Fair sues Shelbyville bank over sale of Durham Duesenberg

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

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.



  • 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

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

  2. Shouldn't this be a museum

  3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

  4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

  5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.