false statements on bank loan applications

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by eyecu2

Sure- on the offer of intelligent conversation, but purely by the nature of this board, more than 3/4 are speculation, and yet I see you only reply to my thread comments on anti trump posts.

If you have a problem with amortization schedules vs. a Line of credit, (your choice- not mine), why would you instantly say infer that these are not term loans and open ended LOC's since you are the one bringing them up- perhaps you can cite a source for your LOC Theory.

My comments are based in experience on banking, lending, and knowing that there are a variety of loan types; some are closed ended- some are open ended, all are originated, and some are sold, and have a quantitative value vs. this arbitrary comments about them having none except the banks consideration of the value, vs. the borrowers input.

You've challenged me that only the appraisal is of importance, and everything else is bullshit- IE. a loan committee would laugh you out of the office, but I seriously doubt that.

I would ask you why do we have applications and disclosures on them if that's the case? Who is being protected? Only the borrower; only the lender? the Banking system, FDIC, PMI, subrogated partnerships on the loans?...in the world you are suggesting, any value is ok as long as a bank appraises it for that value.

I'm saying there are lots of other things that go into it, and in fact, you've completely forgone the grading of loans on hand as assets and failed to address those who are sold at discount for being below standard. So yeah- to get back to the topic- start talking about the false statements vs. your version of what counts vs. what doesn't.

Are false statements even relevant to banking? If not why?


Why does a bank have a disclosure on any application to the fact that you are providing truthful information ?
example:

"I do hereby attest that this information is true, accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and I understand that any falsification, omission, or concealment of material fact may subject me to administrative, civil, or criminal liability"


btw- when it comes time to value a trump loan, here's some good intel- somewhat dated but still relevant for this discussion.

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics...a-possible-100

The Trump Organization’s Business Credit Score

According to Nav, The Trump Organization, Inc.’s business credit score is a 19 out of 100 as of Sept. 23, 2016, which puts it below the national average score by more than 30 points. The Nav report said the score indicates the Trump Organization “is very likely to default on its credit payments” and that “this will make it difficult to get financing.” It puts Trump’s Organization in a “medium-to-high risk” category.

more recently:
The outlook on Trump’s 40 Wall Street is looking worse for wear after Fitch Ratings downgraded a portion of a security tied to the Financial District office building.

Fitch downgraded the portion from investment-grade BBB- to BB, a junk credit rating, Crain’s reported. The ratings agency pointed to “performance concerns” when casting a more negative pall over the security, which is also tied to three additional properties.

Mazars:
“While we have not concluded that the various financial statements, as a whole, contain material discrepancies, based upon the totality of the circumstances, we believe our advice to you to no longer rely upon those financial statements is appropriate,” Mazars General Counsel William J. Kelly wrote to his Trump Organization counterpart, Alan Garten.

Perhaps it was the shitty investments that have been part of the reason for a lawsuit from NY AG' James: — 40 Wall Street, Trump’s Chicago hotel, the Old Post Office-turned-hotel and Trump’s golf course in Doral, Fla. — each lost banks tens of millions of dollars in interest across nearly a decade, according to assessments.

AND since Trump owns about 250 (give or take) businesses, under different names and entities, the piecing together of all the different accountings would be a difficult case for most AGs let alone proving that the guy has been lying - all along. But that's what was done. And as far as Trumps defense- everybody got paid, everyone was flush. Maybe in principal, but we'll not know for certain if those loans were on the brink of default, or worse, cause no bank is going to disclose that publicly. But one could guess!!

Spank away

“But one could guess!”

Yeah, that’s your favorite pastime - guessing. Especially when it comes to Trump. If Tish James cared to know whether Deutsche Bank or other lenders put any Trump loans on their internal Watch List or downgraded them to OAEM status, all she had to do is ask. No need to guess.

I don’t understand why you keep mentioning that banks will often syndicate and sell off loans to other institutions. Whether a bank keeps a souring loan on its books or sells it at a loss is irrelevant - it doesn’t make your point any stronger. Seems like you’re just trying to show off your insider knowledge of the banking industry.

