T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
294.1 | | MIZZOU::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Tue Oct 01 1991 11:51 | 6 |
| Amen to that summary. In addition, while reading I kept thinking about
the fact that the BoD loaned $18M based on "trust" in Mangone, and Mangone
was only bonded for *$6M*. Was there any mention of this in the
document?
Steve
|
294.2 | | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | Someday, DCU will be a credit union. | Tue Oct 01 1991 13:15 | 4 |
|
RE: .1
No mention of the bond on Mangone that I can recall.
|
294.3 | | COMET::PERCIVAL | I'm the NRA, USPSA/IPSC, NROI-RO | Tue Oct 01 1991 14:21 | 11 |
| <<< Note 294.2 by GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ "Someday, DCU will be a credit union." >>>
> No mention of the bond on Mangone that I can recall.
It would be unlikely to find it in the court documents. This suit
is to recover "damages". In this case what the DCU will show is
the loss that we incurred due to Magone's actions. The bond will
reduce the amount of that loss.
Jim
|
294.4 | Re: BoD's Fiduciary Responsibilities... | UNXA::ADLER | Rich or poor, it's nice to have $$$ | Tue Oct 01 1991 14:50 | 6 |
| ...you can *bet* that some smart lawyer will base Mangone's defense on the BoD's
not having exercised due care. Is it any wonder why it's not mentioned in the
complaint? We [DCU members] could be in deep sneakers if such an argument was
construed as valid by the courts.
/Ed
|
294.5 | | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | Someday, DCU will be a credit union. | Tue Oct 01 1991 15:09 | 17 |
|
RE: .4
It's pretty obvious that they will all be pointing the finger at each
other. After all, the final decision go/no-go decision was the Boards,
not Mr. Mangone (with 1 exception according to the suit). Maybe a
court will find that there is a share of responsibility for everybody
involved? But I don't think I'm quite as confident as the DCU BoD is
of winning and/or collecting on these suits. One thing is for sure.
WE will pay for a LOT of lawyers bills. We already are.
But the alleged fraudulent activities of Mr. Mangone does not
absolve the DCU BoD from their responsibility of exercising due care.
Equally, the failure of the BoD to exercise due care does not absolve
Mr. Mangone of his alleged fraudulent acts. So my question to the DCU
BoD is "What did you do in this matter that demonstrates that you
exercised due care?"
|
294.6 | Obtaining Blood from Rocks | USCTR1::RTRUEBLOOD | Rollyn Trueblood DTN 297-6553 | Thu Oct 31 1991 14:17 | 9 |
| Last I knew, fraud not only has civil remedies but criminal remedies as well.
In the case at hand, the DCU is BIG and crosses several state lines. Perhaps
civil relief will not be the only result of this broo-hah-hah.
If the ex-Prez is indicted by the Justice Department and by-chance the ex-PREZ
is convicted, a fine might be part of the penalties exacted. Does someone
know who has collection priority, criminal or civil penalties? Something
tells me a big federal fine would eat into any monies left for civil
relief that the ex-Prez might beneficially control.
|
294.7 | | BAGELS::CFSBHW::WILLIAMS | | Thu Oct 31 1991 18:50 | 7 |
| I have a question, and perhaps this isn't the right note, but...
If the Bond insuring the ex-Prez has been paid, presumably by an insurance
company, wouldn't the insurance company then line up to sue him too? If that's
the case, what are the true chances that the rest will be recovered?
Bryan
|
294.8 | | POBOX::KAPLOW | Free the DCU 88,000 11/12/91! | Thu Oct 31 1991 19:04 | 3 |
| ...and isn't the DCU now standing in line behind Barnstable CU?
Just how many ways can you cut a $44 pie and still cover your
legal fees?
|
294.9 | YAGQ (yet another good question) | ESBLAB::KINZELMAN | Paul Kinzelman | Thu Oct 31 1991 19:21 | 7 |
| Good question. I've wondered more and more lately about that. With the
Criminal lawsuit against Mangone, I'd think that DCU's lawsuit comes
after that (I don't really know), in which case, Mangone will be
bankrupt, in which case, the DCU suit is an expensive way to divert
attention away from the board's responsibility. DCU may stand to lose a
lot more in legal fees due to the suit than they can ever hope to
recover from Mangone. And what's worse, it's going to a *lawyer* 8*).
|
294.10 | | SASE::FAVORS::BADGER | One Happy camper ;-) | Thu Oct 31 1991 20:58 | 2 |
| Funney, I think I said the same thing a few weeks ago. I don't
know why we are spending good money to get nothing.
|
294.11 | My speculations | MUDHWK::LAWLER | Not turning 39... | Fri Nov 01 1991 07:24 | 32 |
|
>I don't know why we are spending good money to get nothing...
FWIW, I think it's worthwhile to _NOT_ try to second guess
the reasons behind the lawsuit, but I'd offer the following
2 suggestions as to why it may be necessary:
1) Mangone doesn't necessarilly have _nothing_. When the
suit was filed, he had an expensive house, a ferrari,
a mercedes and a BMW. He may in fact have more assets.
