Washington Mutual demanda a la FDIC por 17 billones US$ + daños

Excelente noticia pero las acciones siguen por los suelos sin levantar cabeza.

To get a trustee appointed WMI has to be shown to be dirty, and you don't get conversion to a Chapter 7 unless there's no chance of a reorganization (i.e., insolvency).

WMI's made a decent case for reorganization via WMRRC, so there'll be no conversion.

As for getting a trustee appointed, this is the movants' way of saying they have plenty on WMI (remember Rule 9011), and they're willing to use it.

This is just the movants' shot across the bow to say they can make a stink for the $4 billion (the court has ruled it belongs to WMI) and get out. Though it would have been nice to have the bonanza Tepper promised, this has gone on a long time, and most importantly they don't want to be part of a potential DoJ inquiry.

It's nothing more than saber rattling but its purpose is to nudge both Tepper and WMI to come to some sort of resolution -- quickly -- by reminding them they both have things to fear. For the avoidance of doubt, I believe resolution means Tepper and WMI cooperating with the EC.

Either the movants will present evidence that meets the standard for appointing a trustee (i.e., the goods on WMI) or they won't. If the matter remains on calendar and they don't the motion will be denied by an annoyed, inconvenienced judge, so it's put up or shut up by Friday 25th February unless the motion is withdrawn (given what's due Tuesday 22nd, not likely) or rescheduled.

This is blackmail, pure and simple, against WMI and the Tepper cabal.

while it is intertwined with NOL refund

the 4B in the GSA all belongs to WMI

just JPM nets its NOL cash fist

there is no 4B going to JPM or FDIC as their money

the deposit is agreed to belong to WMI in the settlement

but as Rosie said - its all one stack of cards - push too hard on the logic or angle of any one part and the whole things crumbles

indeed if the noteholders (bond holders) could grab the 4B it could get interesting

but I do not see Walrath stopping the POR process

WE MAY get some clarification that day as to what Rosei and or Walrath and or EC etc see as the next step

Is it just a small wrap - minor valution - or is there more that needs to be done - as the counter to Ch 7 is ----- we are on a POR road (and almost done?))??))

that is why I say the day on that motion - 7 - could teach us where the judge is at re the amendments or a new POR

El foro ya pensaba que habias vendido y salido por patas como Esopus. Jajaja

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2011/02/18/fdic-to-seek-1b-from-former-wamu-execs.html

FDIC to seek $1B from former WaMu execs

Puget Sound Business Journal - by Kirsten Grind

Date: Friday, February 18, 2011, 2:41pm PST

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. plans to file a civil suit against at least three former Washington Mutual executives, including former chief executive Kerry Killinger, seeking to collect more than $1 billion in damages, according to people familiar with the pending suit.

Killinger, former president and chief operating officer Steve Rotella and David Schneider, former president of the failed bank’s home loan division, all recently received legal notices informing them of the pending litigation, these people say.

The three executives were the highest-level officials in charge of WaMu’s mortgage operations. It’s unclear when or where the FDIC will file its suit.

Killinger and Rotella and their attorneys could not immediately be reached for comment. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM) declined comment on behalf of Schneider, who continues to work in the New York-based company’s retail banking division. A spokesman for the FDIC also declined to comment.

The amount of money the FDIC is seeking to collect from WaMu officers is huge, particularly because WaMu’s failure did not cost the federal agency’s deposit insurance fund any money.

Sources speculate that the FDIC may use the lawsuit to make a claim against WaMu’s directors and officers insurance in the bank’s complex bankruptcy case.

Last year, the FDIC said it had authorized lawsuits against about 50 former bank executives, trying to collect a total of $1 billion in losses. Last July, it filed a civil suit against four former executives of California-based IndyMac, seeking $300 million in damages. IndyMac failed in the summer of 2008 and cost the FDIC insurance fund about $12 billion.

The federal agency has spent the past year interviewing former WaMu executives about the failed bank’s operations, focusing specifically on the bank’s lending division. The extent of the FDIC’s investigation is unclear.

WaMu’s main federal regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision, seized the bank on Sept. 25, 2008, and the FDIC sold WaMu’s $310 billion in assets to JPMorgan for $1.8 billion.

WaMu’s mortgage division is the subject of a massive shareholder lawsuit and was also the subject of a congressional committee investigation last spring. The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., unearthed hundreds of documents showing repeated fraud inside WaMu’s mortgage division and inaction by executives and regulators about the problems. Levin said the bank “polluted the financial system.”

“WaMu and its affiliate, Long Beach Mortgage Company, used shoddy lending practices riddled with credit, compliance and operational deficiencies to make tens of thousands of high risk home loans that too often contained excessive risk, fraudulent information, or errors,” Levin said in his opening testimony.

Killinger, Rotella and Schneider all testified at the daylong hearing, defending their actions at the bank. Killinger was ousted by WaMu’s board of directors three weeks before the bank’s failure. JPMorgan laid off Rotella shortly after it took over the bank.

A ver si Killinger se anima y va a ver a Susman para empezar a darle al pico de lo que allí ocurrio.

Killinger aun tendra que poner dinero por su mala gestion que llevo a la quiebra al banco. Poco tiene que decir y mucho que callar ya que es uno de los responsables de la caida del banco.

Si tiene algo que ver con la caida que pague pero me da que este tiene mucho que decir todavía y lo estan intentando silenciar... ya veremos si lo consiguen porque este no es de los que se calla facilmente.