aus Google bei Wells Fargo,
This is someones letter that I've been using to pass some information
around;
I have been following the developments in the case of Washington
Mutual, Inc. (a Washington State Corporation) since before the
seizure
on September 25th, 2008. I was a common stock shareholder at the time
of the seizure, and I am currently a shareholder. Upon information
and
belief, I believe the following to be true.
The seizure of Washington Mutual, Inc. assets and the subsequent sale
to JP Morgan Chase & Co. by the FDIC rendered many stakeholders
claims
worthless, including common stock, secured debt, and other unsecured
creditors. In addition, the seizure and sale caused possibly
thousands
of Washington residents to have lost their jobs, other Washington
residents have lost significant portions of their savings or
retirement, some Washington Mutual employee pensions may be in
jeopardy, and Washington state has lost a valuable contributor to the
needs of the community.
Up until this time, many have speculated that the ultimate seizure
and
sale of Washington Mutual, Inc. assets to JP Morgan Chase & Co. has
been the result of coercion by government officials in the Treasury
Department, The Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation, and the Office of Thrift Supervision in collusion with
JP
Morgan Chase & Co., media sources, and ratings agencies. Many have
speculated that Washington Mutual was sacrificed to save a favored JP
Morgan Chase & Co., and up until this time, this conjecture has
remained in the realm of speculation.
However, recent revelations tend to indicate that the case of
Washington Mutual, Inc. may be more than just a tragic case of a
failed banking icon.
For instance, it was recently revealed that former Treasury Secretary
Hank Paulson admitted to New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo that
he coerced CEO Ken Lewis by threat of ouster if Bank of America
invoked a Material Adverse Change (MAC) clause to block the
acquisition of troubled Merril Lynch. Paulson also added, however,
that he made this threat at the request of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke.
In addition, it is suggested that such action by the Fed and Treasury
amount to coercing CEO Ken Lewis to withhold disclosure of materially
significant information from shareholders regarding the deal. Source:
Wall Street Journal.
As a further example, documents recently released as part of a
Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act request details further
coercion by the government regarding TARP funds distribution. "If a
capital infusion is not appealing, you should be aware that your
regulator will require it in any circumstance," Paulson's one-page
list of talking points for a meeting with nine U.S. banks' chief
executives said. "We don’t believe it is tenable to opt out because
doing so would leave you vulnerable and exposed." Accompanying
Paulson
were Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation Chairman Sheila Bair and New York Federal Reserve Bank
President Timothy Geithner (now current Treasury Secretary). Three
and
a half hours after the meeting was scheduled to begin, Paulson had
obtained the bankers’ signatures on half-page forms along with the
handwritten amount of the federal government’s investment, according
to the documents. Source: Bloomberg.
Two months before Washington Mutual was seized, Treasury Secretary
Henry Paulson warned then-CEO Kerry Killinger, "you should have sold
to JP Morgan Chase in the spring, and you should do so now. Things
could get a lot more difficult for you." Source: Seattle Times
In July of 2008, two months before the seizure Washington Mutual,
Inc.
was denied protection from illegal short-selling by the SECs naked
short-sale ban that protected 19 financial institutions (eight of
which were at Paulson's TARP meeting). Data through June 2008 shows
that at one point that month "failures to deliver" (an indicator of
illegal or naked short-selling) of Washington Mutual’s stock reached
9
million shares. From June 5 to June 19 there were, on any given day,
at least 1 million WaMu shares that had "failed to deliver."
According to the OTS fact sheet released after the seizure,
Washington
Mutual was considered to meet OTS capitalization requirements and was
in fact a solvent bank. In forward looking third quarter forecasts to
the media, CEO Alan Fishman related that Washington Mutual, Inc. had
access to over $50 billion in capital and enough liquidity to meet
fixed obligations through 2010. According to some reports, the OTS
seized Washington Mutual at the behest of the FDIC. The subsequent
sale to JP Morgan Chase & Co. was conducted hastily on a Thursday
evening, in a highly irregular auction that typically is designed to
take place 180 to 360 days after seizure. The price paid was $1.88
Billion for a company with over $300 Billion in assets, over $20
Billion in book value, and over 2200 branches.
