Quoted from iceman44:Here’s the argument that should be made
at the hearing.
There is only ONE single offer because TUYO is either stupid or they know more information about the policies than is currently there for inspection, the files that I personally saw as a “potential bidder”.
IF they wanted to solicit more bidders like myself they needed to do the following:
1). The trustee gets “ownership” of the policies, they only had ONE transferred as of last week.
2). Once ownership is obtained then immediately request “IN FORCE” illustrations
As I told the trustee IF the TIME was extended to bid as a result of the OBJECTIONS filed I would like to see the new information for bidding purposes.
The trustee argument is that premiums have to be made currently so that these 8 remaining policies don’t lapse.
That’s why TUYO made a few payments to keep some going and why the bankruptcy guys think they are the “white knights” saving the day.
My thought would be to have the trustee obtain 1) and 2) above over the next 45-60 days so that a true FMV can be determined and bid on.
During that time, TUYO can continue to make any payments, which we don’t even know about, out of the funds already in the possession of the trustee. $400,000
IF the bid process is over, what is the TUYO going to do right now anyhow as owners?
Pay the premiums.
Thus, I see no reason why the judge shouldn’t extend the process by 45-60 days so that the trustee can properly secure the assets and obtain the necessary info for bidding, while maintaining the current 8 policies.
Agree with the above. @frolic, it would seem to me the primary reason there was only one bidder was because the sales process was constructed in a way that and on deadlines such that it would be hard to conceive of any party other than the one who put forth said construction and deadlines would plausibly bid. That is an important difference than the primary reason being no parties—given sufficient information and time—would be interested in bidding.
The trustees job is to achieve the best return for deeproot's creditors from deeproot's assets. For the reasons like those which iceman lays out, it's reasonable to conclude that very well may be best achieved by halting the sale from proceeding as presently ordered and adjusting the terms of that order. And if concerns sufficient to persuade Judge Parker as to that course are presented on Monday, I assume (?) that's what should happen (is that's how the legal system is supposed to work?).