█ Der ESCROW - Thread █

Wie sich einige Menschen eine zivilisierte Diskussion in einem Börsenforum vorstellen...

Aber der verdiente Erfolg gibt ihnen natürlich Recht.

und zivilisierte Diskussion.

Hi Ranger,
ich bin davon überzeugt, dass Du keine ehrenhaften Absichten hast und bringe das auch zum Ausdruck. Denn ich glaube Dir nicht. Ich ziehe mir aber nicht den Schuh bzgl. der von Dir mit dieser Diskussion in Verbindung gebrachten unflätigen Beleidigungen etc.  an.  

Das ist halt Deine subtile Form der Gegenwehr.  Deine Rhetorik - gerade der letzten Tage wieder - bringe ich mit übelsten Gedankengut in Verbindung. (Allerdings bringe ich Dich nicht mit dem Gedankengut in Verbindung!)

Ich schreibe auch in anderen Foren - ebenfalls relativ selten. Mir geht es aber fürchterlich auf den Senkel, wenn sich einige - so wie Du - permanent als Besserwisser darstellen. Der Ton macht die Musik - unabhängig von der Omnipräsenz.

Ich werde uebel beschimpft und beleidigt und ausserdem in dem mittlerweile von Ariva geloeschten Post bedroht. Der Avatar gesperrt...

und dann kommt das..

Jeder kann sich selbst ein Bild von der Motivlage machen.

------

Sollte es hier nicht um die Escrows gehen?

Angefangen hat die augenblickliche Hexenjagd auf mich mit meiner Frage nach den Konsequenzen die man aus der wieder einmal nicht eingetroffenen Prognose zu HV von Coop zieht. Ausserdem habe ich die immer wieder verwendeten Mechanismen blossgestellt die eine bestimmte Gruppe verwendet. DAS hat wohl den Nerv getroffen.

Hilfloses Gezeter aendert an der Erkenntnis auch nichts mehr. Wenn die Buechse der Erkenntnis erst einmal offen ist...

In diesem Sinne

ranger

...KINDERGARTEN.....

www.marketwatch.com/story/...he-fed-11621287287?mod=home-page

Like many other banks, Washington Mutual rode the wave of low-interest rates to grow its mortgage business during the housing boom of the early 2000s. During Kerry Killinger’s time as CEO, WaMu grew to have more than $300 billion in assets.

But when the subprime bubble burst, the bank’s fortunes quickly turned. In September 2008, at the height of the financial crisis, Killinger was forced out by the company’s board, and ultimately the bank was seized by federal regulators. It still stands as the largest bank failure in U.S. history.

In their new book, “Nothing Is Too Big to Fail: How the Last Financial Crisis Informs Today,” Kerry Killinger and his wife Linda, who previously served as the vice chair of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines, explore WaMu’s failure, the government’s response to the last crisis and where there is growing risk in today’s economy.

nur, wer nicht mehr daran glaubt, sollte nicht überproportional hier im Forum seine Schmerzen zeigen.

Unterhalten sich 3 "Graue" miteinander ....

Running Gag :)  

und das von allen seiten.

muss auf jeden scheiss reagiert werden? koennt ihr es nicht einfach mal runterschlucken und beim eigentlichen thema bleiben?

es ist zwar belustigend, wird aber auch sehr langweilig.

zum runter-Scroll-Chat verkommen hier, an vielen immer sich in Szene setzenden Namen vornei, bis mal wieder ein Urgestein auftaucht, den es sich lohnt zu lesen !

