Lehman Brothers Financial SA (CE) (LEHNQ) Quote

Notice of Intention to pay a Tenth Interim Dividend
Based on current information, the Administrators are of the view that there are sufficient realisations to allow a tenth interim dividend to be made to unsecured creditors. The Administrators issued a Notice of Intended Dividend to all known creditors stating a last date for proving of 6 September 2024. A tenth interim dividend will be paid within 2 months of that date to creditors with agreed claims. A copy of the Notice is available to download.


https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/business-restructuring/administrations/lehman/lehman-brothers-holdings/dividends-to-creditors.html

RE: worth 50 billion and are being offset. no?

—-//——-//—-

You’re probably thinking about cancellation of debt. The debt will become an income in the eyes of IRS and will be subjected to tax. The NOL can be used to offset income but not enough to cover the 130B cancelled debt.

That is exactly correct if LBHI will go into that direction. It will then be a suicide for LBHI.

A good business man will not go into that direction Btw.

The Debt will be converted into equity stock. Although, There are many more details to be explained.

Bingo.

i am aware. but they are only worth 50 billion and are being offset. no?

which index fund is good one to invest? i am bit conflicted with lowering of interest rate, inflation and tech may be overvalued. thank you.

RE: nol is only 50 billion?

—-//——-//—-

NOL is not money. It cannot be used to pay anything.. That’s why I said you are completely lost.

It will take a long explanation to you to understand what’s going on. You’ll need to at least understand a little about business.

yes i am lost. that is why i asked you. you say creditors are owed 130 billion, so why would anyone get a penny if the nol is only 50 billion?

The Alternative Outcome was removed. Deutsch Bank supported the alternative outcome. Maybe CTs' Holders? A mystery now...

Source: October 10, 2023 UK hearing:
1 The tier Y distribution applies for the next layer
2 of funds, if available , as your Lordship can see. And
3 there are at this point, and this feeds into the issue 1
4 debate which we are having, and I’m told to say that
5 no one can rely upon the terms of this in respect of the
6 argument, but I haven’t heard anyone seek to do so, so
7 I don’t think that is a point we need to worry about too
8 much.
9 There are three alternative distributions under tier
10 Y, one called an ECAPS outcome, one under an LBHI
11 outcome, and one under an alternative outcome. And if
12 you go back to page 6, at the top of page 6 the
13 definition of ECAPS outcome, which essentially means if
14 GP1 wins. And on page 7 there is an LBHI outcome, which
15 gives the plaudits to Mr Allison’s client .
16 The alternative outcome, if you go back to page 10,
17 is anything that isn’t 1 or 2. And in that event, as
18 your Lordship can see, there will need be
19 a recalibration depending on what it is, if it is
20 exists .
21 MR JUSTICE HILDYARD: That is a case I sort of go off piste,
22 as it were.
23 MR BELTRAMI: I haven’t put that in my notes, my Lord. Yes,
24 it is a for the avoidance of doubt clause. And if that
25 were to occur, then the parties would have to reconsider

Amendment and
restatement of
Agreed
Distributions:
The Framework Agreement shall be amended and restated such that the
concepts of ECAPS Outcome, LBHI Outcome and Alternative Outcome shall be
removed and Available Funds shall instead be distributed according to the
following scheme (subject in each case to the relevant terms of and the other
relevant distribution conditions set out in the Framework Agreement):
Tier X: As set out in the Framework Agreement (which Tier X Distributions have
already been made in accordance with the Framework Agreement)
Tier Y: To be split 73.8 % (GP1) and 26.2% (LBHI)
Tier Z: To be split 40% (GP1) and 60% (LBHI)
The Parties shall agree in the Amended and Restated Framework Agreement
that a PLI 1 Settlement has occurred.
Rights and claims
to be settled /
released / with
covenant not to
sue:
The appeal in relation to Priority Legal Issue 1 (t

RE:.. The distribution of about 1M or more maybe the final.

—//——-//—-

CORRECTION: “100M or more”

RE: RE: …who will get this "Excluded Recoveries"? …

—-//——-//—-

ECAPS money not included, the cash flow estimate is only 210 M.

In approximation, The distribution of about 1M or more maybe the final. The rest of the money will be allocated to other expenses. ie, Taxes, Operating expense, reserve for disputed claims, others.

