Some Perspective on PNC, Fraud, and the Bailout

Last week, I broke a story of corruption and fraud involving PNC Bank. In this story, there was a group of business persons lead by a very powerful individual named Rusty Rose. Rose is a Dallas area business that counts ownership of the Texas Rangers among his list of accomplishments. In fact, Rose once brought in the current President into the ownership group of the Rangers. At the end of 2000, this group created a company, Davenport Tools, that they intended to use to buy up other companies, including one they were also involved with, Crudgington Tools. Even though this company was months old and had no financial assets to speak of, this group applied for and received a $25 million loan from PNC bank. According to an internal memo, the loan was approved despite the waiver of normally vital financial documents like tax returns, balance sheets, and income statements. At the time the deal was done, no one at PNC, except the loan officer on the deal, knew these documents were waived. The loan invariably went into default and then PNC even voluntarily suspended payments. Then, this defaulted loan was bundled into a package of $1.5 billion in loans that were all supposed to be in good standing. To make the corruption even worse, one of the other principles, Rick San Soucie, was involved in a divorce at the time of this deal and failed to disclose this loan in the divorce to his ex wife. Furthermore, when the attorney representing the group, Richard Waggoner, found out that the divorce hadn't been disclosed to him, he did absolutely nothing about it... Late last month, the federal government gave PNC about $7 billion to acquire National City.

I was thinking about this story recently as I tried to process the unmitigated disaster that is the $700 billion bailout. Certainly, not every transaction involved at the heart of creating this crisis was laced with the sort of fraud that I described in the first paragraph. Make no mistake though, the crisis was created by a systemic corruption and fraud. Most of the fraud was "relatively" mild at least compared to what I broke involving PNC bank. Still, mortgage transactions were routinely done in which income was misrepresented. Borrowers routinely misrepresented where they intended to live. Bank accounts were routinely stuffed temporarily with an artificial infusion of cash in order to make them worthy of qualification. It was also routine for appraisals to be done in a fraudulent manner. In fact, it became routine for good buyers to act as fronts, known as straw buyers, in order to purchase a property that others intended to actually occupy and pay for. More recently, new fraudulent schemes like buy and bail have begun to infect the industry. On the horizon, the practice of loan modifications will likely be the next round of systemic fraud.

I understand that it is an unfortunate and all too real fact of life that most industries have their share of fraud. The difference here is that the fraud that infected mortgages and financial services lead directly to the crisis we are in now. To truly appreciate just how corrosive this fraud is, you have to get close to it the way I did in covering the fraud surrounding the loan PNC approved for Rose's company, Davenport. Money to folks like PNC, Rick San Soucie and Rusty Rose is the financial equivalent of crack to a crack addict. Giving folks like these even more money only feeds their insatiable desire to commit even more corruption. While the PNC fraud is one story, make no mistake that nearly each and every player was and continues to be crooked. Whether the name is Countrywide, AIG, Fannie Mae, Bank of America, etc. they were party to fraud that eventually lead to this crisis.

Now, they are all vying for a piece of a pie worth $700 billion. Already, we see that there is absolutely no oversight. The deal has changed. Instead of buying troubled assets, the Feds will just give these companies money. The Feds aren't also going to do any substantial oversight in seeing how these funds are spent. Already, we are seeing signs that this bailout will also be corrupted. The Hartford, perfectly viable, has applied for some of this money. In other words, we are about to give the same crooks that got us into this mess a blank check of another $700 billion to do as they please. Is it really hard to do the math on such a proposition? More than that, are we all really going to pretend that the effects on our economy will be anything but devastating and probably permanent if not generational?

Recently, Alan Blinder made this ridiculous point.

You need to boost spending in the economy," Blinder said. "It almost doesn't matter what kind of spending, but we'd like it to not to be wasteful spending, something that's valuable in its own right."

Does anyone really believe that making sure the bailout isn't corrupted is merely optional? Does anyone really believe that if the bailout is totally wasted, as it clearly will be, that this will still have a positive effect on our economy, just not as positive as if it wasn't wasted? Whatever stimulus a corrupt and wasteful scheme brings are temporary and ultimately counter productive? Are we all going to bury our heads in the sands and sit by while our country is destroyed by the cancer of corruption that folks like PNC, AIG, and Rusty Rose are allowed to perpetrate again? If this $700 billion continues to be doled out as it has, with no oversight, then folks like PNC and Countrywide will get together again with folks like Rusty Rose and Rick San Soucie and they will commit more of the same kind of malfeasance that got us here. They will just change the combinations of players and augment the dynamics of the scams in order to reflect a new reality. Furthermore, unlike the good economy the committed their fraud in prior, this time the corrupt the economy in a time of economic distress.

It isn't that hard to do the math on what an entirely corrupt $700 billion bailout will bring if it is allowed to manifest. Right now, our economy is weak. It needs a boost. If it isn't given a boost soon, the recession will soon enough grow into a depression. If the bailout is simply wasted, that won't boost anyone's bottom line but the folks receiving it. Furthermore, if they are given $700 billion with no oversight, then eventually the government will have to create a plethora of new regulations to try and anticipate the corruption that will follow. Does anyone really believe the government is equipped to do this?

That's not the only effect on our economy. What happens when the country borrows with reckless abandon. This creates the exact same effect as the Treasury simply printing money. In fact, this is the 21st century version of printing money. At some point, the effect will be inflationary. With the sum at $700 billion, that isn't merely inflationary, but hyper inflationary. That's only if the government can actually borrow the money. Right now, the Treasury has no problem borrowing because the world views it as good borrower. That status is only because it can readily find lenders anytime. What happens if the world ever decided not to lend to the U.S.? We would then begin defaulting on our obligations and have to file for bankruptcy. The only reason that inflation hasn't yet reared its ugly head is because our economy is so weak that it overwhelms any inflationary pressure. So, what happens when the corrupted stimulus known as the bailout gives the economy some short term stimulus? Then, the inflationary pressure of adding about $1 trillion to our debt will be unleashed. Of course, whatever stimulus this bailout creates will be temporary because it is corrupted. The inflation on the other hand... As such, we will then face this nightmare...

In other words, the $700 billion boondoggle being handed to the likes of PNC and AIG is heading this country straight into the uncharted territory of a simultaneous depression and hyper inflation. The effects are unclear because we've never actually seen such a nightmare scenario as this. To avoid this, we must demand that the bailout be tabled immediately. There must be a grass roots revolt against this bailout as soon as possible. The more money spent frivilously the closer we will get to the point of no return on our economic viability. The situation we are facing is NOT the equivalent of pouring gasoline on a flame. Rather, it is the equivalent of setting off a sophisticated dirty nuclear bomb in a city already dealing with an AIDS epidemic.

Fraud, Corruption, and Power: What Our Bailout Tax Dollars Are Really Going To

I am sure I am breaking news to no one in reporting that the government has recently passed a massive $700 Billion plus bailout. I am also certain that no one reading this doesn't know that AIG has already received and run through almost $100 billion on their own. In fact, In fact, AIG has recently requested extra funds. What may surprise some is that AIG has a long and dubious history of corruption. One of its cohorts, PNC, also has a long history of corruption. The very same PNC used federal bailout money to acquire troubled bank National City. We all know that the financial industry has disintegrated. We all know that tax Dollars will be used to prop it up. What many don't realize is the systemic level of corruption in the financial industry. What many don't realize is that we are about to give hundreds of billions of Dollars to crooks in three piece suits.

This brings me to the story of a company named Crudgington Tools. In early 2000, they were purchased by Davenport Machines. Davenport Machines used a $25 million loan from PNC to acquire Crudgington as part of a conglomerate purchase. Let's start at the most important part of the story. This is an internal memo I got my hands on from PNC Bank. (click download original pages 2-3) This memo is dated February 27th 2002. It references this very loan that PNC did for Davenport. The memo reveals several troubling things. First, this loan was bundled into a package of loans worth about $1.5 billion and sold from National Bank of Canada back to PNC. This loan was packaged in a bundle of loans referred to as "performing". This means that the loans were at the time supposed to be on time. Yet, the memo reveals that this particular loan was in default. Furthermore, the memo reveals that payments on the loan had been waived without reason given why payment had been waived. The most troubling aspect is that the original loan was done without ever providing any necessary tax documents.

Let's now start at the beginning. Back in 1992, Dallas businessman Rick San Soucie became a principle and manager in Crudgington Tools. At the time, Crudgington Tools was a traditional tool manufacturer, however the company had an idea to revolutionize tool making. The company had an idea to computerize machine tools that would eliminate the need for workers. This idea had a ton of potential but also needed just as much capital. Throughout the 1990's, the company continued to try and raise capital. In fact, according to testimony in a deposition, San Soucie himself at one point loan the company money. San Soucie eventually then brought in local businessman Don Lummus. (who is the witness in the deposition just linked) Lummus then brought in Rusty Rose and his company Cardinal Investment. Rose was the biggest power player of them all. He was a former part owner of the Texas Rangers and it was Rose that brought in George W. Bush to be a part owner in the Rangers. Rose then brought in one of his top "deputies" at Cardinal, Eric Stroud, to be his point person with respect to this company.

As Lummus own testimony indicated, Crudgington was in a constant struggle to stay afloat throughout the 1990's despite all the capital investment and all the new power players. Then, in 1999, San Soucie began divorce proceedings from his wife, Susan Diamond, (it's also how these documents wound up reaching me) In late 1999, the principles of Crudgington attempted a bold financial maneuver. They all formed Davenport and then they would procure a loan and buy several companies including Crudgington. The divorce is only important in that San Soucie never shared any of these business dealings with representatives for Diamond. In fact, as Richard Waggoner points out in testimony from a deposition, he was never made aware of the divorce. Waggoner is a corporate attorney with Gardere Wynne and he represented Davenport when they procured the loan from PNC among other transactions. Diamond was not only entitled from potential profits but as it turned out "community property" was used to secure the loan as well.

Now is when things get very complicated. Davenport was formed and the new company went seeking a loan. As Lummus mentioned in passing in his own testimony, he went to over forty banks before PNC agreed to lend them almost $25 million. This makes sense. Davenport was a brand new entity. They had no assets. A small business loan works like any other loan. Generally, you are required to provide collateral for anything you borrow. That is how a standard loan works. This loan worked in a different way though its not clear how. The internal memo makes clear that no income documents were provided. It's possible that the loan was secured by the personal assets of the principles, however if that is the case then there was no reason for the loan to ever go into default. In such a case, the assets would be held by the bank in case the loan began defaulting. Davenport eventually filed for bankruptcy and it's unclear how much if anything of this loan was eventually recovered.

Then, the loan got sold at least once, and at some point it got sold back to PNC. Though, even here it is unclear if it actually got sold. The internal memo indicates that PNC was taking over the duties of "loan servicing". Loan servicing is when a bank merely collects money for a loan and makes sure they reach the proper party, for a "small" fee. Yet, this loan was already in default and payment was waived by the time that they took over "loan servicing". There would have been no need for such a function. Furthermore, even though they were only taking over servicing of the loan, PNC was then guaranteeing payment of said loan within 18 months of taking it over. Why, we may never know. The most troubling aspect is that this loan, then in default, was bundled with all sorts of other loans into a portfolio of "performing loans". Were there any other loans in this portfolio like this one? Again, we may never know.

What is clear is to me at least is that the whole thing stinks. Brand new companies don't simply get $25 million from a bank without providing any documentation. It appears to me that all sorts of power players were able to game the system so that a bank provided them a $25 million bailout. Most of these folks were heavily tied into all entities, including loaning these entities money themselves, and this loan would have paid for all of it. Then, PNC, or even some other entity, wound up holding the bag on a bad loan that they thought was bundled into a package of transactions of performing loans. Finally, we, the tax payers, are in a position to bailout millions of transactions like this one to the tune of $750 Billion.

For more resources on this case, here are some other documents of note. Rick San Soucie's deposition, Rick San Soucie deposition part 2, Rick San Soucie deposition part 3.


Also, for some perspective on this case and the bailout check out this link.