IBJNews

Tiny bank claims Stifel Nicolaus duped it on securities

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Peoples State Bank of Ellettsville says it was duped three years ago into plunking more than $13 million into auction-rate securities—just before those markets froze up. Now it’s suing its broker, Stifel Nicolaus & Co., to get the money back.

The tiny bank based west of Bloomington sued St. Louis-based Stifel late last year, and the case has no been moved to federal court in Indianapolis.

The lawsuit claims a Stifel broker, Michael Sullivan, called the bank in early November 2007 and, within days, convinced Peoples to spend $7.5 million on a security that was backed by federal student loans. Over the next two months, Peoples poured $6.15 million more into the auction-rate investments.

Peoples’ officials never reviewed a prospectus before placing the order, according to the bank’s lawsuit, nor did they realize that their investment is subordinate to another investor who bought securities on the same batch of student loans.

Their purchases represented 15 percent of their investments at the time, according to data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Peoples has 11 branches in Monroe, Brown, Owen and Morgan counties, according to the FDIC.

Then, within weeks, investors across the country bailed on the monthly auctions of the securities, which had been sold as ways to invest in corporate and municipal debt, and for those debt issuers to obtain more attractive interest rates.

The failure of the auctions kicked Peoples’ investments into a default status, in which it earns little to no interest on its investments. It still has $11.8 million tied up in the auction-rate securities, which do not mature for 35 years.

For two years, Peoples has asked Stifel to sell its investments, but Stifel has not even pitched them to investors, according to Peoples’ lawsuit.

Stifel says Sullivan worked in its Chicago office but is no longer with the firm. A call to Stifel’s attorney, Jim Riley of Indianapolis-based Riley Bennett & Egloff LLP, was not returned.

Meanwhile, Peoples has been under the spotlight of banking regulators. In November 2009, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Indiana Department of Financial Institutions charged Peoples with various “unsafe and unsound banking practices.”

In March, Peoples agreed to a consent order, which required it to boost its capital levels and to develop plans to reduce its bad loans and develop better oversight of its investments and interest rate risks.

Those requirements, as well as ratings downgrades on the auction-rate securites Peoples bought, forced it to boost its reserves from $2.5 million to more than $4.6 million, according to Peoples’ lawsuit.

“Peoples, which had never purchased ARS’s before, reasonably relied upon Sullivan’s representations about market liquidity and security of the ARS collateral,” Indianapolis attorney Chris Roberge wrote in Peoples’ lawsuit. He added, “Sullivan represented to Peoples that ARS’s were liquid, investment-grade securities that could be sold at any auction date … Sullivan never mentioned the possibility of a market freeze.”

A call to Roberge was not returned Monday morning.

Whether Peoples’ case is persuasive in court is uncertain. Mark Maddox, a securities attorney in Fishers, said institutional investors face a higher bar in court than individual investors do.

“An institutional investor has a harder road, because they are assumed to be a sophisticated investor. But then you have to ask the question, 'OK, how sophisticated is this institutional investor?'” Maddox said. Still, he added, “A smaller institutional, like a smaller bank, is still going to be held to a higher standard than a retail investor.”

A year ago, Stifel Nicolaus signed an agreement with three state securities regulators, including Indiana. According to a press release about the agreement, Stifel will buy back auction-rate securities from all its clients by the end of 2011.

But Peoples claims in its lawsuit that the agreement with regulators only applies to retail investors, and therefore will not help its situation. People has been bleeding cash, losing $550,000 during the first nine months of 2010, on revenue of $8.1 million.

In all of 2009, the bank had revenue of $14.3 million, and a loss of $540,000.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • As Ye Sow
    How can professionals in the banking industry - regardless of bank size - put themselves and their investors (1) in a position to be being "dupped", (2) fail to review a propectus, (3) make a lame defense of "we never purchased ARSâ??s before", and (4) "...relied upon [verbal] representations".

    Sometimes people (Peoples) sow what they reap.

    Pretty sophomoric if you ask me. Who is - or was - in charge? That person(s) should pay their shareholders personally.

    I would look at other business practices.

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. To compare Connor Prairie or the Zoo to a random old house is a big ridiculous. If it were any where near the level of significance there wouldn't be a major funding gap. Put a big billboard on I-69 funded by the tourism board for people to come visit this old house, and I doubt there would be any takers, since other than age there is no significance whatsoever. Clearly the tax payers of Fishers don't have a significant interest in this project, so PLEASE DON'T USE OUR VALUABLE MONEY. Government money is finite and needs to be utilized for the most efficient and productive purposes. This is far from that.

  2. I only tried it 2x and didn't think much of it both times. With the new apts plus a couple other of new developments on Guilford, I am surprised it didn't get more business. Plus you have a couple of subdivisions across the street from it. I hope Upland can keep it going. Good beer and food plus a neat environment and outdoor seating.

  3. I was visiting Indianapolis last month, and I was really, really surprised at how many panhandlers in Indy used signs. I currently live in Knoxville, and probably only one in 20 has a sign. They're still there panhandling, just no sign. I think I prefer the signs.

  4. For the record - the Kincaid's also own and operate the Fishers Banquet Center in the 96th & I-69 quadrant. The facility is mediocre at best. And there was a recent article stating they filed bankruptcy. Why are we wasting more money on a property just because it's a certain age to a family who can't run a business without running it to the ground and filing bankruptcy? I don't live in Hamilton County any more but if I still did I wouldn't have put any money towards them. It's a waste. Bull doze it down. The Kincaid's want the money to fund them for their mishaps with filing bankruptcy.

  5. Any estimated opening dates for Giordanno's?

ADVERTISEMENT