RE: …who will get this "Excluded Recoveries"? …

——//——-

Very simple to answer. LBHI Also acted as a broker of ecaps.

yes, it´s right. The ecaps recovery is not included in the cash flow of LBHI. But who will get this "Excluded Recoveries"?
Quarterly report: The June 30, 2024 Cash Flow Estimates
exclude all potential recoveries from LBHI’s
subordinated debt claim against LBH PLC (including
indirectly LBIE’s litigation against AGR), its
agreements with holders of approximately 16.8% of
ECAPS, as well as its partial settlement agreement
with all ECAPS’ holders, which are treated as
Excluded Recoveries herein (see Note 4 – Legal
Proceedings in for additional information)

"130 billion has to be Paid Out" is a False Statement if it is being touted as 'a Condition' to Close LBHI BK Case...Wait & Watch!

EVEN BETTER!!! (Being 'Not Included' in 'Recovery' of LBHI 'BK proceeding')....

Awesome! LBHI has tons of money stashed away everywhere....Folks are 'Clueless', shall we say? LOL...

For 15 years, you’re still completely lost.

you said 130 billon to be paid but nol is only 50 billion. why would you see a dime? also i thought i read that nol's were already used as we speak, not sure how though.

Ride’em Cowboy!

CT posse ready for a round up!!!

~ IMO, just a cowboy's TWO cents, Class 11 (J preferred) & Class 12 (commons), could become financially active, IF' ? LBHI, after zeroing out, and then LBHI is eventually & separately funded and is able to move forward as a "reorganized" going concern, and the ability to use the NOL's ... the CT's are Class 10-B and, as TRUST's, have separated payment guarantees (imbedded covenants) ... ~

CT's currently show their potential interest returns ... "subject to an extraordinary distribution" ... the only concern currently is ... IF ?, LBHI ends up as a "going concern" which affects Class 11 and Class 12 ... but along with the Class 10-A's, the Class 10-B's will be in the money ... just my opinion ? ...

IMO, the conversational combining of ... Class 10-A / Class 10-B in this type of forum, ... with Equity Class 11' and Class 12' confuses the conversation. there's a difference' between them' ...

"DISCLOSURE" ... this ol' cowboy is an ACTUAL OWNER of quite a lot of all four CT's, Class 10-B's ... No Class 11 (J's) or Class 12's though ...

just sayin'

AZ

🦍"11.3 DB shall not assign, transfer or dispose of its interest in the ECAPS, including the ECAPS
👉️Deeds of Guarantee, 👈️unless the relevant assignee or transferee has agreed to be bound
by the terms of this Agreement as if it were DB."

RE: B) 58% to LBHI;
—-//——-//—-

The 58% is the ECAPS claim by LBHI. It is not included in the recovery of LBHI.
READ THE QUARTERLY REPORT.

Dated April 22, 2004,

page 40: if there is an ECAPS Outcome, PLC shall pay the Tier Z Distributions in the
following proportions:
(A) 42% to GP1; and
(B) 58% to LBHI;
(ii) if there is an LBHI Outcome, PLC shall pay the Tier Z Distributions in the
following proportions:
(A) 12% to GP1; and
(B) 88% to LBHI

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8664E_1-2024-9-19.pdf
page 39: if there is an ECAPS Outcome, PLC shall pay the Tier Y Distributions in
the following proportions:
(A) 94% to GP1; and
(B) 6% to LBHI

RE: All guarantees and agreements contain…

NEVER WIN IN COURT due to wrong interpretation of the guarantee for CTs

RE: Is this why you purchased lower priority J

——//——

I bought large amount of J’s and CTs as well. But I do not expect to be paid in the distributions. I’ve been saying for fifteen years now that the hope is on the NOL.
NOL will secure J’s because NOL is owned by equities. This scenario is different from other bankruptcies that usually wipe out all equities. NOL is the reason to continue as a going concern. Possible fresh capital is coming from participating creditors acquisition of LBHI because they will not like the remaining 130B unpaid debt to be wasted. Those creditors are also the existing affiliates of LBHI that holds the majority of all claims.

All guarantees and agreements contained in this Trust Securities Guarantee shall bind the successors, assigns, receivers, trustees and representatives of the ...