Das war schon der Gipfel was sich Camaro da wieder erlaubt hat!
Ich kenne es nur zu gut.
Da wird sich die betroffene Person wohl noch wehren dürfen.
Und viele der Urgesteine haben die Hoffnung eben zwischenzeitlich auch verloren.
Übrigens meine ich mich auch zu erinnern, dass Faster den Escrows keine allzugroßen Hoffnungen gab, zumindest nicht ohne dafür zu kämpfen.
Und welche ähnlich kompetenten Urgesteine sind noch da die Hoffnung haben ??
Zählt mal welche auf.
Und wenn ich kompetent erwähne, dann meine ich auch kompetent und da gab es wenige die es mit Faster aufnehmen hätten können.

fintel.io/so/us/...oz7pDLQV7LWUMQdNm14UfOJKKzUhVVAZdPhuJBoVvU

“Commercial real estate investments offer attractive diversification and risk-adjusted returns in today’s low interest rate environment,” said Billy Butcher, Chief Executive Officer of KREST and Chief Operating Officer of KKR Global Real Estate. “KREST is focused on constructing a diversified portfolio of high-quality equity and debt exposures to deliver stable income and long term appreciation in the real estate asset class, which has traditionally been difficult to access for individual investors.”

KREST qualifies for tax treatment as a real estate investment trust (REIT) while also being registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). KREST’s innovative structure is open to all investors and is designed to address many of the pain points that have historically limited entry in private real estate. Compared to institutional funds, KKR has structured the Fund to be attractive to individual investors by providing increased transparency and accessibility. For example, KREST will offer daily reporting of net asset value (NAV), daily subscriptions via a ticker, anticipated quarterly tenders and monthly distributions and efficient REIT taxation with 1099 tax reporting.

“KREST is one of the first continuously offered, 1940 Act REITs to offer global reach in private real estate to individual investors,” said Doug Krupa, Co-Head of KKR’s Private Wealth Partners group. “We believe the diversification and attractive yield available through private real estate can be used in a wealth management portfolio to enhance income in a low interest rate environment and help investors to meet their long-term goals. We are excited to make KREST available to financial advisors by working with leading distribution platforms. This is an important milestone in our mission to deliver innovative products that expand investor access to KKR’s investment platforms.”

KKR has invested in excess of $150 million from its own corporate balance sheet to seed KREST, creating strong alignment of interest and providing investors with a fully deployed, income-generating portfolio at launch. KKR also received first of its kind exemptive relief from the SEC to be able to receive its fees in shares of the Fund, which is designed to further align the incentives of KKR with Fund shareholders. KKR’s incentive fees will be based only on distributable yield and not on mark-to-market gains.

Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP advised KKR on the formation of KREST.

About KKR

KKR is a leading global investment firm that offers alternative asset management and capital markets and insurance solutions. KKR aims to generate attractive investment returns by following a patient and disciplined investment approach, employing world-class people and supporting growth in its portfolio companies and communities. KKR sponsors investment funds that invest in private equity, credit and real assets and has strategic partners that manage hedge funds. KKR’s insurance subsidiaries offer retirement, life and reinsurance products under the management of The Global Atlantic Financial Group. References to KKR’s investments may include the activities of its sponsored funds and insurance subsidiaries. For additional information about KKR & Co. Inc. (NYSE: KKR), please visit KKR’s website at www.kkr.com and on Twitter @KKR_Co.

Information related to KREST herein is qualified by reference to KREST’s prospectus, which is accessible on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. This is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy securities of KREST.

www.streetinsider.com/Business+Wire/...Abv0RJotyugVCjGcDnTfVo

sich hier endlich mal was tun ,könnte ich mehr in Cadarno pumpen :)

Woww was muss ich da alles lesen !
Löschen Sie das Forum komplett und eröffnen Sie ein neues Forum mit dem THEMA NUR ÜBER ESCROWS.
Dieses Forum ist voll von Scharlatanen und Angebern, die sich immer ins Fenster stellen wollen.
Es gibt nur sehr wenige Menschen, die ernsthaft argumentieren können und wollen.

Denn Union  hat sich gehäutet  (VERSCHÖRUNG ....) und das zu Recht kritisiert wurde.(Sie werden sogar jetzt teilweise vom Nationalsicherh... beobachtet, wer hätte es sowas gedachtet.

Er war der Verfasser hier im forum des THREAD, LEIDER! Man Bezieht INFO NUR noch über IHUB, es ist ja an der Zeit, dass ich mich dort  auch mich registriere um ja Aktiv zu sein.

Hier im Forum  gibt es nur noch einen Threader, der auf den täglichen Schlusskurs des COOP wettet, manche machen das sogar im tiefer Nacht, CRAZY, aber sie bringen mich auch zum Lachen, nicht schlecht!