Your NAV business credit score is interesting, if somewhat dated (from your favorite source of reliable news - FOX). Thanks for doing some research for a change. I am not familiar with NAV but it sounds like their credit score is more akin to a BBB rating than a Moody’s or S&P rating. More than half of the NAV score is determined by what vendors & suppliers report on late payments. It’s no big surprise that Trump entities are slow payers of vendor bills. But that doesn’t mean they failed to pay their bank lenders (the ones Tish James claims were “defrauded”) on time and in full.

You keep bringing up some generic loan application disclosure statement you say Trump signed off on. The actual document involved in this case is Trump’s Statement of Financial Condition (SFC). Why don’t we focus on that?

Here is what was actually stated in Trump’s SFC under the section entitled “Basis of Presentation”:

“Assets are stated at their estimated current values and liabilities at their estimated current amounts using various valuation methods. Such valuation methods include, but are not limited to, the use of appraisals, capitalization of anticipated earnings, recent sales and offers, and estimates of current values as determined by Mr.Trump in conjunction with his associates and, in some instances, outside professionals. Considerable judgment is necessary to interpret market data and develop the related estimates of current value. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amount that could be realized upon the disposition of the assets or payment of the related liabilities. The use of different market assumptions and/or estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated current value amounts.”

In other words - here’s a list of all my assets and liabilities, now if any of this is important to you, then do your own fucking homework and estimate what YOU think they’re worth using whatever methodologies YOU prefer. Judge Kangaroo doltishly dismissed the statement by saying it “does not rise to the level of an enforceable disclaimer” - even though every banker who reads it knows exactly what it means.

The one statement you made that is 100% correct is - “there are a variety of loan types”.

Consider this - large commercial real estate deals often involve MULTIPLE layers of debt - e.g., senior secured, junior subordinated, mezzanine, and a junk piece. They each have different levels of risk, different credit ratings, and different interest rates, even though they are each extended to the same borrower for the same project. Think about that. Now do you see why I wince whenever I read dumb sweeping generalizations such as “All Trump loans are likely some of the lowest quality”? Various loans made for the same borrower against the same property can be rated anywhere from junk to top investment-grade!

Do you know the difference between recourse versus non-recourse loans? It's quite important in real estate. For any loans that are made on a non-recourse basis, Trump’s Statement of Financial Condition is largely irrelevant since the lender has no recourse to other Trump properties/assets in the event of default. The SFC is only relevant if Trump signs a personal guaranty for the loan. Trump used to do that back in the ‘80s, but my understanding is he stopped doing it (or else did it much more infrequently) after he experienced financial problems during the recession of the early ‘90s.

This doesn’t mean banks won’t ask to see an SFC when they are reviewing a non-recourse loan request. It all falls under the maxim - know your borrower, even if you don’t have a legal claim on everything he owns.

You mention how LTV is important in pricing loans. The reality, as Kevin O’Leary emphasized, is that every borrower will tell his lender a property is worth as much as possible, and every lender will respond “yeah, yeah, sure - we’ll take our own look and then tell you how much we’re comfortable lending at what interest rate.” The borrower can scream until he is blue in the face that a property is worth $100 million, but if the bank is only willing to lend up to $50 million against it on a non-recourse basis, that’s all he’ll get, and it doesn’t matter what he imagines the FMV to be.

Spank, spank, spank... I have to stop now, my hand hurts.

[1blackman1]

None of this continued argument matters. Trump lied on the applications about easily verifiable things like property size and overvalued property incomes that were subject to rent control. No dispute there. Established in trial part one. Summary judgment granted.

The applicable statute doesn't require a victim or a complainant aside from the state. So who cares if banks complained? It's irrelevant. And a novel legal application occurs all the time in ways the original statute never intended. So stop crying about that too.

Here is an easy example called felony murder.
Joe and Bob break into a house, unarmed, believe no one is there. Sam the property owner sees burglars and gets startled. He fires his shotgun and kills Bob. Prosecutor charges Joe with burglary and murder for the death of Bob. There you have it. He wasn't armed and committed no murder but would and will be charged and likely convicted for it.

[Tiny]

The judge has ruled. Trump was ordered to pay $355 million and he's barred from running a business in the state of New York for 3 years.

Given that the judge previously declared the partial summary judgement against the defendant before hearing a word of testimony in court, we should have expected something like this.

Blackman, How do you think this will play out? Will the parties settle for a lesser amount? Is the verdict likely to be reduced on appeal?

[Tiny]

The law that Letitia James used to go after Trump was custom made to extort money from oil companies, banks, and unpopular billionaire politicians. From the New York Times,

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-may-fac...130101816.html

In other fraud cases, authorities must convince a judge or jury that someone was in fact defrauded. But 63(12) requires James only to show that conduct was deceptive or created “an atmosphere conducive to fraud.”

Once the attorney general has convinced a judge or jury that a defendant has acted deceptively, the punishment can be severe.

The article says the prosecution offered no evidence that Trump explicitly intended to fool the banks. I read elsewhere that bankers testified they were happy to get Trump's business.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

None of this continued argument matters. Trump lied on the applications about easily verifiable things like property size and overvalued property incomes that were subject to rent control. No dispute there. Established in trial part one. Summary judgment granted.

Got it! So if you go to your bank to refi a mortgage loan, and on the application you round up the square footage and give an overly generous estimate of how much you think your home is worth, then it's ok for the State of Louisiana to swoop in and invoke a similar statute to seize your home?

U cool wid dat, 1b1?

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

The applicable statute doesn't require a victim or a complainant aside from the state. So who cares if banks complained? It's irrelevant.

Except the amount of "disgorgement" damages claimed by - and now awarded to - the state is based on a wild, reckless, flaky, novel and frivolous theory that the banks WERE in fact harmed, insofar as they failed to collect the full amount of interest they should have received on their loans to Trump.

So the state just implied there ARE victims, even if the so-called victims don't agree they were victimized or shorted on interest as a result of Trump's net worth estimates. And the state intends to keep all of the obscene amount of $355 million they are confiscating in made-up damages, based on their retarded theory of how much the non-victims were victimized by Trump. They won't share a penny of it with the banks they stupidly theorize were victimized.

What a steaming crock of shit those corrupt, unprofessional, hyper-partisan elected New York Democrat hacks Tish James and Arthur Engeron have stirred up with all of this farcical nonsense!

They're turning us into a fucking Banana Republic!

[lustylad]

Judge Orders Trump To Pay Whatever Amount It Takes To Bankrupt Campaign

Feb 16, 2024

NEW YORK — Former President Trump's civil trial in New York has concluded with Judge Arthur Engoron ordering that Trump pay whatever dollar amount is necessary to bankrupt his Presidential campaign.

"I, Judge Engoron, hereby rule that President Trump must pay -- hang on, let me google what his campaign raised last quarter," said Judge Ergoron. "Oh forget it, whatever it takes to crush Trump's re-election, that's how much Trump owes. Case closed!"

The civil trial was initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James who argued that Trump received good terms on bank loans, thus endangering democracy. "Trump receiving a slightly better interest rate on a loan fifteen years ago was the death rattle of America," said James. "At last, with using Trump's conviction on a victimless crime to bankrupt one of the two major Presidential candidates, democracy has been saved."

According to legal scholars, the case hinged on whether Trump had inflated the worth of his real estate holdings in order to secure more favorable loan rates. After careful review, Judge Ergoron ruled that Trump's 63,000 square-foot mansion at Mar-A-Lago, including multiple beaches, was worth approximately eight dollars. As such, Judge Ergoron declared that banks had been nice to Trump, which clearly caused people living in New York terrible distress, and that could only be assuaged by Trump being forced to pay enough money to destroy his campaign.

At publishing time, Judge Ergoron had also ruled that Trump had to also pay off the national debt and go pick up his dry cleaning.

[eyecu2]

The moral of the story is don't lie on your fucking application. If you do, and it's in the state of New York, you're going to get your dick kicked in.

I'll bet that mushroom headed monster is a 1-in peewee right now and flatter than a fucking pancake. Engoron did not just kick him, he fucking cow kicked him and then used a sledge hammer to seal the deal.

Couldn't happen to a more fitting person.

Maybe a fire sale to reorganize the dumbass Trump Org.

I hope they pry all the letters off the buildings and let a steamroller flatten them just like Trump's peepee got stomped in today's ruling

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Judge Orders Trump To Pay Whatever Amount It Takes To Bankrupt Campaign

Feb 16, 2024

NEW YORK — Former President Trump's civil trial in New York has concluded with Judge Arthur Engoron ordering that Trump pay whatever dollar amount is necessary to bankrupt his Presidential campaign.

"I, Judge Engoron, hereby rule that President Trump must pay -- hang on, let me google what his campaign raised last quarter," said Judge Ergoron. "Oh forget it, whatever it takes to crush Trump's re-election, that's how much Trump owes. Case closed!"

The civil trial was initiated by New York Attorney General Letitia James who argued that Trump received good terms on bank loans, thus endangering democracy. "Trump receiving a slightly better interest rate on a loan fifteen years ago was the death rattle of America," said James. "At last, with using Trump's conviction on a victimless crime to bankrupt one of the two major Presidential candidates, democracy has been saved."

According to legal scholars, the case hinged on whether Trump had inflated the worth of his real estate holdings in order to secure more favorable loan rates. After careful review, Judge Ergoron ruled that Trump's 63,000 square-foot mansion at Mar-A-Lago, including multiple beaches, was worth approximately eight dollars. As such, Judge Ergoron declared that banks had been nice to Trump, which clearly caused people living in New York terrible distress, and that could only be assuaged by Trump being forced to pay enough money to destroy his campaign.

At publishing time, Judge Ergoron had also ruled that Trump had to also pay off the national debt and go pick up his dry cleaning.

[1blackman1]

Trump lost and will continue losing. He’ll lose on appeal because the judges MSJ ruling is pretty spot on. There wasn't a factual question as to whether some fraud was committed. Multiplying square footage by 3 and claiming market rent for rent control properties isn't much of a factual dispute. I'm pretty sure that's fraud. As for the judgment amount, it's likely the appellate court would say 355 is high but they would maybe lower it to 250 or something but that's not guaranteed.

So to answer your question Tiny - the judgment might get modified some but not to an extent that Trump will be happy with the result. As for the MSJ, it's pretty clear that Trump lied, unsurprisingly since that's what he does all the time, and he committed fraud.

The only people that think he didn't commit fraud are very stupid.

As for the law, que sera sera

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by 1blackman1

The only people that think he didn't commit fraud are very stupid.

Who are you talking about? Judge Engeron? You mean this guy?




So you think he should be prosecuted for fraud under statute §63(12) for grossly DEFLATING trumpy's property values for political gain?

Hmmm... he DID claim Mar-a-Lago is only worth $18 million, didn't he?

Sounds like a bold, novel approach to enforcing statute §63(12)! Go for it, 1b1!

To prove this Kangaroo Judge committed fraud, all we need to do is invite any Palm Beach realtor to testify at his trial!

What the fuck... let's invite ALL of 'em!


"Palm Beach real estate agents who specialize in high-end properties scoffed at the idea that the estate could be worth that little, in the unlikely event Trump ever sold.

“Ludicrous,” agent Liza Pulitzer said about the judge citing the county’s tax appraisal as a benchmark. Homes a tenth the size of Mar-a-Lago on tiny inland lots sell for that in the Town of Palm Beach, a wealthy island enclave.

“The entire real estate community felt it was a joke when they saw that figure,” said Pulitzer, who works for the firm Brown Harris Stevens.

“That thing would get snapped up for hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars,” said Rob Thomson, owner of Waterfront Properties and a Mar-a-Lago member. “There is zero chance that it’s going to sell for $40 million or $50 million.”

Pulitzer said the rock-bottom price for Mar-a-Lago would be $300 million. Thomson said at least $600 million. If uber-billionaires got into a bidding war, they said, a sale of a billion dollars or more would be possible."

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/new...is-fraud-trial

[Yssup Rider]

Feel bad for the unamerican RWWs willingly, gleefully following the pied piper of Dipshittery.

No turning back now.

Unless…

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by Tiny

The judge has ruled. Trump was ordered to pay $355 million and he's barred from running a business in the state of New York for 3 years.

Given that the judge previously declared the partial summary judgement against the defendant before hearing a word of testimony in court, we should have expected something like this.

Blackman, How do you think this will play out? Will the parties settle for a lesser amount? Is the verdict likely to be reduced on appeal?

any reasonable appellate court would vastly reduce if not void this egregious politically motivated over use of a biased law.



Dissolving Trump's business empire would stand apart in history of NY fraud law

https://www.yahoo.com/news/taking-aw...061712563.html

Originally Posted by Tiny

The law that Letitia James used to go after Trump was custom made to extort money from oil companies, banks, and unpopular billionaire politicians. From the New York Times,

https://news.yahoo.com/trump-may-fac...130101816.html

In other fraud cases, authorities must convince a judge or jury that someone was in fact defrauded. But 63(12) requires James only to show that conduct was deceptive or created “an atmosphere conducive to fraud.”

Once the attorney general has convinced a judge or jury that a defendant has acted deceptively, the punishment can be severe.

The article says the prosecution offered no evidence that Trump explicitly intended to fool the banks. I read elsewhere that bankers testified they were happy to get Trump's business.

again which is unprecedented in the use of this "anti-corruption" law



in fact, as far as Deutsche Bank is concerned, Trump's loan i read came not from their general lending but from a high net worth private investment branch who would love to hook a whale like Trump and if they looked away from Trump's numbers to get the whale what's the crime here again??

did i mention Trump paid this and all other "so-called" tainted loans?

bahahahaa

Originally Posted by eyecu2

The moral of the story is don't lie on your fucking application. If you do, and it's in the state of New York, you're going to get your dick kicked in.

I'll bet that mushroom headed monster is a 1-in peewee right now and flatter than a fucking pancake. Engoron did not just kick him, he fucking cow kicked him and then used a sledge hammer to seal the deal.

Couldn't happen to a more fitting person.

Maybe a fire sale to reorganize the dumbass Trump Org.

I hope they pry all the letters off the buildings and let a steamroller flatten them just like Trump's peepee got stomped in today's ruling

if you say so

Originally Posted by lustylad

Who are you talking about? Judge Engeron? You mean this guy?




So you think he should be prosecuted for fraud under statute §63(12) for grossly DEFLATING trumpy's property values for political gain?

Hmmm... he DID claim Mar-a-Lago is only worth $18 million, didn't he?

Sounds like a bold, novel approach to enforcing statute §63(12)! Go for it, 1b1!

To prove this Kangaroo Judge committed fraud, all we need to do is invite any Palm Beach realtor to testify at his trial!

What the fuck... let's invite ALL of 'em!


"Palm Beach real estate agents who specialize in high-end properties scoffed at the idea that the estate could be worth that little, in the unlikely event Trump ever sold.

“Ludicrous,” agent Liza Pulitzer said about the judge citing the county’s tax appraisal as a benchmark. Homes a tenth the size of Mar-a-Lago on tiny inland lots sell for that in the Town of Palm Beach, a wealthy island enclave.

“The entire real estate community felt it was a joke when they saw that figure,” said Pulitzer, who works for the firm Brown Harris Stevens.

“That thing would get snapped up for hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars,” said Rob Thomson, owner of Waterfront Properties and a Mar-a-Lago member. “There is zero chance that it’s going to sell for $40 million or $50 million.”

Pulitzer said the rock-bottom price for Mar-a-Lago would be $300 million. Thomson said at least $600 million. If uber-billionaires got into a bidding war, they said, a sale of a billion dollars or more would be possible."

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/new...is-fraud-trial

ah the Mar-a-Lago valuation! it's actually true it's 18 million. by the tax assessor's office. by the current usage as a "private club" and at that the property given it's history and expansive estate is "low valued" even as a private club. Trump had to agree not to subdivide the estate to get it classified as a private club but it doesn't restrict him from selling Mar-a-Lago as a private estate and as lusty notes any real estate expert would tell you if you could buy Mar-a-Lago for 18 million as a private residence it would be the greatest case of "Grand Theft Real Estate" in history


bahahahaaaa

[VitaMan]

3 sets of books were kept

One for the bankers
One for the IRS
And possibly one correct set

Of course MAGAs blame someone else

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by VitaMan

3 sets of books were kept

One for the bankers
One for the IRS
And possibly one correct set

Of course MAGAs blame someone else

if you say so


bahahaaa

[VitaMan]

You can call Weisselberg for verification and see what he says.

Remember him ? ...convicted felon who was the chief financial officer (CFO) of the Trump Organization.