- 104 -
subsidiaries "was both the seller and purchaser".
Respondent argues that the outside appraisers were not
independent because EPIC "influenced their appraisals with
guidelines and requests that precluded the use of bulk sale
methods in purchases of multiple units." According to
respondent, "EPIC, through CAG, influenced the inflated
appraisals related to the properties and determined the
stated purchase price."
Respondent also argues that the participation of
secondary lenders and mortgage insurers does not establish
that the value of the properties approximated the debt
because there is no evidence that they engaged in due
diligence. According to respondent: "the lack of due
diligence by secondary lenders and mortgage insurers
demonstrates that [the] lenders ignored or did not
understand the realities of the EPIC transactions." At
the same time, respondent notes the fact that some mortgage
insurers refused to insure "newly-created debt on EPIC
properties."
The following is a list of the 51 properties purchased
by EA 83-XII (viz 12 single-family residences and 39
condominium units) together with the amount of each loan,
the value of each property as determined by respondent's
Page: Previous 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011