| |||||||||||||||||||||
Tuesday, February 8, 2005 Headlines--- Classified ads---Collector/Controller ######## surrounding the article denotes it is a “press release”
----------------------------------------------------------------- Classified ads---Collector/Controller Collector
Full listing of all ads here: http://64.125.68.90/LeasingNews/JobPostings.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------- Economic Events This Week March 9 March 10 March 11 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Why 43 Leasing Companies? ---An “interview” with the “top” FTC Leasing Company Prosecutor by Christopher Menkin These questions came from a person I call the top Federal Trade Commission leasing equipment prosecutor, who called me to talk about “forced insurance.” In less than the first 30 seconds, I picked up he not only knew quite a bit about equipment leasing, just by the words he used, the vernacular, but by the questions he started with. It was not until the end of the conversation did I get to ask him for his background. I learned he had a history of winning cases as the lead attorney against those who violate the law, including large equipment leasing companies. “How about a leasing company then that gets ten NorVergence leases to fund in the same day, all the contracts have the same equipment, one Matrix box, nothing else, and the contracts range from $20,000, $50,000,$150,000...Wouldn't someone question that?” My mind went to Doug Hatch at Bank of the West, Allen Moehle at Pacific Capital Bank Leasing, Alan Kissinger at Financial Pacific, and even Marlin Leasing wants social security numbers on principals from a vendor less than one year in business for a $5,000 lease. I also thought of the heads of funding departments that I had direct experience with, and their staff, no way would this happen at any of their places. In my experience, they pick apart some standard issues, questioning everything, let alone something as obvious as this. I did not answer the question, but thought there were 43 leasing companies who funded NorVergence leases. In the course of funding the leases, no one asked why? “Also don't you think it is strange that a county assessor's office gets leasing company filings for equipment, one matrix box, and the dollar amounts are quite different on each one? Wouldn't that raise a red flag somewhere with the person making the filing for the leasing company?” “What about leases written at a 25% yield to the lessor for excellent credits for leases from $50,000 to $200,000 lease, wouldn't that ring someone's chimes? I have talked to many of the local districts attorney prosecuting staff and various state attorneys general top fraud and telecom chiefs and their staffs on this subject, who knew the law, but where I had to explain more basic. In each conversation, they were becoming more familiar with the “procedures” of equipment leasing, but talking with this top FTC prosecutor was like talking with a Certified Leasing Professional. He knew about computing leases on an HP calculator, the going “buy rates” at various leasing companies and banks, their restrictions on commissions, and the procedures used when funding a lease. Specifically I did not ask him if this was “off the record,” and to be fair about it, I am keeping it that way. If I had asked his permission, he would most likely have said no, and then I would not be able to write about our conversation. He did not make any comment or opinion about the matter, so there really is nothing to divulge, except for the questions he asked, which I thought were pretty revealing of what he knows and the direction he may be headed when he goes to court The telephone call was arranged via e-mail about the comments I had made on a Yahoo listserve ( he evidently reads the message board or receives the e-mails.) In addition to writing about the calamity, the fact that I was not only in the leasing business, but was a licensed insurance broker at one time, he wanted to know about “forced insurance,” as he called it, the practice in the industry in determining and enforcing it; basically the procedure leasing companies used when the lessee did not provide insurance, how it works and what is covered ( meaning replacement of the Matrix box.) He went through several scenarios of a fire or a burglary of the business and the procedure of how the equipment value is obtained for replacement or the insurance claim is process from the leasing company's viewpoint. Surprisingly I learned most of the ERA insurance was not on the “cost to lessor” or “invoice cost,” but on the “stream of payments.” He wanted to know how common that was, and the procedure the leasing companies used, along with providing “more” names of insurance companies who provide this service to leasing companies. He wanted to know the procedure on how the “equipment” was listed on the certificate, and would an insurance agent question the value, or if the agent had several requests for insurance certificates for the same equipment at different dollar amounts, how