Gesund bleiben durch Impfen

einfach mal in seine wohlverdiente

... QUARANTÄNE ... stellst.

Hallo, WER lesen kann ist IMMER im Votrteil!
Aus Ihub , es sind FAKTEN ,



Large Green   Saturday, 05/22/21 02:33:15 PM
Re: None
Post # of 657009
          §
Thanks Goes To Dmdmd1 - More Proof From Solid Verifiable Research

Re: IMO..WMI recoveries might be from $101.9 billion to as much as $692 billion « Reply #111 on: Today at 01:06:07 PM » Quote

IMO...conclusions as of May 22, 2021 @ 1149 CST:

Per my old post as of December 13, 2019:


1) FDIC passed legislation in 2009 regarding Safe Harbor assets such as MBS Trusts

“ November 12, 2009: "The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) on Thursday approved an interim rule providing a "safe harbor" for the transfer of assets related to certain types of asset-backed securities (ABS) from insured depositary institutions. The transitional safe harbor applies to all securitizations issued before March 31, 2010, shielding the assets from seizure by the FDIC in instances where the insured depositary institutions fail. "

www.housingwire.com/articles/...sfer-new-existing-abs-assets/

2) WMI subsidiaries explicitly stated in prospectuses that they were not going to record assignments of titles to securitized mortgages

3) Thus there is a defective chain of title and the last verifiable owner of the securitized loans are the WMI subsidiaries that are owned by WMI/WMI Escrow Marker Holders.

www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=12150.msg263799#msg263799

Excerpt:

“ Quote from: Dmdmd1 on December 07, 2019, 10:03:16 PM
Per Bill Paatalo’s article published as of December 05, 2019:

bpinvestigativeagency.com/...n-my-wamu-loan-through-the-fdic/

“ “Smoking Gun” Proof That JPMorgan Chase Never Acquired Beneficial Interest In My WaMu Loan Through The FDIC

Posted by Bill Paatalo on Dec 5, 2019 in Uncategorized | 0 comments

This little piece of production in my Oregon Ejectment Action just confirmed what I have been testifying to since day-one: Chase acquired no ownership of loans that WaMu sold and securitized prior to the September 25, 2008 takeover by the FDIC.
The story by the Defendants in my case is that Chase acquired beneficial rights to my deed of trust through the FDIC and the Purchase & Assumption Agreement, and proceeded to foreclose non-judicially as the “successor in interest” to WaMu. However, in newly produced documents, I’ve learned that my loan was assigned the investor code “AO1” which I have written about here:
bpinvestigativeagency.com/...ents-wamu-asset-acceptance-corp/

This code belonged to “Washington Mutual Asset Acceptance Corp” to which Chase stipulated. Chase also stipulated that the loan with the designated code “AO1” did not pass through the FDIC. My position, based on years of investigations and accumulated evidence, is that Chase has been hiding and concealing the identities of the actual investors in many WaMu loans that were sold into private trusts, and have proceeded to foreclose on thousands of homes claiming to be the owner/beneficiary/mortgagee which is flat out false. Well here is some hard evidence that my position is in fact true. Attached is the escrow wiring instructions for the REO sale transaction of my property to the current occupants who purchased back in 2011. Proceeds from the cash sale were to be wired to account titled “Washington Mutual Bank in Trust for the REO proceeds in Trust for various Investors and Mortgagors.”

It should also be noted, that the real estate sales agreement named the “Seller” as “NRT REOExperts, LLC as agent for JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Servicing Agent for Owner of Record.”

_____________________

IMO...my conclusions as of December 07, 2019 @ 2049 CST:

1) JPMC did not buy (from the FDIC) or own the securitized loans that WMI subsidiaries created from 2000-2008 ($692 billion). JPMC only owned the servicing rights.

A) WMI owns the retained interests in the securitized loans from 2000-2008 of at least $101.9 billion (per the quarterly and annual reports of WMI from 2000-June 2008).

2) JPMC did not buy (from the FDIC) or own the portfolio loans from WMB & WMB, fsb ($231 billion). JPMC only owned the servicing rights.

