushed aside and mocked.

Then came along Susman, and they still didn't care. They ignored Walrath, and even in the face of an examiner they didn't care.

The examiner is a very different entity. I am not 100% sure what happens if they stonewall this entity, but the examiner certainly comes in with a lot more fire power than the EC had.

I don't know how far WMI/JPM/FDIC can push their luck here and stonewall without Walrath taking this to an extreme level.

9/7 is 4 trading days away, and we'll get a more clear viewpoint of what's been happening, hopefully!

[erevno]

I'm no lawyer but I'll take WAG at it.

If the examiner is stonewalled by the debtors, JPM, and FDIC, that is exactly what the examiner reports. The decision on the DS and POR is an easy one for the judge and she appoints a trustee because the debtors are not forthcoming with vital information to bring this BK case to a fair conclusion.

The trustee may have to start over with asset evaluation, asset transferred (which JPM and FDIC will probably still won't comply with), any potential litigation against JPM and FDIC. Eventually, rulings will go against JPM and FDIC that will become public...hopefully rulings awarding WMI for damages, etc...

All of this in the next 1-3 years, and I don't think 3 years out is an exaggeration. Who would have thought (other than Chiron) we would be where we are almost two years into this?


WithCatz, Mordi, etc can chime in with the professional advice here if you like.

[gophilipgo]

Contempt of court and/or US case trustee appointed.

[ub2]

Why, why would the examiner waite till the court day to let it be known that they are being stoned walled?
I'm assuming the examiner is still impartial if not ( off the record ) pro EC