If DCU gets a judgement in our favor, if he were to
declare bankruptcy, DCU would at least be in the
running for the proceeds of any liquidation. (I think
DCU could also force a liquidation as well. (I don't
know much about bankruptcy, but I think one must list
all the creditors you want protection from - winning the
lawsuit probably makes DCU a creditor.)
2) In some situations, failure to assert one's legal rights can
amount to a waiver of such rights. (I don't know if
that applies in this case.) In any event, it may have
been a necessary step to recover damages from the bonding
company.
In summary, although I think there are many valid areas of criticism
of the BOD's management of the credit union, I don't think the
lawsuit is one of them... I really think we should step back and
let the lawyers handle this one...
-al
|
294.12 | I met a friend of Mangone's..... | TYGER::GIBSON | | Fri Nov 01 1991 09:24 | 21 |
| While engaged in a discussion of white collar crime recently, I
brought up the situation with Mangone and the Barnstable
and Digital CU's. Unknown to me, one of the participants in the
conversation happened to be a personal friend of his. Her
"justifications" for his actions were:
1. His son had died.
2. He got a little greedy, so he's going to jail.
She also stated that he had lost his boat and his airplane because of
his legal situation. Her sympathies were all with him. He did wrong,
but there were extenuating circumstances.
This is a place where I do frequent business, and she is an employee
there, so I did not get into a "p****ing contest" with her. I equate
her attitude to that of friends of an ax murderer: "He was always
such a nice boy, and took such good care of his mother."
Linda
|
294.13 | | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | Someday, DCU will be a credit union. | Fri Nov 01 1991 09:57 | 11 |
|
His son had died. My sympathies but people suffer losses of loved ones
without defrauding thousands of people of millions of dollars. A play
on peoples' sympathies I guess. Worth a shot but pretty poor in my
eyes.
He got a little greedy? Guess we can thank our lucky stars he didn't
get REAL greedy! This man should do HARD time if convicted. He has
stolen from thousands of people. It'll be interesting to see what
happens to him in the halls of justice.
|
294.14 | He got a little greedy, but at least he didn't show it off | LJOHUB::SYIEK | | Fri Nov 01 1991 10:34 | 13 |
|
Mangone had a boat and an airplane too? Along with, what was it,
half a dozen luxury cars and eight rental properties? Boy he sure
didn't believe in flaunting it. It's easy to understand why no one
suspected him of wrongdoing.
Sort of reminds me of that cartoon on one of the walls here, showing
a guy being led away by the FBI from a yard sale he was holding
featuring "surplus" Digital video terminals, with the caption:
"So, what tipped you off that he was stealing from Digital?"
Jim
|
294.15 | | SSDEVO::EGGERS | Anybody can fly with an engine. | Fri Nov 01 1991 13:57 | 8 |
| Re: .-1
The airplane was probably at at airport somewhere, not in his front
yard. And the boat possibly at some marina. The ownership of rental
properties isn't obvious to casual observers.
Now where he parked half a dozen luxury cars isn't clear to me.
If on his home property, that becomes obvious.
|
294.16 | | MIZZOU::SHERMAN | ECADSR::Sherman DTN 223-3326 | Fri Nov 01 1991 14:51 | 10 |
| As to whether or not the Board should go after Mangone, just imagine
what the outcry would have been if the Board said, "We know we can't
recover anything because there are too many other concerns that will
take everything. It won't be worth the effort of getting the best
lawyers money can buy." Darned if they do, darned if they don't.
Better to appear to be doing all you can possibly do to recover the
funds of shareholders, even if the net result is negligible. I don't
fault the Board on this decision.
Steve
|
294.17 | | COGITO::AHERN | We can vote REAL CHOICES for DCU! | Sun Apr 05 1992 15:56 | 78 |
| [Permission to forward or re-post this note is granted.]
The following appeared in "The Boston Globe" on Saturday, April 4th.
THRIFT OFFICIAL CRITICIZED
Trustees say Mangone led high-roller's life
By John H. Kennedy
Globe Staff
Richard D. Mangone, accused of helping defraud the Barnstable Community
Federal Credit Union of $47 million, has lived a high-roller's life on
gambling junkets to Las Vegas in violation of a court order, officials
alleged yesterday.
The National Credit Union Administration sued Mangone and four other
former credit union officials last year to recoup losses from allegedly
fraudulent loans at the Hyannis institution, which was placed in
liquidation by the agency in June.
Now a court-appointed trustee in the lawsuit is seeking a criminal
contempt charge against Mangone for allegedly violating a federal
judge's order limiting Mangone's spending to $8,000 per month for
"ordinary, reasonable and usual personal expenses.'
Officials said Mangone has frequented the Mirage Casino at Las Vegas
seven times since the judge's order last August, purchased more than
$250,000 worth of chips, winning or losing as much as $40,000 per trip.
His total net losses from the trips, according to the documents,
amounted to about $10,000.
"Every day that defemdant Mangone is permitted to violate the court's
order depletes the pool of assets available to repay [the credit union]
and the NCUA's insurance fund," regualators said in the documents filed
yesterday in US District Court in Boston.