3) Per my post on October 24, 2019

www.boardpost.net/forum/...hp?topic=14369.msg260410#msg260410

“ Timeline for Exigent Circumstances in November and December 2009:

November 06, 2009: President Obama signed the "Worker. Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009", which allowed businesses to recoup up to five years of taxes paid instead of two years stated in the previous law.

obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/realitycheck/...istance-act-2009

"Creates Jobs by Cutting Taxes for Struggling Businesses. The bill provides an expanded tax cut to tens of thousands of struggling businesses, providing them with the immediate cash they need to pursue an expansion or avoid contracting or furloughing their workers. The Economic Recovery Act included a provision that allowed small businesses to count their losses this year against the taxes they paid in previous years. Today, the President extended that benefit for an additional year and expanded it to medium and large businesses as well. Business losses incurred in 2008 or 2009 can now be used to recoup taxes paid in the prior five years. This provision is a fiscally responsible economic kick-start, putting $33 billion of tax cuts in the hands of businesses this year when they need it most, while enabling Treasury to recoup the majority of that funding in the coming years as these businesses regain their strength and resume paying taxes."

____________________

November 12, 2009: "The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) on Thursday approved an interim rule providing a "safe harbor" for the transfer of assets related to certain types of asset-backed securities (ABS) from insured depositary institutions. The transitional safe harbor applies to all securitizations issued before March 31, 2010, shielding the assets from seizure by the FDIC in instances where the insured depositary institutions fail. "

www.housingwire.com/articles/...sfer-new-existing-abs-assets/

“FDIC Extends 'Safe Harbor' for Transfer of New, Existing ABS Assets

November 12, 2009 Diana Golobay

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) on Thursday approved an interim rule providing a "safe harbor" for the transfer of assets related to certain types of asset-backed securities (ABS) from insured depositary institutions. The transitional safe harbor applies to all securitizations issued before March 31, 2010, shielding the assets from seizure by the FDIC in instances where the insured depositary institutions fail. The resolution clears some uncertainty regarding the treatment of transferred assets under pending accountancy rule changes for off-balance sheet securitizations, according to Fitch Ratings. Fitch indicated it can now assign ratings to these assets higher than those placed on the originating entity, thanks to the interim rule. The rule grandfathers existing transactions and those issued before March 31, 2010, if the transactions would be compliant with the existing securitization rule and would qualify as a Generally Acceptable Accounting Principals (GAAP) sale for reporting periods before Nov. 15, 2009, Fitch said. "Fitch believes the Interim Rule effectively addresses a key concern that results from existing transactions losing GAAP sale status following implementation of the new accounting rules," Fitch said in a statement Thursday. "Prior to today's clarification, the comfort previously provided by the FDIC -- that it would not seek to recover financial assets transferred in connection with a securitization or participation -- had been jeopardized by SFAS 166 as one of the preconditions of the Securitization Rule was that the transfer qualify as a sale under GAAP provisions." The American Securitization Forum (ASF) also issued a statement supporting the securitization rule extension. “ASF welcomes the FDIC Board’s unanimous action this morning to extend application of the FDIC’s securitization rule to provide needed certainty to existing securitizations as well as those issued over the next few months," ASF said Thursday. "The application of this rule had been cast in doubt by accounting standards changes that will take effect for reporting periods after November 15th, 2009." ASF adds: "Today's action by the FDIC Board will resolve this uncertainty and will allow bank securitizations of credit card and auto loans to resume, which in turn will make additional credit available to consumers at a critical time for the American economy.”

December 18, 2009: US Trustee establishes Equity Committee


___________________

IMO...Conclusions as of October 24, 2019 @ 1728 CST:

1) The Debtors (WMI and WMIIC) were in Chapter 11 bankruptcy. OTS/FDIC not only seized the assets of WMB but it also seized the assets of WMI (parent company).

2) Per the FDIC's approval of the transitional safe harbor rule as of November 12, 2009, it explicitly states that the FDIC cannot seize any securitizations that were created prior to March 31, 2010.

