Assignments to Wells Fargo Foothill

A quick search of the Harris County (TX) Clerk’s Office website shows that RE Loans assigned its interests in the Bravo Marshall development to Wells Fargo Foothill (pasted below).  It’s not difficult to track down these assignments to WFF.  REL noteholders were led to believe that each and every loan was assigned to WFF.  Is this the case?  If not, why would B-4 Partners exclude certain properties from the deal with WFF?  If there were certain properties not assigned to WFF, where did they go and who got them?  Could they be viewed as preferential payouts to preferred investors?  What makes one investor more important than another?  If this happened, B-4 could be much more ethically challenged than we imagined.  As we methodically work our way down the list, loan-by-loan, we’ll see if this is true. If anyone has information on this subject they care to share, please do so here.

File Number Description
Type
Vol. Pg.
Names File Date YYYYMMDD Sec.
Lot
Block
Misc.
Pgs Film Code
20080153115 SEE INSTR
ASSGN
Grantor: RE LOANS LLC
Grantee: WELLS FARGO FOOTHILL LLC
20080328

9 RP055290556
20080433825 SEE INSTR
SUBORD
Grantor: RE LOANS LLC
Grantee: BARRINGTON SEC 2
20080819

2 RP059241310
20070467886 KINGWOOD LAKES SOUTH
ASSGN
Grantor: RE LOANS LLC
Grantee: WELLS FARGO FOOTHILL LLC
20070801 01

INSTR

5 RP047860917
20090113699 BARRINGTON SUBDIVISION
PT REL
Grantor: RE LOANS LLC ETAL
Grantee: BRAVO MARSHALL COMMUNITIES LP
20090319 01

B0002
INSTR

5 ER010971715
20090113702 NO 096693Z
REL
Grantor: RE LOANS LLC ETAL
Grantee: BRAVO MARSHALL COMMUNITIES LP
20090319

5 ER010971720

<< Previous 1 Next >> 

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Assignments to Wells Fargo Foothill

  1. Thanks Researcher. Follow-up questions: There must have been some sort of rhyme or reason to which properties were assigned at which times and why. Did REL decide to hold back certain properties based upon back room negotiations with preferred investors? If so, do you know who got paid out in-kind?

  2. "I know of one very suspicious transaction, an assignment of a note and deed of trust to a preferred investor."Could that possibly be the $13 million ($5.36 million net proceeds) Austin Val Verde loan, REL Loan #A0110, which was given to Phil Tagami and Len Epstein, California Capital Group, for a $10.00 transfer fee and then simply disappeared off of the REL loan list?

  3. "The other approximately 50% of the first draw went to the Ng family and Bruce Horwitz. Specific details of these cash disbursements from the line of credit are also well documented."Are these "specific details" a matter of public record?How much was the "first draw" against the $50 million line of credit?If memory serves, in July '07 we received the first inkling of the WFF LOC loan and the stated amount of indebtedness at that time was $45 million.

  4. "The details may not be that important because the first draw was distributed instantaneously"They are to me. The Partners would not have taken out the WFF LOC loan and returned to themselves over $20 million of their personal investments unless they had 'insider/proprietary' information that REL was broke, beyond repair, and about to be belly up for all to see.They bailed themselves out and left 'most' of the rest of us swingin' in the wind!Remember that some of us were already being denied the return of our investment principal as early as the beginning of July, 2007."The critical fact is the result; the lack of liquidity of R.E. Loans was not changed by the first draw on the WFF line of credit."I respectfully disagree.I believe the liquidity problems were greatly exacerbated by the addition of a $60 million debt, plus huge amounts of interest, that has to be repaid BEFORE those of us who thought we had made secured loans can ever recoup any of our investment funds.What information do you have re. distributions of subsequent LOC draws?

  5. "By June 30, 2007, however, the cash on hand had dropped to $1,077,894."Yes, and by the middle of the next month, July, 2007 that amount that had been reduced by another $1+ million.Cash on hand went from $55.5 million to less than $45,000 in seven months.What the casual reader may not understand here is that the Partners went through nearly $100 million between January and the end of July, 2007. $55.5 million from REL cash reserves and $43.6 million from the WFF LOC.We know that some of that went toward construction draws but we don't know how much and to which Borrower. Even more important, we don't know how much or to which Partner(s) and Preferred Investors the balance was distributed. And all of this after the average Noteholder had been told that the fund had been frozen by the SEC (and then the reorg.) and that we couldn't get any of our principal back.

  6. Researcher – Slight clarification on the Austin Val Verde dates. The Transfer And Assignment document signed by Walter was notarized on May 15, 2008. The terms of the deal, however, went into effect four months earlier on January 4, 2008.RE Loans received $10.00. That's Ten DOLLARS. Not hundreds. Not thousands. Not millions. Ten bucks. No wonder you called this a "very suspicious transaction."

  7. "For the year 2007, B-4 Partners paid themselves an annual fee of $7,109,698 to manage the fund, while Bar-K paid themselves an annual fee of $7,109,321 for loan servicing."So what you're saying is that Walter, Bruce, Barney and Kelly, the B-4 Partners, split $7,109,698 and Walter, Barney and Kelly, Bar-K, Inc. split $7,109,321?Bruce received $1,777,330 and Walter, Barney and Kelly each received $4,147,104, just from RE Loans, LLC? Is this correct?And that doesn't include what Barney and Walter took from the Siena?

  8. "I thought that Walter, Bruce, Kelly and Barney each had a 25% interest in B-4 Partners, while Kelly and Barney each had a 50% interest in Bar-K."You are, of course, correct, for 2007.(And this pretty much goes to show that you're not Barney Ng.)Today, Bar-K is composed of Walter, Barney and Kelly andB-4 supposedly doesn't include Bruce Horwitz anymore but he's still listed on their website as a B-4 Partner.http://www.reloansllc.com/partners.htm

  9. The relationship between Bar-K, B-4 Partners and RE Loans, LLC. is explained on Bar-K’s website at http://www.reloansllc.com/index.php

    In case you’re not an investor/noteholder and therefore don’t have the password, here’s their brief statement;

    Welcome to the web site for the Bar-K family.

    Our company consists of 5 entities specializing in real estate loans:

    1. Bar-K Inc. – Originator and servicer of loans
    2. R.E. Loans LLC – first funding source for loans done by Bar-K Inc.
    3. B-4 Partners LLC – the management arm for investments originated by Bar-K Inc and funded by R.E. Loans LLC
    4. Mortgage Fund ’08 LLC – current funding source for loans done by Bar-K Inc.
    5. The Mortgage Fund LLC – management arm for Mortgage Fund ’08 LLC

    There are then links to each of the specific entities.

    2718 Santa Rosa is a property in Florida for which a very large loan was made.

    A Google search by name for both the Santa Rosa property and the Eagle Group should provide some of the information you seek.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s