Für die, die sichfür den ganzen Prozess interessieren
Aus IHub VON AZC
investorshub.advfn.com/boards/...sg.aspx?message_id=136475715
~ Sharing4u, A Good Question, Maybe This' Will Help ~
The reference that you had a question about, was regarding any and all specified ownership ... "certificates and other documents", ... that anyone may have held designating a security ownership ahead of when the bankruptcy filings' had occurred ... WMI' was a very old institution'
at the 8:00am 09/26/2008' ... "Exchange Event" ... all of the Preferred Securities, went into ONE WMI' ownership pool' ... the TPS not receiving an updated "Certificate from WMI" was the basis for their argument, which the TPS of course, ... Lost' ...
... The TPS' speculators' caused quite a bit of problems and delay, not to mention the insert' they were allowed to place within your voting package' ... the Court referencing that the majority of them, having bought in actually "After the "Exchange Event" Had Occurred, and AFTER' the WMIIC / WMI Bankruptcy Filings' ...
The TPS also had / has' continuous presentations on these discussion forums' that, In My Opinion ? are quite obvious' ... there is a list of objectors with some familiar names, but I'll let that go for now' ...
The following, I have found to be quite interesting from Judge Walrath's Opinion Denying Plan 6' ... There's a lot more of course from the TPS actual litigation and Judges Opinion ? ... But I think you will get the picture' ...
Basically, ... The bottom line was, that the Exchange Event had legally occurred, making these Capital Raise Debt Securities, the PROPERTY of Washington Mutual Inc. ... and', ... no one could tell WMI' what it could ? or what it couldn't do with them' ... It was JPMC' NOT WMI', that basically bought off their cooperation and silence' ...
www.deb.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/...071108-12229_0.pdf
Quote:d. Treatment of REIT Holders
The TPS Holders also object to the treatment afforded to Class 19 (REIT Holders) because the latter are receiving consideration in addition to their pro rata share of the Liquidating Trust on account of their preferred share holdings. (Ex. D-2 at § 23.1.) Specifically, the REIT Holders will receive a pro rata share of a payment of $50 million from JPMC if they consent to releases of JPMC. (Id.) The TPS Holders contend that this is discriminatory treatment and is designed principally to give additional consideration to the Settlement Noteholders. The Court disagrees. To the extent that the REIT Holders are receiving anything more than other preferred shareholders, they are receiving it directly from JPMC in exchange for releases. See, e.g., Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors v. Stern (In re SPM Mfg. Corp.), 984 F.2d 1305, 1313 (1st Cir. 1993 (allowing a senior creditor to agree to give up part of its collateral to another class, skipping other classes in between); In re World Health Alternatives, Inc., 344 B.R. 291, 299 (Bankr. D. Del. 2006) (finding that a secured creditors gift to a junior creditor did not violate the absolute priority rule since the property belongs to the secured creditor and not the estate.). Further, it appears that the offer is made to all REIT Holders who agree to release JPMC, not simply to the Settlement Noteholders. (Ex. D-2 at 50.) Therefore, there is no discrimination within that class. 11 U.S.C. § 1123(a)(4).
This is just an interesting Press Piece' ... nothing legal' ...
Quote:However, the discussion doesnt end there because there apparently is some risk that the Court will apply the Absolute Priority Rule (APR) and rule that Common Equity Interest Holders (Class 22 WAMUQ Claimants and Class 21 - DIMEQ) cant be paid until the Preferred Holders in Class 19 are paid in full and that would present a $7.5 Billion hurdle based on Par value. The TPS Group, representing the Cayman REIT Preferred Holders, has been lobbying for the application of the APR, and they are not alone. Near the end of the hearing on Wednesday, January 11, 2012, the Judge even opined that the Debtors assumption that it could violate the APR was Optimistic, which signals that she is giving some consideration to instituting the APR. Absent that, the Court has the discretion, and the blessing of the Debtors and the Equity Committee, to adjust the proposed distribution of 30% of Newco to Common Equity Interest Holders. The institution of the APR or any downward adjustment of the Newco allocation by the Court would necessarily mean that the currently proposed recovery for all Common Equity Interests would be decreased if not entirely eviscerated. Accordingly, there is risk that the Newco portion of the recent LTW Settlement may have no value in the hands of the LTW Holders.
Plan 6 Failed' ... Plan 7 was Approved, ... WMI Holdings Corp, (now WMIH-Corp) ... became the reorganized new company, and the Owner of these Original WMI' Capital Raise Debt Securities' ... and' as they say, ... The Rest ? is History' ...
AZ
Zurück
Werbung