3) On the surface, the Debtors (WMI and WMIIC) were essentially saved in the Chapter 11 cases due to the November 06, 2009 signing of the "Worker, Homeowner, and Business Assistance Act of 2009" which allowed the Debtors to get a bigger refund from NOLs because businesses were allowed to recoup 5 years instead of 2 years.

4) But what was very important to WMI was the FDIC's approval of the transitional safe harbor rule on November 12, 2009.

IMO...WMIIC was used as a conduit SPE/SPV to transfer all assets from WMI to DSTs such as Thackeray III Bridge, LLC. The most valuable asset that were transferred were the retained interests (in certificate participation in MBS Trusts created by WMI subsidiaries).

Thus, the retained interests in MBS Trusts were illegally seized on September 25, 2008. The FDIC receivership does not have legal rights to seize WMI assets such as securitizations/retained interests in MBS Trusts.

IMO...WMI Escrow Marker Holders are the rightful owners to WMI assets such as retained interests in MBS Trusts.

IMO...once the Chapter 11 cases and the FDIC Receivership is closed, WMI assets such as the retained interests in MBS Trusts, will be returned to WMI/WMI Escrow Marker Holders. ”

Per Neil Garfield show as of December 12, 2019


www.blogtalkradio.com/neilgarfield/2019/...-wamu-deal-of-2008

Starting at 19:41

Servicer is permitted not to record chain of title after securitizations and “co-mingle” funds



Starting at 20:26

PSAs stated in section 2.03 under
“Separateness Requirement”

There cannot be any co-mingled funds.

Starting 21:10

No assignments were going to be recorded in the chain of titles of the securitized loans

Starting 25:27

Paatalo predicted that possibly 90% of all Wamu securitized loans had “AO1” designations which means Washington Mutal Asset Acceptance Corp.

FDIC did not have the legal rights to sell (and they didn’t sell it to JPMC) any securitized loans under WMI subsidiary created MBS Trusts.

_______________

IMO...my conclusions as of December 13, 2019 @ 0730 CST:

1) FDIC did not sell any securitized loans in any WMI subsidiary created MBS Trusts

2) Washington Mutual Asset Acceptance Corp. (WAAC) was a non-Banking subsidiary thus bankruptcy remote. Thus WMI owns WAAC.

3) PSA explicitly stated that securitized loans will not have any recordation of assignments of titles in the chains of title, thus the last verifiable owner of the loan is WAAC, a non-banking WMI subsidiary (owned by WMI).

4) I contend that all PSAs in other WMI non-Banking subsidiaries like Long Beach and Washington Mutual Mortgage Securities Corp has similar language pertaining to not recording assignments of title in the chain of title. Thus making those non-Banking subsidiaries the owners of the securitized loans not the MBS Trusts.

5) Therefore, IMO...not only does WMI own the retained interests ($101.9 billion) in MBS Trusts created from 2000 to 2008, but WMI non-Banking subsidiaries also own the mortgages that were securitized in those MBS Trusts.”
##################################################
Dies sind Fakten und Proklamationen und Dekrete der Obama-Regierung . Ich denke, dem muss nichts mehr hinzugefügt werden.
Für diejenigen, die hier im Forum versuchen, Lügen und Märchen zu erzählen, können Sie jetzt nachlesen, was und wie es in den Jahren 2008-2009 passiert ist!
Wer hier im Forum herumkritzelt und das Gegenteil behauptet, lügt mit ganz bestimmten Neigungen und Gründen! Das GBR ist damit gemeint

Ich hatte ja zuletzt die Frage gestellt, worin der Unterschied zwischen POR6 und POR7 liegt - und keiner der "Allwissenden" aka GRB wollte mir diese beantworten - deshalb hier die Anwort:

Im POR7 bekommen die EXCROW-Holder das "Nichts", welches die Piers in POR6 bekommen hätten - und zwischen POR6 und POR7 gab es keine JPM, die involviert war.