While all these revelations can suggest that Washington Mutual, Inc.
was not a failed institution, and they can support speculation that
Washington Mutual was improperly seized, recent court filings in
Federal District Court in Texas and U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware
suggest something more sinister.
For example, the filing in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware,
referring to a Texas State Court action (since removed to Federal
District Court for the Southern Disrict of Texas (3:09-cv-00044)) is
located at the following link:
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812...0...
In the above-referenced filing, it is alleged that wrongful conduct
of
JP Morgan Chase & Co. includes (i) entering into false negotiations
with the Washington Mutual, Inc. under the guise of a good-faith
bidder during the summer of 2008; (ii) gaining access to Washington
Mutual's confidential and proprietary information through a variety
of
deceptive practices; and (iii) disclosing Washington Mutual's
confidential information as well as false information to the media
and
investors in an effort to drive down WMI's credit rating and stock
price, cause depositors to withdraw deposits as a result of fear, and
hamper efforts of Washington Mutual, Inc. to find a purchaser for
itself.
The filing suggests that additional claims that could arise in the
bankruptcy proceeding might include, without limitation, unfair
competition, tortious interference, interference with prospective
economic advantage, breach of contract, misappropriation of
confidential information and trade secrets, and conversion. The
filing
further suggest that by way of these claims, JPMC may be held
responsible for the destruction of Washington Mutual, Inc. and the
total losses suffered by its creditors and shareholders.
In addition, the underlying Texas action alleges that JP Morgan Chase
& Co. used plants or moles (e.g., the Rotella allegations) inside of
Washington Mutual, Inc. for the purposes of gaining insider
information and exploiting that information for economic gain. Recent
news reports have stated that in 2005, a small group of senior risk
managers drew up a plan to limit risky lending practices, but a new
executive team at the bank nixed the plan. Thus, it is conceivable
that if the allegations of insider plants are true, these same plants
could have knowingly undertaken or encouraged risky or fraudulent
lending practices in an effort to destroy Washington Mutual's
reputation and shareholder value.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b), the above-identified
filings are subject to the requirement of certification "that to the
best of the person's knowledge, information, and belief, formed after
an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances . . . ." Thus, whereas
previous revelations in the news or government papers regarding
Washington Mutual's situation might command a relatively lower level
of trust, the allegations in the above-identified filings demand the
additional respect that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are
designed to command.
The sum of these allegations is that, if any number of the
allegations
are true, the activities of JP Morgan Chase & Co.'s leading up to the
seizure and sale of Washington Mutual, Inc. assets have the capacity
of implicating the laws of unfair competition, unjust enrichment,
fraud, securities violations at the expense of Washington resident
investors, breach of contract (confidentiality agreement), breach of
fiduciary duty, conversion, etc.
While many of such violations may be the province of federal law, it
is also clear that the magnitude of the allegations and potential
extent of damages suffered by Washington residents would likely raise
issues of state law violations. Washington residents deserve to have
a
fair and complete investigation on the subject by the Attorney
General
of the State of Washington and to have themselves availed of
Washington State law if such an investigation deems this an
appropriate course of action.
http://wamustory.com/
http://wamuqd.com/
http://www.wamu-shareholders-resources.c...
http://wamuequity.org/history.html
Jamie Dimon planted "moles" in Wamu..?
http://www.kccllc.net/documents/0812...0...
The J.P. Morgan Chase Watch
http://www.innercitypress.org/jpmchase.h...
http://www.nypost.com/seven/04292009/bus...
Jamie Dimon is being accused of wrongfully hoarding an $8 billion
windfall gleaned in Washington Mutual's collapse -- and using the
cash
to prop up profits at his JPMorgan Chase.
In a bitter twist in the mammoth bankruptcy of WaMu, two parent
holding companies of the defunct bank said in court papers that
JPMorgan Chase refuses to release about $4 billion in cash deposits
on
the "absurd" belief it "purchased" the cash for $1.88 billion.
JPMorgan is also accused of improperly staking a claim to huge tax
refunds worth ... |
Thread abonnieren
