  Drm Member Username: Drm Post Number: 734 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.249.9.117 |
http://www.crainsdetroit.com/c gi-bin/article.pl?articleId=28 040
| ||
Spartacus Member Username: Spartacus Post Number: 49 Registered: 07-2005 Posted From: 209.114.251.65 |
I think Steve Wilson owes some apologies. | ||
Hamtramike Member Username: Hamtramike Post Number: 400 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 146.9.52.108 |
Just curious, is it common for loans such as this to have no repayment schedule and no repayment made years after the loan is made? (Hendrix said no payments have ever been made) How does a banking institution complete an amoritization schedule or even know what the effective interest rate is if it is never due? ((I am not a supporter of either candidate and don't even vote in the city, just wondering) | ||
Spartacus Member Username: Spartacus Post Number: 50 Registered: 07-2005 Posted From: 209.114.251.65 |
I have not seen anything in the public record that would suggest that there is no repayment schedule. | ||
Hamtramike Member Username: Hamtramike Post Number: 404 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 146.9.52.108 |
I really don't know the specifics other than the transcripts of the interview on WXYZ. Hendrix was asked whether any payments had ever been made on the loan and he said no. Just thought it kind of odd that a loan several years old seemed like it didn't have any terms. Not sure about what info Stevo was posing the quest from. I'll look it up if i have time. | ||
Bindetroit Member Username: Bindetroit Post Number: 1217 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 209.69.165.10 |
The publicly available documents - the only ones anyone in the media has seen - such as the mortgage and the UCC filings, did not have the repayment terms in them. The promissory note - not a public document - did but no one at the newspapers or at the tv stations have seen those. | ||
Brian Member Username: Brian Post Number: 3150 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 67.37.83.143 |
Alot of doublespeak by the Helmut clan. No one said it was unlawful, but it did and does violate professional ethics. Perhaps this is why Archer waited until he was to leave office for suggesting the charter mandated ethics rule. I guess people are supposed to believe that just because there is a lien against the home that it will never be considered 'real' collateral. Its just in the paperwork for a 'committment' to repay on terms that have no repayment schedule. If Helmut wasn't an employee of McNamara or Archer he would never have qualified for this loan. BUT Crain's did show that Helmut's dealings began under Big Mac who is under investigation by the FBI for having county contractors grant him sweatheart deals. Ed never did anything wrong as well, it was his people who signed all the paperwork. | ||
Hamtramike Member Username: Hamtramike Post Number: 411 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 146.9.52.112 |
Commercial loans are based on factors different from home loans. One of the criteria is "character". So to say that the deal was sweet because of who he knew doesn't really matter if the lender thought that made him more trustworthy and helped him meet the "character criteria. I would have more concerned for the repayment terms which seem like the loan is really a "loan" along with a wink and a nod. | ||
Drm Member Username: Drm Post Number: 736 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 68.249.239.120 |
What is so hard to understand about the fact that the repayment terms are contained in another document? |