Doch, wie groß ist denn das "Nichts":

Dazu ein Schriftstück (An das Gericht) von Griffin in Ihrem Verfahren, dass in Bordpost /FB gepostet wurde - und ein Anwalt wie Griffin macht sich strafbar, wenn sie bewusst die Unwahrheit schreibt:


Antwort von kfe: 5/20/2021 Griffin v. Washington Mutual Inc. et al
" Reply #2 on: Gestern um 11:39:23 PM "
Zitat
"Ende 2019 erhielt der Kläger Informationen von einem anderen Legacy Holder, der mit einem Mitarbeiter eines großen Wertpapiermaklers (die "Quelle") kommunizierte. Die Quelle erklärte, dass, wenn die Bundesberufungen des Klägers endgültig entschieden sind und der Trust aufgelöst wird,3 Mr. Cooper Aktien an die Legacy-Inhaber verteilen wird. Die Quelle gab an, dass der Beklagte Mr. Cooper im Besitz von hypothekarisch gesicherten Wertpapieren und/oder Hypotheken im Wert von ca. 550 Mrd. US-Dollar ist, die sich im Besitz von WMI oder des Trusts befinden (die "MBS"), wobei diese Vermögenswerte den Interessen des Klägers und anderer Legacy-Inhaber unterliegen. 22. Anfang April 2021 erklärte die Quelle, dass alle MBS bis zum 30. Juni 2021 an Mr. Cooper übergeben würden und dass die Mr. Cooper-Aktien von verschiedenen Brokern ausgezahlt würden. Die Quelle sagte weiter, dass Mr. Cooper verpflichtet war, den Erhalt der MBS in seinen '34 Act-Anmeldungen im selben Quartal wie das Datum des Erhalts zu melden, dies aber nicht tat, während der Rechtsstreit des Klägers mit dem Trust im dritten Gerichtsbezirk andauerte und er plant, die Mr. Cooper-Aktien unabhängig vom endgültigen Urteil auszuzahlen. Der Quelle wurde gesagt, dass: "Griffin wird überrascht sein." Die Quelle gab an, dass das Management von Mr. Cooper sehr darauf bedacht war, die Berichtspflicht nach dem '34 Act in Bezug auf die MBS zu erfüllen. Die Quelle gab auch an, dass der Wert der MBS auf ca. 600 Mrd. USD gestiegen sei.4 (Der aktuelle Wert ist nicht überraschend, da die gesamten MBS, die WMI in seinen Verbriefungen bis 2008 zurückbehalten hat, laut archivierten '34 Act-Anmeldungen von WMI ca. 135 Mrd. USD betrugen). 5 Des Weiteren gab die Quelle an, dass die Legacy-Inhaber zusätzlich zu den Mr. Cooper-Aktien gleichzeitig eine Barauszahlung in Höhe des 2,5-fachen Nennwerts erhalten werden. 23. Die Quelle enthüllte ferner, dass in seinem Unternehmen ein internes Memorandum zirkulierte, in dem die Namen der Legacy-Inhaber und ihre Bestände aufgelistet waren und in dem darauf hingewiesen wurde, dass diese Personen als vermögende Privatkunden und nicht als Privatkunden behandelt würden, sobald sie die Mr. Cooper-Aktien erhielten."

Übersetzt mit www.DeepL.com/Translator (kostenlose Version)

Reply by kfe: 5/20/2021 Griffin v. Washington Mutual Inc. et al
« Reply #2 on: Yesterday at 11:39:23 PM »
Quote
"In late 2019 Plaintiff received information from another Legacy Holder in communication with an employee of a major securities broker (the “Source”). The Source stated that when Plaintiff’s federal appeals are finally adjudicated and the Trust dissolved,3 Mr. Cooper will distribute Mr. Cooper Stock to Legacy Holders. The Source stated that defendant Mr. Cooper is in possession of approximately $550 billion in mortgage-backed securities and/or mortgages owned by WMI or the Trust (the “MBS”) which assets are subject to interests of Plaintiff and other Legacy Holders. 22. In early April 2021 the Source stated that all the MBS would be given to Mr. Cooper by June 30, 2021 and that the Mr. Cooper Stock disbursed by various brokers. The Source further said that Mr. Cooper was obligated to report receipt of the MBS in its ’34 Act filings in the same quarter as the date of receipt but did not do so while Plaintiff’s Third Circuit litigation with the Trust survived and is planning to disburse the Mr. Cooper Stock regardless of the Final Decree. The Source was told that: “Griffin will be surprised.” The Source indicated that Mr. Cooper’s management was very anxious about fulfilling its ‘34 Act regulatory reporting requirement with respect to the MBS. The Source also indicated that the value of the MBS had increased to about $600 billion.4 (The current value is unsurprising given the total MBS retained by WMI in its securitizations through 2008 totaled approximately $135 billion according to archived WMI ’34 Act filings.) 5 Further, the Source stated that in addition to the Mr. Cooper Stock, Legacy Holders will contemporaneously receive a cash payout of 2.5x par. 23. The Source further revealed that circulating within his/her enterprise was an internal memorandum listing the names of Legacy Holders, their holdings, and indicating these persons would be treated as private wealth clients rather than retail clients once they received the Mr. Cooper Stock."

