Texas Judge Rules against IFC Credit IFC to sue Leasing News for “Slander” PDF Print E-mail
Written by Administrator   
Wednesday, 19 April 2006
In the Specialty Optical dba SOS trial before the Honorable Sally L. Montgomery, Dallas, Texas, IFC Credit Corporation Officer John Estok, CLP, divulged that his company has a $100 million asset portfolio with over $14 million in “up to 800” NorVergence leases with 550 in question: “…for the last 18 months, every month out the door is $300,000 in payments to the banks, and every month in the door is $100,000 or so of cash from settlements and customers who are still making their payments. “
The funds are borrowed, allegedly $9 million from a line of credit at PFF Bank (confirmed by the bank officer to Leasing News), $3 million from two investment groups (from three reliable sources), and $1 million in other bank lines (from court testimony.)
In this specific law suit, the “Equipment Rental Agreement” is for 60 months at $543.67 or $32,620.20. After testimony, it is learned that IFC paid NorVergence $11,743 for a $28,000 original invoice figure that yielded lease payments of $32,620.20. The original lease factor was .0194, but in “reality” was .0463 on a sixty month term.
This is the first time Estok admits to the holdbacks, which he guesses are over $2 million. The opposing counsel questions whether perjury is involved.
The residual of the lease, which was booked as having no value, according to testimony. There was no further yield, but in Texas law this may also be viewed as a “capital lease” and not an “operating lease.” The lack of residual value, whether stated or in practice may have legal consequences regarding usury and/or “consumer” law.
Judge Montgomery ruled:
"The Court declares that the rental agreement or lease at issue in this case is not enforceable.
The Court further orders that Specialty Optical shall recover the following attorneys' fees that are equitable and just and have been stipulated to by the parties as being reasonable and necessary. It is therefore
" ORDERED that Specialty Optical shall have and recover judgment against IFC Credit Corporation in the amount of $45,000 for attorneys; fees through trial. It is further
" ORDERED that Specialty Optical shall have and recover an additional sum of $30,000 in the event IFC unsuccessfully appeals this Judgment to the Court of Appeal. It is further
"ORDERED that Specialty Optical shall recover the further sum of $15,000 in the event that IFC files a petition for review to the Supreme Court of Texas and is unsuccessful in that effort or if it is successful in obtaining review but unsuccessful in its appeal to the Supreme Court of Texas. It is further
" ORDERED that Specialty shall recover the furthermore sum of $15,000 for responding to any unsuccessful appeal by IFC to the Supreme Court in Texas, in the vent the petition for discretionary review is granted.

“All relief requested and not specifically herein granted is denied. This is intended to be a final judgment disposing of all issues in this case."

click here for the judgement

Last Updated ( Thursday, 21 August 2008 )
 
< Prev
[ Back ]