The End

11. SUCCESSORS
11.1 GP1 shall not at any time assign, transfer or dispose of its interest in the PLC Sub-Notes
without the prior written consent of the Parties.
11.2 LBHI shall not assign, transfer or dispose of its interest in the PLC Sub-Debt:
(a) on or before 15 December 2024, in any circumstances; and
👉️(b) on and from 16 December 2024, unless:
(i) the assignee or transferee of LBHI’s interest agrees to be bound by the
terms of this Agreement; and
(ii) each of GP1 and DB (in the case of DB, only if it then holds 10% or more
of the ECAPS in issue) have consented to such assignment or transfer,
such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. 👈️LBHI, GP1 and
DB each agree that it shall not be reasonable to withhold or delay consent
if the proposed transfer, assignment or disposal by LBHI of the PLC Sub-
Debt is for value, save for if there is a genuine demonstrable risk that the
assignment or transfer could undermine this Agreement or that the
proposed assignee or transferee intends to breach, undermine or take
action inconsistent with this Agreement.
11.3 DB shall not assign, transfer or dispose of its interest in the ECAPS, including the ECAPS
Deeds of Guarantee, unless the relevant assignee or transferee has agreed to be bound
by the terms of this Agreement as if it were DB.
11.4 If at any time after the Effective Date DB acquires

Is this why you purchased lower priority J stock shares, in 2011, versus higher priority securities' linked to subordinate bonds, such as our CTs? Thanks, for your posts. Look up and not down to see the waterfall.

toogoodfella

Re: None

Sunday, 09/22/2024 8:46:47 PM

RE: 6.00% SUBORDINATED DEFERRABLE INTEREST DEBENTURE DUE 2053

——//——-//———

YOU CAN READ BUT IT DOESNT MEAN YOU HAVE THE COMPREHENSION.

IT IS SO CLEAR SAYING “SUBORDINATED”.. AND THERE IS STILL 130 BILLION DEBT AHEAD OF IT.

IT IS ALSO CLEAR IT IS DUE ON 2053 SO A GOING CONCERN LBHI IS NOT OBLIGATED TO REDEEM UNTIL 2053.

Common sense or just a coconut shell??

Therefore Lehman’s is a Going Concern.

One cannot offer new contracts if one hasn’t paid their past debts.

Excellent post.



Ron

https://contracts.justia.com/companies/lehman-brothers-holdings-inc-plan-trust-7208/contract/1008222/

RE: are you saying ct's won't get paid?

————//———

I’ve been shouting it for fifteen years!

are you saying ct's won't get paid?

NOT APPLICABLE FOR LBHI WITH NO MORE MONEY AFTER ALL REMAINING ASSET IS DISTRIBUTED AND STILL OWES APPROXIMATELY 130 BILLION! …….

COMPREHEND BILLION!!!!!

POR IS WRITTEN AND APPROVED BY ALL PARTIES AND THE BANKRUPTCY COURT.

POR IS THE LAW!

WHAT HAPPENED IN UK STAYS IN UK.

A GOING CONCERN LBHI IS NOT OBLIGATED TO REDEEM CTS.

LBHI OBLIGATION IS PAYING INTEREST.

Thank you Dr. C. You found some relavent movement.!!!! Finaly!!! Great find!!!
And possible blessing. For the Lehman London Branch and US..
Here is the Rub.

4.18.4 The Joint Liquidators of the Company opposed the Dividend
because it would lead to prejudice to the holders of the Securities.
This would arise from a loss of statutory interest payable by LBH on
the amount of the Dividend paid to the Company, which could be
held as un-distributable for some considerable time pending the final
resolution of the ECAPS Guarantees position.

No Distributiion untill "Satisfied in Full"

Then againg we are not in Londons Perview. IMO
And that may be a while. IMO

are they done now or another 10 years?