Erst jemand der sich mit einem vietnamesischen Text bei Ariva anmeldet um einen gewissen User zu persiflieren und dann jemand aus Thailand mit dem ueblichen Quatsch aus IHUB. Naja, sei Dir gegoennt...
Schoene Pfingsten!

welche der drei Worte verstehst du nicht?

Griffin?
Schriftstück?
Gericht?

1. Falsche Experten
   Es werden Menschen mit Aussagen zu Experten erklärt die gar keine sind.

2. Unmögliche Erwartungen
   Es werden Forderungen aufgestellt die von vornherein gar nicht zu erfüllen sind
   (muss 100% sicher sein etc.)

3. Verschwörungstheorien
   Es kann nicht mit rechten Dingen zugehen und wer das nicht so sieht ist Teil der Verschwörung

4. Selektivität
   Man pickt sich Fragmente die den eigenen Standpunkt vermeintlich unterstützen heraus ohne auf
   den Kontext zu achten oder reiht sie so aneinander das sie einen neuen Sinn ergeben.

5. Falsche Logik
   Darunter versteht man Angriffe auf einer persönlichen Ebene. So werden z.B.  Menschen Motive
   unterstellt um ihre Argumente zu diskreditieren. (Sie ist Blond = blöd = kann nicht stimmen was sie
   sagt weil alle Blonde wie wir ja alle wissen blöd sind) Das ist eine Pseudologik.

May 21, 2021   ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING DEFICIENT REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS. Notice to Attorney Alice Ellen Griffin to RE-FILE Document No. #6 Request for Issuance of Summons, #3 Request for Issuance of Summons, #5 Request for Issuance of Summons. The filing is deficient for the following reason(s): the wrong filer/filers were selected for the request for issuance of summons. Re-file the document using the event type Request for Issuance of Summons found under the event list Service of Process - select the correct filer/filers - and attach the correct summons form PDF. (vf)

May 21, 2021   Case Designated ECF. (vf)

May 21, 2021   Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn is so designated. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636(c) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73(b)(1) parties are notified that they may consent to proceed before a United States Magistrate Judge. Parties who wish to consent may access the necessary form at the following link: #nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/2018-06/AO-3.pdf. (vf)

May 21, 2021   CASE OPENING INITIAL ASSIGNMENT NOTICE: The above-entitled action is assigned to Judge Gregory H. Woods. Please download and review the Individual Practices of the assigned District Judge, located at #nysd.uscourts.gov/judges/district-judges. Attorneys are responsible for providing courtesy copies to judges where their Individual Practices require such. Please download and review the ECF Rules and Instructions, located at #nysd.uscourts.gov/rules/ecf-related-instructions..(vf)

May 21, 2021   ***NOTICE TO ATTORNEY REGARDING PARTY MODIFICATION. Notice to attorney Alice Ellen Griffin. The party information for the following party/parties has been modified: Mr. Cooper Group Inc., WMI Liquidating Trust, Washington Mutual, Inc, Alice Griffin. The information for the party/parties has been modified for the following reason/reasons: party role was entered incorrectly; party text was omitted. (vf)

May 20, 2021   Filing 6 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT- SUMMONS REQUEST - FILER ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Washington Mutual, Inc., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Washington Mutual, Inc...(Griffin, Alice) Modified on 5/21/2021 (vf).

