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.


  • 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

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. 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.