Amendment and
restatement of
Agreed
Distributions:
The Framework Agreement shall be amended and restated such that the
concepts of ECAPS Outcome, LBHI Outcome and Alternative Outcome shall be
removed and Available Funds shall instead be distributed according to the
following scheme (subject in each case to the relevant terms of and the other
relevant distribution conditions set out in the Framework Agreement):
Tier X: As set out in the Framework Agreement (which Tier X Distributions have
already been made in accordance with the Framework Agreement)
Tier Y: To be split 73.8 % (GP1) and 26.2% (LBHI)
Tier Z: To be split 40% (GP1) and 60% (LBHI)
The Parties shall agree in the Amended and Restated Framework Agreement
that a PLI 1 Settlement has occurred.


dhyan40

Re: None

Friday, 09/20/2024 6:58:05 AM

Lehman Brothers UK Capital Funding IV LP: Notice to the Holders of the Preferred Securities
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/lehman-brothers-uk-capital-funding-121200926.html
LONDON, Sept. 19, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

NOTICE TO THE HOLDERS OF:

EUR 200,000,000 EURO FIXED RATE ENHANCED CAPITAL ADVANTAGED PREFERRED SECURITIES ("LP IV ECAPS")

ISSUER: LEHMAN BROTHERS UK CAPITAL FUNDING IV LP ("LP IV")

ISIN: XS0282978666

LIQUIDATION OF LB GP NO.1 LTD ("the Company") AND IMPLICATIONS FOR HOLDERS OF LP IV ECAPS

Your attention is drawn to the formal notice contained in the PDF link below concerning the Company, LP IV and the LP IV ECAPS. In order to view the formal notice, it is recommended that you copy and paste the link into your browser.

http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8664E_1-2024-9-19.pdf

Cotton - How should I compare and assess these two situations you have presented in that post? Your thoughts more plainly laid out would be most helpful.

https://tisegroup.com/market/securities/1357
https://casetext.com/case/alesco-preferred-funding-viii-ltd-v-acp-re-ltd-2
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alesco

Use a song. You might be surprised.

Cotton - Supplied the link for your post so there's a bit of context. It's not difficult. Try harder.

https://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/8660E_1-2024-9-19.pdf

https://www.wmd-law.com/wmd-practice-areas/news/firm-obtains-appellate-victory-on-behalf-of-holders-of-over-200-million-in-trups-debentures


WOLLMUTH MAHER & DEUTSCH LLP
500 Fifth Avenue
Brant D. Kuehn
New York, New York 10110

Counsel for Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
In re
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC., et al.,
Debtors.
CHAPTER 11
Case No. 08-13555 (MG)
NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL
TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES IN INTEREST:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Wollmuth Maher & Deutsch LLP (“WMD”) pursuant
to Local Rule 2090-1(e) hereby withdraws counsel Brant Kuehn, as counsel of record for
Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., and requests that Brant Kuehn be removed from all notices,
including the Court’s CM/ECF electronic notification list, notices, pleadings, and any
applicable service lists given or filed in the above captioned matter.
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that this withdrawal is limited to Brant Kuehn,
Esq., and does not impact the representation of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. by WMD 👈️
attorneys in the above-captioned matter.
08-13555-mg Doc 61676 Filed 07/30/24 Entered 07/30/24 17:09:17 Main Document
Pg 1 of 3

Represents holders of more than $200 million in Trust Preferred Securities (“TruPS”) against certain Defendants who allegedly facilitated and/or participated in wrongdoing that greatly diminished the value of Plaintiffs’ TruPS. In October 2022, the New York Appellate Division, First Department, largely affirmed two decisions in the Trial Court that had largely denied Defendants’ motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Alesco Preferred Funding VIII, Ltd., et al. v. ACP Re, Ltd., et al., 209 A.D.3d 558 (1st Dep’t 2022). The case is now in the discovery phase.

· Represents a class of entities adversely affected by an alleged conspiracy by certain financial entities to inflate the interest rates for Variable Rate Demand Obligations (“VRDOs”), bonds issued by public entities to raise funds for infrastructure and public services. The City of Philadelphia, et al. v. Bank of America Corp., et al., Case No. 19-cv-1608 (JMF) (S.D.N.Y.)

· Represented Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and certain of its affiliated entities (collectively, “Lehman”) in litigations asserting indemnification claims against hundreds of mortgage loan sellers relating to Lehman’s multi-billion-dollar settlements of claims litigation with Fannie me, Freddie Mac and trustees for hundreds of RMBS trusts. In re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., et al., Case No. 08-13555 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.), Adversary Proceeding No. 16-01019 (SCC). Collaborating with the client, Brant led a settlement mediation campaign that, with other settlements, resulted in the resolution of approximately 200 adversary proceedings filed by Lehman.


https://lawyers.findlaw.com/profile/view/4200950_1

Brant Kuehn took a position elsewhere, and removed his name as the LBHI counsel at the end of July. Now we see James H.M. Sprayregen is removed from the council as well.

