IBJNews

Lender wants Hansen & Horn receivership terminated

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A lender of Hansen & Horn Group Inc. wants a Marion County judge to terminate the receivership directed to oversee the bankrupt homebuilder’s assets.

Lawyers for Salin Bank & Trust Co. filed the motion late last month, arguing there is no need to continue the receivership because creditor claims will be resolved through bankruptcy proceedings anyway.

Marion Superior Court Judge Heather A. Welch approved the liquidation of Hansen & Horn in March, after court-appointed receiver Richard Lux recommended the Indianapolis-based homebuilder’s assets be sold in an attempt to repay creditors. The bankruptcy is pending in federal court.

Hansen & Horn has assets of $7 million and liabilities of $14.5 million.

The judge in February, however, denied a request from a lawyer representing Indianapolis-based Salin to opt out of the receivership process.

Salin argues it has a total of $1.5 million in loans to Hansen & Horn for which there is no equity. Salin spokesman Roger Harvey, senior vice president of Bose Public Affairs Group, said the bank filed the motion to terminate the receivership because it wants to “control its own destiny.”

“We just want our properties back,” he said, “and we want to make the decision on how best to dispose of those properties.”

A lawyer for C&R Concrete, one of dozens of unsecured creditors owed money by Hansen & Horn, responded to Salin’s motion by filing an objection. Without the additional oversight of a court-appointed receiver, it’s more likely Salin and Hansen & Horn could negotiate to dismiss the bankruptcy, which might allow the homebuilder to return to doing business, attorney Eric Allen said.

“If they keep the bankruptcy enforced, that’s fine,” he said. “But what we don’t want is the bank to cut a deal with Hansen & Horn and leave the unsecured creditors out in the cold.”

C&R is seeking to recover $268,749 for concrete work done during the past three years. Altogether, Hansen & Horn is facing at least 20 claims brought mostly by subcontractors hoping to recover more than $1 million.

Judge Welch has not ruled on Salin’s motion to terminate the receivership.

Hansen & Horn has stopped building in more than 20 subdivisions in central Indiana, including the massive mixed-use Anson development in Boone County near Whitestown.

Founded in 1977, the company regularly ranked among the top residential construction companies in the Indianapolis area over the past decade, building more than 200 homes during several of those years.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • What a mess!!
    The longer these proceedings last, the longer the lots sit unkept and overgrown with weeds in half-finished neighborhoods. Not to mention the half completed houses and dilapidated models with no electricity and probable flooding/mold issues. What a mess! Whatever happens, H&H should not be allowed to go back into building in any way. They are criminals!
  • Sadly
    I am thinking no.
  • The little people
    And what about the poor souls who lost their down payments? Does anyone, including the Court, consider them when it comes to the $7 mil in assets???

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. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT