Grab 'em by the ... property

#26
#26
BigOrangeMojo said:
One way to determine valuation (especially for commercial real estate) is utilizing good, solid income statements showing operating income that you can apply a cap rate to.

The physical value of a building (which a bank can verify on their diligence) is important as that's the banks collateral but the operating metrics are important in determining risk...

Where Trump got into trouble wasn't exaggerating building value but providing fraudulent income statements for risk purposes...
Click to expand...
When I am securing loans with rentals for collateral, the bank asks for my tax documents where I show gross and net rent receipts.

Is that not common when loaning on a massive scale like Trump?
 
#27
#27
Jxn Vol said:
The funny thing the OP doesn’t understand is that Trump may willfully let NY seize them during the appeal process. The state must foot the bill to keep them in correct condition. Then when the SC overturns the fine due to excessive amount like they have a history of doing. He will get his property back all while saving a pile of money that NY has been covering. He wins in the end and the rube OP doesn’t even realize it.
Click to expand...
Please source this if you can.
 
#28
#28
dalton_vol said:
Lol, comedy. So i give false driving records, because im a crappy driver, though i have no accidents or tickets? No proof im a bad driver? Are you really a lawyer? I don't remember an insurance company taking only my word as a driver
Click to expand...
I'm trying to explain uncompensated risk to a simpleton. My point is simply that if the insurer (or bank, it doesn't really matter) has a false picture of the risk it's taking on, and therefore fails to properly price the risk, it can be defrauded even if it doesn't have to pay out a claim (insurer) or if the loan is paid back in full on time (bank). You dig yet, or do I need to break out the crayons?
 
#29
#29
evillawyer said:
Judgment debtors get their sh*t seized. Been happening for a long time. Weird folks weren't upset about this before Trump came along.
Click to expand...
The whole thing is dirty politics BS and you should know it…. But your 400 cats and TDS are apparently affecting your judgement
 
#31
#31
BigOrangeMojo said:
The banks were never going to get on the stand and publicly criticize their underwriting/diligence process either...

Concerns about process around establishing reserves on underwriting is what caused Signature and Credit Suisse to implode in 2023...

All that being said, the way the judge got to his fine makes no economic sense either
Click to expand...
Trump hater or not….. people should have the ability to see this for what it is
 
  • Like
Reactions: norrislakevol
#32
#32
McDad said:
When I am securing loans with rentals for collateral, the bank asks for my tax documents where I show gross and net rent receipts.

Is that not common when loaning on a massive scale like Trump?
Click to expand...

If you look at 40 Wall Street, the collateral was significantly more than loan balance. Bank probably spent bulk of time doing diligence making sure of no other liens, etc....

That was where they would have got dinged here...
 
#34
#34
BigOrangeMojo said:
If you look at 40 Wall Street, the collateral was significantly more than most conservative estimate of property's value. Bank probably spent bulk of time doing diligence making sure of no other liens, etc....

That was where they would have got dinged here...
Click to expand...
The lenders spent the resources verifying the value of the property, the status of its title, and any liens against but didn't look at his real estate schedule E (or equivalent) on his taxes?
 
#35
#35
McDad said:
The lenders spent the resources verifying the value of the property, the status of its title, and any liens against but didn't look at his real estate schedule E (or equivalent) on his taxes?
Click to expand...

It appears they relied on the financial statements prepard by his accounting firm. Of course, what Trump's CFO gave them was dummy statements....
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#37
#37
McDad said:
Two things: 1. Wish I had access to that type of lender. 2. I hope I have no investment in that bank.
Click to expand...

He had done business with Deutsche for years. Of course, Trump could have created a Fake Schedule E too...

Given extensions, the most recent tax return could have included activity between 21-33 months old too...(Sept 2011 loan origination would be 2009 tax info, for example
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#38
#38
BigOrangeMojo said:
He had done business with Deutsche for years. Of course, Trump could have created a Fake Schedule E too...

Given extensions, the most recent tax return could have included activity between 21-33 months old too...(Sept 2011 loan origination would be 2009 tax info, for example
Click to expand...
Different set of rules for me. I've been with same bank for 20 years but still get my tax, PnL, and PFS in annually.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#40
#40
hog88 said:
I do believe he is wildly incorrect.
Click to expand...
Not sure if this is the same, but in Georgia, if there is an illegal foreclosure, the party foreclosing is liable for damages, including punitive.

So, New York seizes the assets and fire sales them. Federal courts wind up ruling the fine was excessive under the 8th Amendment (Federal appeal would not be subject to the state's requirement on bonding would it, since the excessive fine essentially and effectively prevented bond from being posted?). Given James' big-mouth pronouncements, it was obvious she intended to cause harm. Would be interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1
#41
#41
GroverCleveland said:
Not sure if this is the same, but in Georgia, if there is an illegal foreclosure, the party foreclosing is liable for damages, including punitive.

So, New York seizes the assets and fire sales them. Federal courts wind up ruling the fine was excessive under the 8th Amendment (Federal appeal would not be subject to the state's requirement on bonding would it, since the excessive fine essentially and effectively prevented bond from being posted?). Given James' big-mouth pronouncements, it was obvious she intended to cause harm. Would be interesting.
Click to expand...

IDK if the 8th would apply since this was a civil case and not a criminal. It might not even be subject to federal review.

What it would do is send NY real-estate and investment reeling.
 
#42
#42
hog88 said:
IDK if the 8th would apply since this was a civil case and not a criminal. It might not even be subject to federal review.

What it would do is send NY real-estate and investment reeling.
Click to expand...
I have wondered that as well, but as it comes under a state statute, prosecuted by the state and executed to the state's benefit, I am not so sure the "civil" label will shield it from 8A.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wireless1, McDad and StarRaider
#44
#44
GroverCleveland said:
Not sure if this is the same, but in Georgia, if there is an illegal foreclosure, the party foreclosing is liable for damages, including punitive.

So, New York seizes the assets and fire sales them. Federal courts wind up ruling the fine was excessive under the 8th Amendment (Federal appeal would not be subject to the state's requirement on bonding would it, since the excessive fine essentially and effectively prevented bond from being posted?). Given James' big-mouth pronouncements, it was obvious she intended to cause harm. Would be interesting.
Click to expand...
I'll be the first to admit I am not knowledgeable on these types of situations but aren't you describing a private entity for closing on someone? And are the rules the same for a public entity like a state court?
 
  • Like
Reactions: GroverCleveland
#48
#48
hog88 said:
IDK if the 8th would apply since this was a civil case and not a criminal. It might not even be subject to federal review.

What it would do is send NY real-estate and investment reeling.
Click to expand...
Is civil forfeiture not subject to federal view?
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top