IBJNews

Much of trustee’s suit against Fair Finance lenders dismissed

Scott Olson
November 12, 2012
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Fair Finance Co.'s investors have been dealt a blow by a federal judge who dismissed a bankruptcy trustee's lawsuit against one of the company’s deep-pocketed lenders.

Trustee Brian Bash in February sued Fair’s lenders—Rhode Island-based Textron Financial Corp. and New York-based Fortress Credit Corp.—seeking up to $1.2 billion in actual and treble damages.

The suit charged the companies turned a blind eye to Fair CEO Tim Durham’s fraudulent activities because they were making millions of dollars on their lending relationship and held first liens on the only Fair assets with real value.

It accused the two companies, which have billions in assets, of aiding and abetting theft, fraud and insiders’ breaches of fiduciary duty.

But Judge Patricia A. Gaughan of the Northern District of Ohio’s Eastern Division said in her ruling Friday that Fair Finance is at least “equally” responsible for the harm to investors, and she dismissed the claims against Textron.

“Textron need only show that [Fair Finance] is at least as culpable as Textron,” the judge wrote. “Textron need not establish that it is less culpable.”

Regarding Fortress, the judge dismissed some counts against it and ruled that the trustee cannot collect treble damages because the  company did not commit a criminal act of damage to property, or theft.

It's not clear whether Bash intends to appeal the ruling. He and his attorneys were not immediately available for comment.

Without a big recovery from Textron or Fortress, Fair investors—who purchased unsecured notes with interest rates as high as 9 percent—may face an uphill battle recovering a signficant chunk of the more than $200 million they're owed.

The judge did decide that the trustee’s claims that Fortress intentionally committed fraud can go forward.

“Loan funds borrowed from Fortress were ‘directly routed to a debtor-owned account for use by Durham in furtherance of the Ponzi scheme,’” the judge wrote.

The judge said Fair created a special-purpose entity to receive Fortress funds only after Fortress declined to consider making Fair a direct loan. "Moreover," the judge wrote, "the Fair Finance SPE was controlled by Durham and [James] Cochran, who in turn have been convicted of a massive fraudulent scheme.”

A grand jury in March 2011 indicted Durham, Cochran and Fair Chief Financial Officer Rick Snow on charges of wire fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy to commit wire and securities fraud. A jury convicted Durham on all charges and Cochran and Snow on some charges in June. The three are scheduled to be sentenced Nov. 30.

The lawsuit against Textron and Fortress was Bash’s most aggressive push yet to recover money for the Ohio residents who bought Fair's unsecured notes. Payments ceased to all 5,000 noteholders when the company collapsed in November 2009.

Bash has filed dozens of suits since early 2010. But most seek to recover relatively small sums that were transferred out of Fair at a time the trustee alleges it was insolvent. Many of the defendants are Durham friends or business associates who appear to have few assets.

Durham and Cochran bought Akron, Ohio-based Fair in a 2002 leveraged buyout. Authorities charged that almost immediately, Durham drained tens of millions from the company by making loans to himself and failing businesses he owned. They say millions also went toward Durham’s mansions, a yacht, part ownership of an airplane and extravagant gambling trips.

The trustee’s suit charges that by December 2003, Fair already was operating as a Ponzi scheme reliant on the sale of additional unsecured notes to Ohio residents to stay afloat.

Textron provided a $22 million line of credit that financed the purchase of Fair from then-owner Donald Fair. Since its founding in 1934, the business had focused on buying finance contracts from fitness clubs, time-share condominium developers and other firms that offered their customers extended-payment plans.

To catch up on IBJ's coverage of Fair Finance and Durham, click 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. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.

ADVERTISEMENT