IBJNews

Developer Broadbent loses fight to keep finances under wraps

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The economic crisis and sharp decline in the commercial real estate market have whacked $73 million off developer George Broadbent's net worth, according to a court filing unsealed this week after he lost a legal battle to keep his financials private.

As of January 2007, Broadbent, co-founder of The Broadbent Co., had net worth of $121 million, and his shopping centers had equity of $62 million, according to the newly public filing. As of July, his net worth had fallen to $48 million, and the equity in his real estate projects had shrunk to $10 million.

On top of that, his cash in personal accounts plummeted from about $7 million to just $3,000, though he continues to have annual expenses of more than $1 million.

broadbent mug Broadbent

The spat over whether Broadbent could keep his finances under wraps was an outgrowth of a legal battle with The Huntington National Bank and PNC Bank, which have argued for months that a "material adverse change" in his personal financial condition allowed them to declare a default on a $21 million loan The Broadbent Co. received in 2006 for its Greenwood Place shopping center. George Broadbent personally guaranteed $4.9 million of that debt.

That litigation was settled Saturday, two days before a two-day trial was set to begin. Terms were not disclosed. Richard Kempf, a partner at Taft Stettinius & Hollister representing Broadbent, would not comment in detail but said he was happy with the agreement. Attorneys for the banks did not return calls.

George Broadbent, 70, and his company over the past three years have become ensnared in more than a half-dozen lawsuits with lenders. Courts already have ordered George Broadbent to pay PNC and Huntington $17 million, and he likely soon will face an additional $5.75 million in judgments stemming from loans the company used in 2007 to redevelop the building at 117 E. Washington St. into its corporate headquarters.

“For reasons that remain somewhat unclear, Mr. Broadbent has failed to satisfy any of the $17 million in judgments entered against him,” Tanya Walton Pratt, the judge who oversaw the Greenwood Place litigation, wrote in July.

Walton Pratt laid out George Broadbent's financial condition in that July filing, but kept it under seal. However, on March 2 she ordered it unsealed, citing Seventh Circuit precedent toward keeping records open. On Monday, Broadbent's attorneys proposed that the court instead unseal a redacted version, but Walton Pratt rejected that request Tuesday.

“To be sure, Mr. Broadbent has understandable personal reasons for seeking to keep this information private,” she wrote. “That said, potential embarrassment to a stakeholder in a lawsuit does not warrant maintaining information under seal.”
 
Broadbent's dispute with Huntington and PNC began in August 2009, when his company sued them, charging they were wrongly attempting to restrict the company's access to a $50 million credit line.

The banks loaned The Broadbent Co. $21 million for the Greenwood Place development in May 2006. It was scheduled to come due in three years, but the lenders later extended it to May 2014.

Huntington and PNC countersued The Broadbent Co. in August 2010, seeking to collect the entire loan balance early, citing his declining financial condition.

Their counterclaim might have been triggered by Broadbent’s move a few months earlier to sell The Broadbent Co. to his wife, Mary Clare Broadbent, for $50,000 as the mounting lawsuits threatened his control over the company.

As lenders circled, Broadbent also transferred to her his ownership interests in five retail properties that had equity of more than $22 million for what he said in an affidavit were “estate planning reasons.” He also sold to her his ownership interest in nine other properties for $150,000 to “raise personal capital” and “diversify his portfolio,” court records show.

Broadbent said in the affidavit that the transfers were not designed to “hinder, delay or defraud” his creditors.

But Judge Walton Pratt wrote in court documents that “since 2010, Mr. Broadbent has engaged in a series of financial transactions with his wife that have raised red flags for lenders.”

The Broadbent Co., founded in 1972, manages more than 3 million square feet of retail space, mostly in central Indiana.


 
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • TRUMP
    This is a DONALD TRUMP strategy and it works very well for him.
  • Crooks
    Greedy crooks....hope George & MC have to move into a trailer! After years of strong arming small businesses with questionable business practices I am gald he is getting all of this negative attention.
  • george
    I'll bet Ole' George has a little bit of cash socked away.
    Just following the path of some other notable developers here in Indy.
  • Fraudulent Conveyance Anyone?
    How exactly can he argue that it was anything but fraudulent conveyance for him to sell his ownership in Broadbent to his wife for a meager $50,000? Can we get a legitimate valuation please? And the sale of other interests for $150,000? Really? I'm almost certain his original investment would have been far above that. All of these transactions occur in the wake of lawsuits and it is considered anything but fraud? He is clearly trying to protect his assets to prevent the creditors from calling his personal guarantees.
  • Excuses
    How does selling something to your wife "raise personal capital"? All those high priced attorneys and that's the best excuse they could come up with?

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. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT