"
Around 12/7/08 –
Kevin Padrick meets with Summit Principals – Well yes they did. Kevin Padrick was recommended to one of the Principals by a Bend Developer as a guy who could help solve Summit’s proplems.
You see
Kevin Padrick met with the Summit principals in early December 2008. By talking with the Summit Principals about this meeting, it looks like Kevin was more than willing to help them with their liquidity crisis. Kevin Padrick said his company,
Obsidian Finance Group, LLC, specialized in helping save distressed businesses like Summit Accommodators, Inc. Good news right?
Kevin Padrick said he had financial partners with DEEP POCKETS who would help fund the short-term liquidity issues. At this meeting, Summit Principals explained the business of short-term lending, told Kevin Padrick about the properties they were willing to hand over and about the $14 Million of cash that was in the Summit bank account. At no time during this meeting did Kevin Padrick even mention the words fraud, ponzi scheme, embezzlement, or illegal.
After this meeting with
Kevin Padrick, the Summit Principals approached Summit 1031′s bankrupcty attorneys, Sussman Shank, with the possibility of contracting with Obsidian Finance since Padrick assured the principals that he and Obsidian Finance would be the best has helping distressed businesses.
Sussman Shank agreed that it would be a good idea to contract with Kevin Padrick and his company. However, the contract should be signed after a Chief Restructuring Officer is put into place (after they filed bankrupcty). Sussman Assured the Principals that Padrick and Obsidian would work directly for the CRO. Seems to me Kevin Worked more directly with
Sussman Shank and
Perkins Coie than Terry Vance…
What do you think?
12/18/08 Summit 1031 filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy -
DIP “debtor in possession” reorganization. In this type of bankruptcy a Chief Restructuring Officer is named and he is the
“acting boss” of the reorganization to pay back the exchangers. It wasn’t until the bankruptcy was filed and
Terry Vance was named CRO, that the official contract to hire Obsidian Finance Group, LLC was signed by Terry Vance and Kevin Padrick.
Click Here to See what they were supposed to do per their contract
The Summit Principals were advised by Sussman Shank that a Chapter 11 DIP bankruptcy would be ideal. Sussman assured the principals that this form of bankruptcy would provide a little more time than a Chapter 7, enough time to liquidate the illiquid assets in an orderly manner to, hopefully, get the exchangers/creditors paid back in full. This effort would alow the Principals to aid the CRO in every way possible to accomplish this goal.
Sussman’s
Susan Ford also instructed the Principals to transfer approx $250,000 from certain accounts and to wire it out of a specific account. Ford did not want it to appear that Sussman’s legal fees were coming out of exchanger funds. Ford told the Principals that the $250,000 wold be more than enough to cover the entire legal cost of the bankruptcy.
I know that as of 05/15/09 the attorney fees amounted to almost $2 Million. This estimate is just slightly off.
12/19/08 –
end of December 2008 – Summit Principals gathered all the information and willingly gave it to there supposed saviors, Obsidian Finance Group.
Ewan Rose, said thanks, we will get you our proposal within the week. No proposal was ever delivered.
Early February – Kevin Padrick makes a presentation to the Creditors’ Committee. What? Thought they were supposed to be getting the proposal to the CRO and Principals, NOT the creditors??? Jeez this stuff is so confusing.
2/11/09 – Summit 1031 Bankruptcy Hearing where Creditors’ Committee is pushing to replace Terry Vance as CRO with Kevin Padrick as CRO. Lucky for Kevin Padrick, at this hearing
Judge Randall Dunn’s idea to resolve the matter at hand is to appoint a liquidating trustee. It wasn’t until yesterday that I received the legal document from The 1031 Tax Group, LLC case that says, “The appointment of a chapter 11 trustee is an
extraordinary measure“. After going back and listening to the audio from this hearing, it seems to me that this appointment of a chapter 11 trustee was
originally presented by Judge Randall Dunn.
Kevin Padrick has stated in his declaration under penalty and perjury that
Doc 551 “8. Ms Studebaker-DeYoung has also posted on her website what
appears to be an audio recording that she made during an official court hearing proceeding, in violation of Court local rules”
From Transcript:
“Judge Dunn – Let’s talk about the joint motion of the debtor and the official committe of unsecured creditors to substitute Obsidian Finance Group LLC for Mr. Vance as Chief Restructuring Officer and I have a limited objection from the US Trustee, requesting some additional time to see if this is the proper road or whether I ought to be appointing a chapter 11 trustee and I have a middle ground suggestion for the parties consideration and we may not get there today…WHY DON’T WE APPOINT OBSIDIAN AS TRUSTEE????
Ms. Vivienne Popperl (attorney for US Trustee) – Sorry your honor but that is a decision for our office to make.
Judge Dunn – I understand that so I am throwing it out as something that you should consider.
Ms. Vivienne Popperl – We will certainly consider that, but at this time we’re very concerned about who is really directing this case. At the moment it appears to be the professionals.
Judge Dunn – It does appear that way, there’s no question the professionals are directing this case. There’s no one else in the driver’s seat.
Ms. Vivienne Popperl – Which is why we need a trustee and that is why we request a little extra time to get a motion and appropriate memorandum before the Court and we certainly will consider Obsidian, but we will consider other candidates as well.
Judge Dunn – Well, well, that’s fine, but I’m not sure I need additional memorandum. I think that needs to be discussed with debtor’s counsel and Obsidian and the committee and see where we come out. I understand why you would move for appointment under section is it 1112, whatever section and I’ll ??? with that. But I think the parties should talk and do what makes sense here, but certainly if the creditors’ committee has evaluated Obsidian’s work to date and their potential for future work…that’s going to weigh strongly in the Courts consideration in terms of the interests’ of creditors and I do agree that we need someone clearly in control of the ship of state?? that is functioning in effect as a trustee would so in the absence of further direction I really would like to see Obsidian named as chapter 11 trustee, but I leave that for the parties to argue out.
Ms. Vivienne Popperl – Well then would the Court entertain an oral motion directing the US Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee or do we need to file a written motion?
Judge Dunn – Well I want to hear from the parties and their respective positions on that, but I don’t want to trample on the US Trustee’s office perogatives either so if you would be offended by such an order based on an oral motion, I’m not going to do it, but I just am suggesting that it makes sense to consider it. Mr. Padrick’s here…Is Obsidian opposed to serving in the position officially as chapter 11 trustee.
Kevin Padrick – No Your Honor subject to the parties desires.
Judge Dunn – Right so that’s something I want the parties to talk about and consider because frankly at least my review of the situation with respect to the case as to what’s going on…having
Obsidian functioning officially in the position of chapter 11 trustee solves a multitude of problems, but what do I know?”
Steve Hedburg (Lead Attorney at Perkins Coie and worked under Kevin Padrick at Miller Nash back in the day) -
Steve Hedbergseems up to helping out with the appointment of Obsidian no matter what others’ concerns are due to the vote on the creditors’ committee. This committee is only made up of about 5% of the creditors. Did the group of creditors understand the ramifications of converting to a liquidating trust? Steve Hedberg rambles on about how creditors are voting for Obsidian no matter what guidelines are followed Obsidian will be trustee.
I can’t even spend the energy typing the rest of this now. BUT I did run into another interesting tidbit of discussion between Ms Vivienne Popperl and Judge Dunn…
Cont. Transcript…
“Ms Vivienne Popperl – Your Honor I’d just like to bring to the courts attention that the Court had been granted an oral motion. I want to make sure that the Court feels comfortable having done it with no notice because 1104(a) does say that a request of a party in interest or the United States trustee, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall appoint a trustee –
WELL THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN NOW Did it? They act as if they are following the procedures, but they willy nilly throw them out the door when they don’t fit their agenda. Is this what they mean by Highest Fiduciary Duty.
Here Ms. Vivienne Popperal is referring to Title 11 U.S.C US Bankrupcty Code Section 1014 (a)
§ 1104. Appointment of trustee or examiner
(a) At any time after the commencement of the case but before confirmation of a plan, on request of a party in interest or the United States trustee, and after notice and a hearing, the court shall order the appointment of a trustee—
(1) for cause, including fraud, dishonesty, incompetence, or gross mismanagement of the affairs of the debtor by current management, either before or after the commencement of the case, or similar cause, but not including the number of holders of securities of the debtor or the amount of assets or liabilities of the debtor;
(didn’t apply to Summit, unless they are talking about Sussman Shank, Obsidian Finance and Terry Vance??)
(2) if such appointment is in the interests of creditors, any equity security holders, and other interests of the estate, without regard to the number of holders of securities of the debtor or the amount of assets or liabilities of the debtor; or
(this is very arguable)
(3) if grounds exist to convert or
dismiss the case under section 1112, but the court determines that the appointment of a trustee or an examiner is in the best interests of creditors and the estate.
(doesn’t look like it applies to Summit) Based on the huge amount of legal fees the appointment would cost.
Click here to see Document from The 1031 Tax Group, LLC – Okun case for appt trustee in place of DIP. It also says
“The appointment of a chapter 11 trustee is an extraordinary measure” and that it “should be the exception, rather than the rule”. “The decision to appoint a chapter 11 trustee is a factual determination
entrusted to the discretion of the bankruptcy judge”.
I bet the US Department of Justice knows this proceeding did not follow the legal procedures.
After listening to this
circle of players go on and on about replacing the Chief Restructuring Officer, Terry Vance, with Obsidian as Trustee. Seems everyone is in agreement right? Only Brian Steven’s attorney, Foraker seems to be mind boggled by the happenstance of this hearing. Is there a reason Foraker removed himself from teh case shortly thereafter? Was he scared to be part of the Ruse?
Who was representing the Debtor? Who was representing the 200 creditors? They decided this in a matter of moments and they seemed to all really like the idea. Why follow any procedures? Who cares about who is doing the job?
Who cares about anybody?
Seems like they are having a good time entertaining themselves with how do you get Obsidian in Control of the Estate and the Assets???? For my common sense brain this is So Confusing.
In Sharon Steel Corp “the standard gives the…. court discretion to appoint a trustee when doing so would serve the parties’ and estate’s interests”. In Ionosphere Clubs, Inc. the standard for appointment of a trustee should be…… “facilitation of a reorganizatoin that will benefit both the creditors and the debtors”.
Courts have considered several factors including “the benefits derived by the appointment of a trustee, balanced against the cost of appointment”.
It seems to me this was a rather rash decision and it was happening no matter what happened at this hearing. What are your thoughts? Was this already decided before the hearing began OR What???
Did you think that was it??? No there is more…
As you can hear for yourselves, the Judge says we can have this presentation…
I worked out the schedule with Kevin Padrick & the Summit Principals to hold the Presentation at the Summit Bend Office at
10:00AM on 2/12/09. Kevin Padrick was an hour late to the presentation. There was much discussed about the bankruptcy proceedings during this hour of waiting amongst some other fun chatter.
I forgot I had the camera on the webcam for the duration of
Kevin Padrick’s tardiness. There is no way I could have scripted the discussions and events that occurred. I like that it is an accurate representation of what what going on at that point in time and how there was a HUGE disconnect between what Terry Vance and the Summit Principals knew and what the Portland courtroom was basing motions and orders on.
Why weren’t Terry Vance and Summit Principals able to have their own say about appointing a Chapter 11 Trustee. Susan Ford did not represent Terry Vance, she just spoke for him.
There is some talk about Sussman’s ability to serve as counsel to the Obsidian as Trustee. Why is there not a conflict of interests for the Debtor’s Attorney, Sussman Shank, to serve as counsel for the Liquidating Trustee, Kevin Padrick??? Seems a slight conflict, but what do I know.
The Hearing was on 02/11/09. We had the presentation on 02/12/09.
The night of 2/11/09 I researched on the internet about this type of situation where I ran across the recording of court authorized meetings that were semi-public (Since Judge Dunn said all interested Parties would be interested in this presentation and from this, I believed I was able to determine that it was a semi-public meeting. You can record a semi-public meeting if the camera equipment was
not concealed.
I did not conceal the camera equipment.
Kevin Padrick reported my so-called “illegal recording” to the
Bend Police department in
July 2009, just after he noticed it was on the Summit Blog. After some investigation and checking with my attorney we found out the investigation was going nowhere.
On January 5, 2010 I received notice that I was being charged with 2
misdemeanors of “illegal communication” related to the recording and the divulging of this recording.
Besides the fact that the investigation is
stale, there are a few issues that seem fishy regarding why the DA incorrectly filed this claim.
A.
The officer thought I told him, in July 2009, that I set up the recording computer in the “middle of the conference table”. The officer apparantly next thinks he found an inconsistency because he said it was readily apparent that I set up the device on the “back counter behind the Summit Principals.”
I think the officer erred twice here.
1. The device was facing Obsidian (the three people who are complaining (Kevin Padrick, Ewan Rose, & Ryan Norwood) – thus it was unconcealed, even by the officer’s standard.
2. The officer did not follow me (comprehend me (understand the importance of what I was saying)) when he interviewed me 4 months after the recording, in that he did not correctly quote me where I told him how the computer was set up. My own package of evidence should have jogged his memory.
B. Padrick, Rose, and Norwood were the only individuals interviewed by the officer besides me.
It seems that an unbiased officer (or rather an officer that was not being harangued by some powerful attorneys) would have interviewed Terry Vance and the other 5 people who saw where I set up the computer.
It looks like the first
Deschutes County Deputy, likely contacted by
Obsidian Finance, probably closed his investigation without criminal finding against me. Obsidian next pushed the Bend Police officer to follow up over 5 months after
Padrick’s initial complaint. Next, the officer passed the buck (not a common practice) to the District Attorney’s office without a citing or closing the case. Next, because the
District Attorney’s office (who also probably initially declined the case) to follow up. In other words, in all likelihood, at every step of the process, Obsidian had to resurrect the case, that otherwise would have remained closed, by pressing things."
Source of Post
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/?s=opera
Also Check Out the Kevin Padrick Testimony in Obsidian Finance Group v. Crystal Cox Trial, Under Oath
http://kevinpadrickobsidianfinance.blogspot.com/2012/04/kevin-padricks-testimony-in-obsidian-v.html
David W. Brown, Obsidian Finance Group Testimony in Obsidian Finance Group v. Crystal Cox Trial, Under Oath
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2012/06/david-brown-obsidian-finance-group.html
http://obsidianfinancesucks.blogspot.com/2012/10/bank-vp-declaration-declaration-of_14.html
Patricia Whittington, Obsidian Finance Group VP Testimony in Obsidian Finance Group v. Crystal Cox Trial, Under Oath
http://kevinpadrickobsidianfinance.blogspot.com/2012/04/lets-take-look-at-obsidian-v-cox-trial.html
More Research
http://www.summit1031bkjustice.com/?s=buell