What does this mean? Is LBHI taking steps to wind down finally?

Appendix 3.
Comparative EOS
Notes Base Case Recovery High Case Recovery
£'m £'m
Estimated surplus available to LBH subordinated creditors 1 132 327
LP I LP III LP III Totals LP I LP II LP III Totals
£'m £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m £'m
Scenario 1 - GP1 wins PLI1 (Tier Y) 26.8 41.7 55.5 124.1 45.8 71.1 94.7 211.5
Scenario 1 - GP1 wins PLI1 (Tier Z) - - - - 9.3 14.4 19.2 42.8
Scenario 1 - GP1 wins PLI1 (Tier Y and Tier Z) totals 2 26.8 41.7 55.5 124.1 55.0 85.5 113.9 254.3
Scenario 2 - GP1 loses PLI1 (Tier Y) - - - - - - - -
Scenario 2 - GP1 loses PLI1 (Tier Z) - - - - 2.6 4.1 5.5 12.2
Scenario 2 - GP1 loses PLI1 (Tier Y and Tier Z) totals 3 - - - - 2.6 4.1 5.5 12.2
Scenario 3 - Proposed terms implemented (Tier Y) 21.1 32.7 43.6 97.4 35.9 55.8 74.3 166.1
Scenario 3 - Proposed terms implemented (Tier Z) - - - - 8.8 13.7 18.3 40.8
Scenario 3 - Proposed terms implemented (Tier Y and Tier Z) totals 4 21.1 32.7 43.6 97.4 44.8 69.5 92.6 206.9
Notes
2. Scenario 1 - Estimated recoveries available to ECAPS Accountholders if GP1 wins Priority Legal Issue 1 ("PLI1") on appeal.
3. Scenario 2 - Estimated recoveries available to ECAPS Accountholders if GP1 loses PLI1 on appeal.
5. The above calculations do not take costs (past or future) into consideration.
1. Estimated funds available to LBH's subordinated creditors as per LBH's March 2024 estimated outcome statement. All calculations in scenarios 1 to 3 work on the basis that
the remaining funds available to LBH's subordinated creditors will be £132m in the 'Base' case and £327m in the 'High' case, which are subject to the assumptions set out in
LBH's March 2024 update to creditors. GP1's realisations to date in respect of LP III are not reflected in the above calculations.
4. Scenario 3 - Estimated recoveries available to Accountholders if GP1 enters into the deal being proposed in the term sheet at Appendix 2.

It comes in dribs and drabs


You get the general mood around here joyce c. I don't need to draw you a picture.

Enjoy your weekend. Last day of summer today. I am headed off for The Berkshires.

newflow thanks for your feedback,

Toogood thanks for your valuable input, I am really indebted to you been following you since 6 foot flat days in yahoo and got into Js mainly because of your input in those days.

CTs were extremely illiquid and expensive, I managed to get a decent quantity of Js @ 5c avg cost

JHawg - No one posting.

And that changed rather quickly. 🤣

four sisters

CT"s ...... ?


LB..P..= ?$?


cool post..ty ron


Does keep it lively

Asset Backed Securities.

ABS Trusts are asset backed.
That simple!

The ABS are not a liability of the Parent LBH, or a sub.
The responsibility lives with the Trust/Trustee.

The ABS became bonds with the securitization of the Trusts that were insured by Derivative Contracts as insurance policies to cover all the losses of the Trust.

This whole long game is about the derivative insurance contracts needing time to generate the money to cover the contracts.

LIBOR is nearing completion.


I’m expecting similar numbers from my LB P’s as I am from my WMI P’s.

2.1 face, minimum from the Performance Payments from the Trust associated with the ABS Trust.
I have proven my numbers multiple times.

Similar numbers for all LB ABS Securities.

Same here with the four sisters.


Ron

The overview page of the LBHI ch11 Epiq system listed two legal cases one of which is now the fully settled ECAPS litigation. The only thing that is left is the case between LBIE and Assured Guaranty. Is this the only one that hold us back? I hope that the request for an appeal is denied even if it adversely affects the recovery for LBHI. GLTA

Fascinating posts and angles…