IBJNews

Fair sues Shelbyville bank over sale of Durham Duesenberg

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Fair Finance Co.’s bankruptcy trustee sued Shelbyville’s SCB Bank this week, charging it refuses to turn over hundreds of thousands of dollars it raised by auctioning off one of Tim Durham’s most valuable automobiles, a 1929 Duesenberg.

The spat stems from a $580,000 loan SCB extended to Durham on Oct. 23, 2009—one day before IBJ ran an investigative story questioning whether the Indianapolis businessman had the financial wherewithal to repay tens of millions of dollars that he and his businesses had borrowed from Fair Finance.

A month later, the FBI raided Fair’s Akron, Ohio, headquarters and Durham’s office atop Chase Tower in downtown Indianapolis—part of a probe that led to his indictment in March on felony charges of orchestrating a Ponzi scheme that defrauded investors of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Fair Finance’s trustee, Cleveland attorney Brian Bash, is trying to scrape together money to return to the 5,000 Ohio residents who purchased more than $200 million in unsecured investment certificates from Fair. He’s recovered about $2.3 million so far.

The lawsuit says SCB extended the loan to Durham and to Durham's Diamond Investments, and in return Diamond gave the bank title to the Duesenberg.

“This loan allowed Durham to keep his fraudulent empire on life-support for several more months while the FBI and the public demanded answers on the misappropriated Fair Finance funds,” according to the suit.

The Fair Finance trustee said providing that collateral was improper because Diamond years earlier already had pledged the automobile to Fair to secure millions of dollars it borrowed from the finance business.

Durham last year turned over his collection of classic automobiles to the trustee, who sold them at auction. However, the Duesenberg wasn’t part of that sale because the title was missing.

Bash later learned SCB had the title and, in January, the bank auctioned the Duesenberg for $1.1 million. SCB used proceeds to pay off the $592,043 then owed on the $580,000 loan. SCB pocketed another $197,731 to cover its attorneys’ fees and costs and then applied the remainder—$316,139—to pay down the balance Durham owed the bank under a home equity line of credit.

The trustee alleges Fair is entitled to the $316,139, since the car had not served as collateral on the home equity loan. He also is objecting to the $197,731 the bank is claiming in fees and expenses, calling them “grossly excessive and unreasonable.”

The trustee said in the lawsuit that he opted to sue after his attorneys “made concerted efforts to reach a negotiated resolution to this dispute ... but the bank was unwilling to turn over a single cent of the proceeds from the sale of the Duesenberg.”

SCB—owned by Shelbyville-based Blue River Bancshares—has not yet filed a response to the suit. In a statement issued Wednesday afternoon, Blue River CEO Russell Breeden III said the bank's action to collect on Durham's loans were appropriate and in step with loan documents and the law.

"While the trustee’s conclusions may make for good headlines, they are abusive, unfair and untrue, and the bank categorically rejects them. The bank should not be made a victim twice over—the first time by Diamond and Durham, and again by the trustee’s actions."

Durham and fellow Indianapolis businessman Jim Cochran purchased Fair in 2002. The pair, along with Fair Chief Financial Officer Rick Snow, are facing 12 felony counts. All have denied wrongdoing.

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

 


ADVERTISEMENT

  • amen
    "While the trustee’s conclusions may make for good headlines, they are abusive, unfair and untrue, and the bank categorically rejects them. The bank should not be made a victim twice over—the first time by Diamond and Durham, and again by the trustee’s actions."

    Finally someone speaking out about the trustee and his methods.

    The saddest part is that I would bet they'll never distribute a penny to Durham's victims, instead keeping millions in fees.

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. A non-compete clause is expected to keep Buchman from appearing on-air at WTHR for a year from the WISH contract’s expiration.

  2. In my opinion the estridge companies are crooks. They filed bankruptcy on their 'track housing' side of the business two weeks before they closed on one of my clients' homes. When my client first interviewed Estridge as a builder 6 months before, they specifically ASKED about the solvency of their business, knowing that some builders were struggling. Estridge truly misrepresented their financial situation at that time. I suppose I am more unhappy with the whole system than I am with the builder because what the heck==you can file bankruptcy on 'track homes' but still keep building and make money off of 'custom built' homes??? How ridiculous! They are all homes. How can a company be allowed to bilk thousands of dollars from their subcontractors but still be allowed to build houses?? they should have been made to pay back all their unpaid contractors before being allowed to profit from building any more houses! This alone makes them and the system crooks in my eyes. I would never build an estridge home and I would not recommend for my clients either. If they were truly 'bankrupt' how could they afford to keep building homes anyway??? The whole system needs fixed.

  3. I live a couple blocks east of the Angie's campus and my house is assessed for ~$160,000. If I could get that amount, let alone $384,000 (a 140% bonus), I'd sell in a minute. Either Angie's stockholders just got fleeced, or Angie's is getting about a 58% discount on their property taxes, if these properties are actually worth what they paid Mr. Oesterle for them. Which do you think is the case?

  4. Perhaps the IMA board is really to blame! They agreed to hire Charles. They can't seemingly find donors among themselves, or bring in new blood that will support the museums operating budget with an expanded museum and money to provide curators with something to do (ie buy art). The headlines of disarray at the museum and mass firings are hurting the reputation of the museum for some time to come. If people on the board had misgivings, perhaps they shpuld have more forcefully opposed efforts that they have seemingly been unable to fund, like expansion and the costs it has created!

  5. See, I told u Indyman and Dipsicle....this 8 days is overkill. It's barely worth a weekend....great job Tony George! Your dream has been fulfilled....he fans want the I r l back. Thats how good it was.....and that sucked.

ADVERTISEMENT