would that work? And how would that work from the leasing company's requests or “forced insurance,” especially if it were on the “stream of payments” and not the “invoice” cost. While I thought most insurance agents have their staff type up the certificates, rarely do they look at them or even question the value of the equipment. Perhaps if it were a vehicle and they saw it was a 1989 Pontiac for $50,000, it would certainly raise questions, but a piece of equipment that they know nothing about and are relying on their customer and also the leasing company who requested it, rather doubt it would be questioned. Even if the agent had several clients where the amounts differed but the equipment was the same description: one matrix box. The time to correct any problem with the dollar amount was upon signing the lease contract and the insurance verification form, and more than likely the verification by the insurance agent. A replacement would be normally on the “cost to lessor” or “invoice cost” and not the “stream of payments.” He wanted to know in the “forced insurance” program if the company was receiving many of these requests on the same type of equipment, would that be normal. Also if the equipment was always the same, but the dollar amounts varied from $10,000 to $75,000, would the insurance company question this? I did not answer the question, but thought there were 43 leasing companies who funded NorVergence leases. Why? Did they ask similar questions? We talked about many such “forced insurance” situations and procedures. I told him if he wanted to speak to some leasing company officers about their company's procedures, I would try to open the door for him on an informal basis rather than a deposition. He then asked about the funding of ten leases a day, and in some instances, there were more than that at one leasing company. In all the lease contracts, the equipment was the same, one matrix box, not other information or models, and in some cases, two matrix boxes, all at varying prices from $10,000 to one $260,000. In most states, service, software, and other such costs are not subject to personal property tax. The lessor was going by the "invoice cost" or what is known as "cost to lessor." Most contend they were not aware of the soft costs in the lease. Most likely all the lease figures submitted to the county are incorrect and the lessee should receive a refund in almost all the instances. The lessee is entitled to a copy of what the county charged the lessor to compare what the lessor charged the lessee---another issue that complicates all the matters. “What about the ‘implied interest rate?” In one of the depositions I read on an vice-president of a “bundler” of leases, they had a 12% buy-rate and NorVergence could not discount a contract over 120% of the cost, meaning their “commission” or “administrative fee” could not exceed 20%--no restriction of dollar amount either meaning, a $10,000 or $75,000 lease, under this “application only” program. From some of the contracts I saw, the commissions were well over 15% all the time, on some top credits. I did not answer the question, but thought there were 43 leasing companies who funded NorVergence leases and wondered if they all were giving such high commissions or “administrative fees.” I have seen several where the discount was capped at 120% of the “invoice cost.” I was told by an ex-employee IFC Credit had 25% yields on their leases. Another subject centered around late charges and other fees, especially in states where commercial leases may also be considered “consumer” leases, such as in Massachusetts, where “enterprises and consumers” fall into the same category, plus laws regarding telecommunication which may have other such provisions and equal the production afforded similar to the federal consumer credit act. In the Leasecomm matter, the settlement cancelled $24 million in what were called “deceptively obtained judgments against consumers.” From the FTC press release: "Leasecomm's customers got a one-two punch," said Howard Beales, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "Leasecomm used sellers of highly suspect business opportunities to sell its financing, and then claimed it had no responsibility for their deception. Companies that try to hide behind the fine print in contracts and lie to consumers about what they're were signing, whether directly or through agents, simply do not pass muster." Another question I could not answer: “Could these lessors also claim depreciation or other benefits, as there was no residual at the end of any of the ERA leases? Is that also why the insurance was based on the stream of lease payments?” Other questions I could explain, but had no direct knowledge or specific information. “Let's get back to the leasing companies as they have credit and other requirements. How would they accept the ERA contracts, let alone NorVergence as a ‘discounter' of leases?” This was an easy one to answer as I have personal experience in this. When I first started out discounting and then establishing recourse lines of credit, I would take submit the contract I wanted to use. No one ever asked who was the author ( Barry Dubin, Cooper-White-Cooper) and the Crocker bank attorneys looked it over, and then when I went to Wells, the Wells Fargo attorneys, looked it over. When I went to Union bank, I told them Wells and Crocker approved it. They never checked this statement out, as I would have known, and when I went to the next source, and told them Union Bank, Wells Fargo, and Crocker banker approved it, they never questioned. In opening lines at community banks, they stopped asking as they would check out the experience at the previous banks, look at the financial statements, personal guarantee, and that was that. So once one or two approved it, everyone trusted what I told them. The same most likely happened with the NorVergence “Equipment Rental Agreement,” although it does look like a “ hodge-podge” and even I could see sections that would be difficult to hold up in most state courts as to how they were worded ( now not an opinion, but reality as ruled by various federal and state judges.) The same procedure is how NorVergence also got into some of the larger leasing companies. In stories hat Leasing News wrote about RW Professional, how hey made a settlement with Old Kent Bank Leasing News had been writing about NorVergence complaints for approximately two years, settling the complaints, and also questioning the involvement of the president of a leasing association, who we spoke to on numerous occasions. During this time, we were threatened with legal action, but did answer telephone calls, including one with top officer of a major bank, who was approached o fund these leases, but heard about some of our articles. We told him not to do it, and why. He then named several financial firms and banks that were funding these transactions, and because of that was quite tempted as the credits looked very good of samples he had been given. He was one of many who called us after the bankruptcy to thank us for the warning. Despite the references they had given him, we had cautioned him enough that he did not want to put his bank at risk. Interestingly it appears from what I have talked to NorVergence lessees, there were no professional leasing consultants or brokers involved directly, including leasing companies. All of this was handled by the NorVergence sales representative. They were not given any alternatives and told to sign the contract if they wanted “service.” It also does not appear that systems were “purchased” outright, although there may be cases of that. In the bankruptcy hearing in New Jersey, NorVergence estimated they had 11,000 leases ( “Equipment Rental Agreements.) The “top” leasing FTC prosecutor never asked why so many leasing companies were required in the fundings of these “Equipment Rental Agreements.” My count from the various list serves was 43, although 25 are being “prosecuted” today. In several instances, from depositions, several leasing companies cut off NorVergence when they started received complaints from their lessees, or learned more about what they were leasing, perhaps. Perhaps they eventually began to ask why the same equipment with a great disparity of “cost to lessor ” in fundings, insurance, personal property tax ,and NorVergence was forced to find other sources. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Another Hammered Down Leasing News printed the NorVergence "Equipment Rental Agreement" Here, the acceleration clause in the NorVergence rental contract form is ruled a penalty under Texas law because it may be invoked upon even a minor default. Attorney Paul H. Cross of Irving, Texas represent the lessee in this case against IFC Credit Corporation. Here is a copy of the summary judgment: http://leasingnews.org/PDF/Salazar,JohnR.pdf ---------------------------------------------------------------- Trustee looks for help with Cyberco By Ed White The Grand Rapids Press Mlive.com GRAND RAPIDS -- The trustee overseeing the bankruptcy of Cyberco Holdings wants help from former executives as he tries to tally numbers at the collapsed high-tech company. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Jeffrey Hughes soon will order James Horton to assist the trustee's legal team, but not the widow of deceased Cyberco chief Barton Watson -- at least not yet. Krista Kotlarz-Watson has "limited knowledge of all the workings" at Cyberco, also known as the CyberNET Group, her attorney told the judge Thursday. "She's not quite sure what her role was," Perry Pastula said. "She relied on her husband ... and did what he asked her to do." The company imploded in November when authorities discovered Cyberco was acquiring millions of dollars in loans for equipment that didn't exist. The money instead was used to enrich Watson, his wife and others, the FBI alleges. No charges have been filed. While federal authorities investigate, creditors are in Bankruptcy Court seeking any assets. The trustee's attorney, Steve Rayman, needs help compiling lists of assets