IBJNews

Fair Finance trustee to continue pursuit into 2014

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The bankruptcy trustee charged with recovering money for the 5,300 investors bilked by Tim Durham’s Fair Finance Co. plans to continue filing lawsuits for reparations into 2014.

“We are continuing to move forward on all cases and collect any assets that there may be,” Brian Bash said this week during a Fair Finance bankruptcy hearing in Ohio, according to the Akron Beacon Journal.

Bash, the Ohio-based lawyer spearheading the recovery efforts, is three years into the scorched-earth legal assault on former Fair CEO Tim Durham, other company insiders and Durham’s friends and business associates.

About 5,300 Ohio investors lost more than $200 million when the Ponzi-scheme-fueled company collapsed in 2009. Durham and two associates also based in Indianapolis were sentenced in November on criminal fraud charges relating to Fair’s demise. Prosecutors charged that Durham looted the company to fund a lavish lifestyle and support other failing businesses he owned.

Durham is serving a 50-year prison term, business partner Jim Cochran received a 25-year sentence, and former CFO Rick Snow was sentenced to 10 years.

Lawsuits filed by Bash and an army of attorneys have resulted in default judgments totaling nearly $200 million, the Beacon Journal reported earlier this week. But so far none of that money has been recovered and returned to investors.

According to Bash’s June report to the court, default judgments totaled $193,671,716.28. They included more than $144 million granted May 28 against Durham and Cochran, the newspaper reported. Bash is evaluating recovery options and deciding how to proceed with collection actions against Durham and Cochran.

The June report said Bash has done an asset search of Durham, found property, and was using information from the examination “to evaluate other recovery options.” Bash said he is negotiating with “certain individuals” interested in buying some assets that belong to Durham or to the Fair Finance estate, according to the report.

All of IBJ's coverage of Tim Durham and Fair Finance can be found here.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

  2. If you only knew....

  3. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

  4. The facts contained in your post make your position so much more credible than those based on sheer emotion. Thanks for enlightening us.

  5. Please consider a couple of economic realities: First, retail is more consolidated now than it was when malls like this were built. There used to be many department stores. Now, in essence, there is one--Macy's. Right off, you've eliminated the need for multiple anchor stores in malls. And in-line retailers have consolidated or folded or have stopped building new stores because so much of their business is now online. The Limited, for example, Next, malls are closing all over the country, even some of the former gems are now derelict.Times change. And finally, as the income level of any particular area declines, so do the retail offerings. Sad, but true.

ADVERTISEMENT