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

El Juez de ghostofwamu

I am very disappointed by Judge Collyer's decision and do not think it is correct. She is telling the bondholders, "Even assuming that JPM screwed you with malice aforethought, you have no legal recourse because it's a procedural Catch-22 situation." That's not how American justice is supposed to work. For every wrong there is supposed to be a remedy.

To review: The plaintiff WMB bondholders sued JPM only in Texas state court for evil acts committed solely by JPM which caused FDIC to seize and sell WMB assets. JPM successfully persuaded the judge to punt the case to federal court in Texas, alleging exclusive federal jurisdiction, but then FDIC intervened as a defendant and persuaded the federal court in Texas to punt the case to DC because FIRREA sez FDIC can only be sued in DC. Now the DC judge sez to plaintiffs, "You never filed a claim against FDIC as required by FIRREA, so your suit against FDIC is out. But, the FDIC is a 'necessary party' because it committed the 'ultimate' acts of seizure and sale which 'caused' your damage, so JPM is off the hook, too." This creates an absurd result. (And, Village of Oakwood case she cites as controlling authority does not compell this result.)

An analogy: Suppose a criminal fleeing a bank robbery jumps in your car, puts a gun to your head and forces you to drive him away in a high speed chase. Your tire blows, resulting in an accident where an innocent civilian is killed. The criminal is prosecuted for "felony murder", but you are not prosecuted because you only acted under duress. You yourself physically did the acts which "caused" the death, but should the case against the crook get dismissed because you're not charged, too? Of course not.

I hope the plaintiff's appeal.

Pd. La justicia deja sin caso a los bonistas de wmb en favor de la fdic/jpm. Veremos que pasa con nosotros como todos quieran firmar el POR.

Saludos

Hola lo que es lacerante es que se desprenda de las intervenciones que los grandes bancos fueron ayudados de forma arbitraria cuando wamu, como ha quedado constancia habia disminuido sus creditos y su securtitizacion y era una emprea viable,desde luego lo hubiera sido con la inyeccion de liquidez,y otras fueras ayudadas y financiadas para comprarnos con unos blances peores.eso clama el cielo,han sido unos cantamañas cuando se le pregunta al pelirrojo si le ha parecido injusto deberia haber respondido que era el mayor atraco de la historia sin circunloquios.de verguenza

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/ExWaMu-execs-defend-banks-apf-1881315538.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=7&asset=&ccode=

One things for sure...

The ratio of stories actually mentioning anything about the seizure has gone through the roof.

Killinger, for all his warts and bumps yesterday did manage do raise awareness, even without mentioning any "names".

We've still got ninnies in the press to contend with. The boob tube coverage I saw was all negative.

But honestly... go back a year. Heck, go back before Kirsten took up the cause.

How many of you wouldn't have drooled at something like this being mentioned at all in the mainstream press, let alone on this scale?

Loads of crappy hit piece articles and reporting... sure.

But the more articles we see raising questions, or even citing those with questions, the more our numbers grow as people begin to wake up.

Perception is everything. The illusion may not be broken, but it's certainly starting to show signs of cracking.

JPM and the FDIC had better tread carefully from here on out. One moment of indiscretion could see them ill prepared for the damn to burst while they aren't looking.

They used their influence over the mainstream press to build that damn... and when it ruptures, the tide that will wash this mess clean will reveal far more than either entity is capable of escaping unmaimed, if at all.

We're fighting an information war here. In the age of the Internet these cracks and schisms in the "program" lead people to use "google" to find answers.

If we get a little more coverage and see just a few more questions raised, then I have little doubt that it's only a matter of time that what we know and have known for 18 months will soon thereafter become public knowledge.

Maybe I'm delusional... but I feel as though the tide has just about turned

ORDER granting 87 FDIC-Receiver's Motion to Dismiss; denying 88 Plaintiffs' Motion to Dismiss FDIC-Receiver and to remand to Texas state court; granting 89 JPMorgan Chase's Motion to Dismiss. This case is closed. Signed by Judge Rosemary M. Collyer on 4/13/10. (lcrmc2) (Entered: 04/13/2010)

Link follow

http://ghostofwamu.com/documents/09-01743/09-01743-0118.pdf

http://ghostofwamu.com/documents/09-01743/09-01743-0117.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/14views.html?src=busln

Visto lo visto, de aquí al próximo hearing del 21 (1 semana) CREO que las acciones (en especial las comunues) irán goteando.

Días clave el viernes (FDIC que dirá lo que quiera y el OTS que no sé por dónde nos saldrá). En principio OTS decía que Wamu estaba sana, pero claro, como son la cabeza de turco de este caso (FDIC argumenta que OTS no hacía correctamente sus chequeos a los bancos) no me extrañaría que dijeran que Wamu les ocultaba pruebas o se las falseaba. Lo de ayer que Wamu concedía créditos sin comprobar los ingresos por ejemplo, podría ser el entrante...

Tampoco descartaría que el POR fuera firmado por todas las partes antes del Hearing de la semana que viene (aunque sin el visto bueno del UST/Jueza no vaya a ninguna parte).

Preveo que con estas noticias las comunes bajen algo (gente que entró a 0.0X$ y prefiera salirse con 'pájaro en mano' o gente que simplemente no quiera arriesgarse a perderlo todo). Las preferentes no creo que bajen tanto (matemáticamente valían 50$) así que no me arriesgaría a venderlas por debajo de 40$.

Mi plan es vender un paquete de comunes (les saco un +18%) y volver a echar la caña más abajo. En una semana os cuento cómo me ha ido...

Estrategia posiblemente incorrecta. Puedes ganar ese 18% y volver a comprar más abajo pero puedes perderte una subida fuerte a la que entre una noticia favorable en cualquier día.
El momento de vender era cuando estaba a 0,40 - 0,70, el de ahora es mantener.

puedes perderte una subida fuerte a la que entre una noticia favorable en cualquier día.

...¿como por ejemplo? Ayer habló Killinger y nada. Por los acuerdos de confidencialidad que tienen todos firmados el que hable cuando no debe se la puede cargar; se haría responsable de los perjuicios económicos que pudiera inflingir al contrario. ¿Quién se va a arriesgar a decir nada que no sea fuera de la corte (el hearing del 21)? Los únicos que van a hablar antes son Sheila Bair del FDIC y el que sea del OTS... y no van a decir nada bueno, casi seguro. ...a menos que me esté pasando algo por alto...