May 20, 2021   Filing 5 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT- SUMMONS REQUEST - FILER ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to WMI Liquidating Trust, re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by WMI Liquidating Trust..(Griffin, Alice) Modified on 5/21/2021 (vf).

May 20, 2021   Filing 4 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT - SUMMONS REQUEST- FILER ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF AMENDED SUMMONS as to Mr. Cooper Group Inc., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Mr. Cooper Group Inc...(Griffin, Alice) Modified on 5/21/2021 (vf).

May 20, 2021   Filing 3 FILING ERROR - DEFICIENT-SUMMONS REQUEST - FILER ERROR - REQUEST FOR ISSUANCE OF SUMMONS as to Mr. Cooper Group Inc., re: #1 Complaint. Document filed by Mr. Cooper Group Inc...(Griffin, Alice) Modified on 5/21/2021 (vf).

May 20, 2021   Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed..(Griffin, Alice)

May 20, 2021   Filing 1 COMPLAINT against Mr. Cooper Group Inc., WMI Liquidating Trust, Washington Mutual, Inc.. (Filing Fee $ 402.00, Receipt Number ANYSDC-24569341)Document filed by Alice Griffin..(Griffin, Alice)
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nysdce/1:2021cv04554/560703

***
"In late 2019 Plaintiff received information from another Legacy Holder in communication with an employee of a major securities broker (the “Source”). The Source stated that when Plaintiff’s federal appeals are finally adjudicated and the Trust dissolved,3 Mr. Cooper will distribute Mr. Cooper Stock to Legacy Holders. The Source stated that defendant Mr. Cooper is in possession of approximately $550 billion in mortgage-backed securities and/or mortgages owned by WMI or the Trust (the “MBS”) which assets are subject to interests of Plaintiff and other Legacy Holders. 22. In early April 2021 the Source stated that all the MBS would be given to Mr. Cooper by June 30, 2021 and that the Mr. Cooper Stock disbursed by various brokers. The Source further said that Mr. Cooper was obligated to report receipt of the MBS in its ’34 Act filings in the same quarter as the date of receipt but did not do so while Plaintiff’s Third Circuit litigation with the Trust survived and is planning to disburse the Mr. Cooper Stock regardless of the Final Decree. The Source was told that: “Griffin will be surprised.” The Source indicated that Mr. Cooper’s management was very anxious about fulfilling its ‘34 Act regulatory reporting requirement with respect to the MBS. The Source also indicated that the value of the MBS had increased to about $600 billion.4 (The current value is unsurprising given the total MBS retained by WMI in its securitizations through 2008 totaled approximately $135 billion according to archived WMI ’34 Act filings.) 5 Further, the Source stated that in addition to the Mr. Cooper Stock, Legacy Holders will contemporaneously receive a cash payout of 2.5x par. 23. The Source further revealed that circulating within his/her enterprise was an internal memorandum listing the names of Legacy Holders, their holdings, and indicating these persons would be treated as private wealth clients rather than retail clients once they received the Mr. Cooper Stock."

Legacy    -     das Erbe ;   das Vermächtnis ;  die Hinterlassenschaft

Und somit geht Alice in die nächste Runde...

Mal sehen, ob das Ganze jetzt endgültig ein Ende findet und sie nicht weiterhin mit ihren sinnlosen Klage- und Einspruchsversuchen einen möglichen Geldfluss an uns bis ins Unendliche verzögert.  

The Source further said that Mr. Cooper was obligated to report receipt of the MBS in its ’34 Act filings in the same quarter as the date of receipt but did not do so while Plaintiff’s Third Circuit litigation with the Trust survived and is planning to disburse the Mr. Cooper Stock regardless of the Final Decree. The Source was told that: “Griffin will be surprised.”

Offenbar besteht die Möglichkeit, dass, sofern die Auszahlungen nun tatsächlich geschehen, diese ungeachtet des Einspruchsverfahrens fließen werden. So lese zumindest ich das.