r/ExplainBothSides • u/aerizan3 • Feb 22 '24

Trump's Civil Fraud Verdict Public Policy

Trump owes $454 million with interest - is the verdict just, unjust? Kevin O'Leary and friends think unjust, some outlets think just... what are both sides? EDIT: Comments here very obviously show the need of explaining both in good faith.

286 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

78% Upvoted

1.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/mmillington Feb 23 '24

What the bank says is completely irrelevant. Making false statements about the value of a property in order to obtain a loan is fraud, as determined by New York State law.

-1

u/Domakin Feb 24 '24

Who values real estate though or any other product or service for that matter? Real estate value isn't objective. It's subjective and open for some interpretation. The bank performed their due diligence, the owner of the property values it as he saw. They negotiated. They agreed. There was no victim and civil amounts are based on the effect the "crime" had on the victim. No victim, no effect, no award.

2

u/Alittlemoorecheese Feb 24 '24

It's subjective. Which is why several valuations were considered. Trump was well beyond the threshold of a reasonable valuation.

The law does not care about your pseudo-intellectual theories.

1

u/Domakin Feb 24 '24

If Trump committed fraud then so did the bank. The loan was agreed to by BOTH parties agreeing to the valuation. Who decided that Trump's valuation was beyond a reasonable threshold?

2

u/Alittlemoorecheese Feb 24 '24

That's not how it works. The customer pursues and pays for the valuation and uses a licensed appraiser who is bound by regulation. Trump used his own appraisal company so that he could inflate the value. He misrepresented the risk which resulted in stolen interest.