and liabilities. He also would like to learn more about the company's dealings with lenders, although cooperation might be limited. Statements by Horton, Kotlarz-Watson or financial chief David Roepke could be used against them in the criminal probe. "If they're going to take the Fifth, they're going to take the Fifth," Hughes said, referring to the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Outside court, Rayman acknowledged that "criminal law trumps what we do." He would like to talk to former company officials off the record, but that would require approval from the U.S. Attorney's Office. Meanwhile, there is a March 15 hearing on the trustee's request to sell furniture, equipment and other assets at CyberNET offices at 25 S. Division Ave. The company's wine collection also will be sold. The documents show the government has now officially seized millions in cash from the company's four bank accounts, which each have roughly three-quarters of a million dollars, a baby drop in the bucket for what is alleged. At least 400 creditors (many are leasing companies) are looking for $60 million, maybe $65 million. Authorities believe they might be able to scrape up $5 million, maybe $10 million, in assets, leaving about $50 million still missing. New names in the affidavit pop up as well, like Geraldine Watson, the mother of Barton Watson who killed himself in November after a raid of the business on Division Avenue. It is alleged that Barton and wife Krista were masters at duping creditors. At one point, they secured a $17 million line of credit from Huntington Bank. The St. Louis Business Journal reports: Three regional banks -- Heartland Bank, Pioneer Bank and Trust in St. Louis, and Bank Midwest of Kansas City -- are owed more than $7.6 million, and possibly as much as $11 million, by a bankrupt Grand Rapids, Mich., technology company. Pioneer Bank Chief Executive Gaines Dittrich said when the bank saw the loan could be a problem, it sold the note to its parent company, Forbes First Financial Corp. in St. Louis, to remove it from Pioneer's books. Tom Brouster, the primary owner of Forbes First Financial, could not be reached for comment. "This will have no impact on the bank," Dittrich said, adding that Pioneer's earnings for 2004 were up 50 percent to $3.75 million from 2003's earnings of $2.5 million. CyberCo.'s alleged fraud began to unravel in mid-November, a little more than a week after some of the banks had loaned millions of dollars to the company, according to court documents outlining CyberNET's dealings. Charter One Vendor Finance of Illinois sued CyberCo in Michigan Nov. 19 claiming it loaned CyberNET $3 million to buy 66 computer servers. Charter One said it could find only 25 servers at the company's Grand Rapids headquarters, and CyberNET's executives could not provide an explanation for the missing equipment. Within days, other lenders also inspected CyberNET's offices and could find none of the equipment covered in their loan agreements. On Nov. 25, after a standoff with local police, CyberCo's Watson was found dead in his home from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. Creditors forced CyberCo Holdings into bankruptcy in December. The company had assets of $4 million and liabilities of $65 million. "We haven't been able to see all the records, because they were seized by the FBI," said Steve Rayman, an attorney in Kalamazoo, Mich., representing CyberCo's bankruptcy trustee. CyberCo made its connection with the St. Louis banks through a loan broker who had brought prospective loan clients to those banks before, said a banker familiar with CyberCo's loans in St. Louis. Riverbend Capital Group in St. Louis County is identified in the bankruptcy documents as a loan broker that had secured loans for CyberCo from Pioneer Bank. Pioneer's attorneys want a deposition, or formal testimony, from Riverbend's president, Tom Sears, about the CyberCo case, according to bankruptcy court documents. Sears said he has not given a deposition in the case and is not at liberty to discuss the matter. Heartland Bank is represented in the CyberCo case by Greg Willard, who leads the bankruptcy practice at the Bryan Cave law firm. The other area banks hired law firms based in Michigan. Loan brokers shop prospective deals to banks for customers that usually have been turned down in their home market, according to banking industry observers. Brokered loans can carry higher interest rates, but also present a greater risk. Executives at a bank making loans on computer equipment two states away should raise questions about why the loan could not get funded in the company's own backyard, those industry observers said. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Classified Ads---Help Wanted Collection Attorney
Middle Market Sales Representative
National Account Manager
Platform Business Manager / Asset Manager
Sales Professionals
Small Ticket Sales Representative
----------------------------------------------------------------- Wells Fargo's Entire ATM Network Web-Enabled Bank Technology News Wells Fargo announced that its entire network of roughly 6,200 ATMs is now Web-enabled. Wells' ATMs feature six language screen options, customizable fast cash amounts, access to 22 financial accounts, and a voice-recognition function for the visually impaired in both English and Spanish. Wells said its ATMs and 3,000 on-line stations in nearly all of its branches are a vital part of its strategy to integrate all channels. Very few of the bank's customers are single-channel users, according to bank officials. Customers are conducting as many transactions at the ATM as they do with a teller, the officials said. Wells Fargo began deploying its Web-enabled ATM in May 2000. The bank says the Windows-based infrastructure allows it to make updates and add new services to its entire network remotely. The platform also makes it easier for Wells to make future systems improvements such as adding new languages or the ability to accept envelope-free deposits. ---------------------------------------------------------------- What-Me, worry??? “I have met Sal several times when I worked at Citicapital. “I can absolutely assure you, there is no relationship between the Maglietta and Newman family.” Best regards, Brian Carey -- “Kit, you got the wrong photograph of Sal Maglietta as the new president and CEO of U.S. Bancorp Equipment Finance. “Here is his picture:” ----------------------------------------------------------------- Leasing Meetings Open to Non-Members March 17th United Association of Equipment Leasing Regional Meeting Thursday, March 17th 2005 Please reserve your ticket by Monday, March 7th, via email at: for more information, please go here: ---------- March 30th Lunch Meeting Eastern Equipment and Leasing Association Wednesday, March 30th 2005 Longfellows Wayside Inn For additional information and registration, please contact the EAEL office at 212-809-1602 ---------- April 5th Lunch Meeting Eastern Equipment and Leasing Association Tuesday, April 5th 2005 Charley's Crab Cleveland, Ohio For additional information and registration, please contact the EAEL office at 212-809-1602 ----------------------------------------------------------------- ### Press Release ###################### Financial Federal Corporation Declares Quarterly Dividend Announces 19% Net Income Increase 2nd Quarter NEW YORK------Financial Federal Corporation (NYSE:FIF) announced that its Board of Directors has declared a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share on its common stock. The dividend is payable on April 29, 2005 to stockholders of record at the close of business on March 28, 2005. The dividend rate is unchanged from the previous quarter. -- Net Income - $9.2 million (a 19% increase) Financial Federal Corporation (NYSE:FIF) announced its results for the second quarter ended January 31, 2005. Net income for the second quarter of fiscal 2005 was $9.2 million, a 19% increase from the $7.8 million earned in the prior year. Diluted earnings per share increased by 26% to $0.53 from $0.42. Diluted earnings per share increased by a higher percentage than net income due to our repurchase of 1.5 million shares of common stock in April 2004. Finance receivables originated during the quarter were a record $274 million ($43 million higher than the previous record amount set in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004) compared to $180 million in the prior year. Finance receivables outstanding grew at an annualized rate of 10% to $1.53 billion at January 31, 2005 compared to $1.46 billion at July 31, 2004. For the first six months of fiscal 2005 and 2004, net income was $17.8 million and $14.9 million, respectively, a 19% increase. Diluted earnings per share increased by 27% to $1.03 from $0.81. Finance receivables originated increased by 41% to $493 million from $349 million. Paul R. Sinsheimer, CEO, commented: "Positive trends in growth, asset quality and profitability continued in the second quarter. Receivable originations were the highest in the company's history, possibly fostered by our customers' seeking to benefit from an expiring tax incentive. We are encouraged by the strong level of demand for equipment financing and our positive results, but we remain concerned about the near-term effects of rising interest rates and the impact of continued high energy prices." Steven F. Groth, CFO, remarked: "Our recent credit rating upgrade, driven by our solid operating performance, is enabling us to improve credit spreads, extend debt maturities and maintain substantial liquidity. We produced an 11.5% return on equity for the quarter with our debt-to-equity ratio remaining in the range of 3.5x to 3.6x. Additionally, our Board of Directors has declared our second quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share." Financial Federal Corporation Steven F. Groth, 212-599-8000 Full press release available at: ### Press Release ###################### O'Charley's Inc. Conducting Review of Lease Accounting NASHVILLE, Tenn.----O'Charley's Inc. (NASDAQ/NM:CHUX), a leading casual dining restaurant company, announced that it is reviewing its accounting practices with respect to leasing transactions as a result of a recent clarification of United States generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). On February 7, 2005, the Office of the Chief Accountant of the SEC issued a letter to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants expressing its views regarding certain operating lease accounting issues and their application under GAAP. In the ensuing weeks many restaurant companies and retailers have reviewed their previous interpretations of the lease accounting issues and have subsequently announced that they will be restating their results for prior periods. In light of this letter, the Company initiated a review of its lease-related accounting methods. Based on this review, as well as discussions with the Company's independent auditors and its Audit Committee, the Company determined that its accounting for leases was not in conformity with GAAP as described in the SEC's letter. Accordingly, on March 3, 2005, management and the Audit Committee determined that the Company would be required to restate its previously issued consolidated financial statements, including those contained in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal years ended December 29, 2002, and December 28, 2003, and those in the Company's Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarters ended April 18, 2004, July 11, 2004, and October 3, 2004. Further, management and the Audit Committee have determined that the Company's unaudited consolidated financial results included in the Company's press release issued on February 3, 2005, should likewise no longer be relied upon. The Company is working diligently to complete its review of these matters and to quantify the impact of the necessary adjustments on each of the affected prior periods. Adjustments will have no affect on historical or future cash flows or the timing of payments under the related leases, nor will they affect the Company's compliance with covenants under its credit facility. The Company does not anticipate that the review will have an impact on its previously issued guidance for the first fiscal quarter of 2005. Due to the time and effort involved in determining the effect of these adjustments on the Company's historical financial statements, the Company intends to file a Form 12b-25 and to delay the filing of its Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004, which the Company now expects to file on or before March 28, 2005. The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 26, 2004, will include disclosure of the effects of the adjustments on the financial statements of each of the periods included in the audited financial statements. The Company also intends to file amended quarterly reports for the fiscal quarters ended April 18, 2004, July 11, 2004, and October 3, 2004. About O'Charley's Inc. O'Charley's Inc. operates 223 company-owned O'Charley's restaurants in 16 states in the Southeast and Midwest, with two franchised O'Charley's restaurants in Michigan.. The Company also operates Ninety Nine Restaurant & Pub restaurants in 100 locations throughout Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. O'Charley's Inc., Nashville Lawrence E. Hyatt, 615-782-8818 ### Press Release ####################
News Briefs--- Small Business Optimism Steady in February Wachovia's taxes triple in '04 due to no more “SILO” Chief of Riggs Bank Resigns, Citing Its Pending Merger With PNC Tyco Witness Tells of Undisclosed Benefits Justices, 7-2, Reject Secrecy at Tax Court Snow: Bono may make short list for World Bank Institutional Investor's Inaugural Securitization News Awards Wednesday night will be Dan Rather's last at the anchor desk. Martha Stewart, back at work after five months in prison, says she is a changed woman Extramarital affair topples Boeing CEO --------------------------------------------------------------- “Gimme that Wine” California vintners harvest banner sales abroad Record Number Earn Master Sommelier Diploma; Eleven Wine Professionals Awarded Master Sommelier Title Sommelier training uncorks intimate education in the grape Napa winemaker extends family tradition North Carolina Wine enthusiast broadens horizons ----------------------------------------------------------------- This Day in American History 1717 - On Fishers Island in Long Island Sound, 1200 sheep were discovered to have been buried under a snow drift for four weeks. When finally uncovered, one hundred sheep were still alive. Stanley Cup Champions This Date 1943 Detroit Red Wings ---------------------------------------------------------------- Baseball Poem In honor of “Hammerin' Hank's 714 home run, the days before baseball players started using steroids to improve their performances. Our regular series of baseball poems will be when the season official opens. Hammerin' Hank by D. Roger Martin © You did it, Henry. Now it's your record | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|