In a single day in February, for example, Mangone lost more than
$20,000 at the Mirage, more than doubling the amount the court allowed
him to spend monthly without permission of the trustee, according to
the documents.
Mangone, of Norwell, has an unlisted telephone number and could not be
reached for comment yesterday. His lawyer, William Cagney, of Edison,
N.J., said he had not seen the court documents and declined to comment.
The federal agency, which filed casino computer records to support the
trustee's request for a contempt charge, said Mangone also "lived the
life of Riley" in the 1 1/2 years before the court order and in the
dying days of the credit union.
During that period, Mangone visited the Mirage more than two dozen
times, wagering more than $2.5 million, and on one six-day trip in
March 1991 lost more than $240,000, the documents said.
"To say that defendant Mangone is a valued customer at the Mirage
Casino in Las Vegas, Nevada, is an understatement," according to documents.
They draw a picture of a high-stakes gambler, the kind of a customer
who rated free penthouse suites, airline tickets, meals and boxing
tickets. In fact, the Mirage "often ensconced defendant Mangone in the
lap of luxury," showering him with more than $35,000 worth of such
gratuities, said the regulators.
While the National Credit Union Administration has filed the civil
lawsuit against Mangone and others involved in Barnstable, no criminla
charges have been filed.
Mangone was fired last April as president of the Digital Employees
Federal Credit Union, a separate corporate entity from the computer
manufacturer. That credit union has also sued Mangone over $18 million
in bad real estate loans, some of them made in conjunction with the
Barnstable credit union, according to a Plymouth Superior Court lawsuit.
That lawsuit alleges "Mangone played a central and pivotal role in the
organization, administration and management of these loans, which have
involved extensive fraud and other acts of wrongdoing."
|
294.18 | Countdown to bankruptcy | GUFFAW::GRANSEWICZ | REAL CHOICES for a real CU! | Mon Apr 06 1992 11:01 | 24 |
|
Well, nice to know they're keeping track of the old Prez anyways. Many
people had wondered if he'd skipped the country. Looks like the only
reason he'd do that would be to hit Monte Carlo.
>During that period, Mangone visited the Mirage more than two dozen
>times, wagering more than $2.5 million, and on one six-day trip in
>March 1991 lost more than $240,000, the documents said.
Hmmm, I wonder if this was after he was granted a leave of abscence
from DCU to help NCUA with Barnstable?
>Mangone was fired last April as president of the Digital Employees
>Federal Credit Union, a separate corporate entity from the computer
>manufacturer.
Well, if today is Monday, the subject is Mangone and the sun is shining
then it must be the day DCU is a seperate corporate entity. Who
volunteers to call the Globe and tell them that DCU is not a seperate
corporate entity but an "important employee benefit"? ;-)
Maybe we should start a note for "Guess how much DCU will recover from
Mangone".
|
294.19 | | TOMK::KRUPINSKI | I'm voting for 'REAL CHOICES' candidates in the DEFCU election | Mon Apr 06 1992 11:15 | 9 |
| > Maybe we should start a note for "Guess how much DCU will recover from
> Mangone".
I expect that depends upon how well he does at the tables...
He's just trying to win enough to pay us all back, right?
Tom_K
|
294.20 | | AOSG::GILLETT | Petition candidate for DCU BoD | Mon Apr 06 1992 12:01 | 10 |
| Unbelievable! The more this stuff gets out into the open, the
worse it gets. $250,000 a pop...that's some hefty coin.
The only good news in this is that if the allegations are true, then
he has money. I would've expected him to be bankrupt by now.
Those go-get'em bull market days of the 80's are sure coming home to
roost aren't they?
./chris
|
294.21 | | PATE::MACNEAL | ruck `n' roll | Mon Apr 06 1992 12:28 | 8 |
| � Well, if today is Monday, the subject is Mangone and the sun is shining
� then it must be the day DCU is a seperate corporate entity. Who
� volunteers to call the Globe and tell them that DCU is not a seperate
� corporate entity but an "important employee benefit"? ;-)
It is a separate corporate entity in that the the DCU BoD and the DEC
BoD are not one and the same, and the officers and shareholders are not
one and the same.
|
294.22 | | AOSG::GILLETT | Petition candidate for DCU BoD | Mon Apr 06 1992 12:46 | 21 |
| > It is a separate corporate entity in that the the DCU BoD and the DEC
> BoD are not one and the same, and the officers and shareholders are not
> one and the same.
No disagreement there. I think what Phil was referring to is that, depending
on the situation, DEC senior management refer to DCU as either an employee
benefit (implying a close relationship between DEC and DCU), or as a separate
corporation (implying no relationship between DEC and DCU).
For example, I was talking to "somebody" in Corporate (promised to not report
who, or the exact nature of the conversation in notes) about DCU issues a
couple weeks ago. This person, as part of another comment, referred to DCU
as a separate corporation. On the other hand, I've heard DCU referred to
as a valuable resource by this same person's peers.
How DCU is perceived, of course, has a direct implication on how DEC management
treat people who are concerned with DCU's future, and with how "problems"
related to DCU are handled. DEC has shown itself to be inconsistent with their
interpretation, which makes it convenient to react in paradoxical ways.
./chris
|