Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act

Effective January 1, 1990, Illinois adopted the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. “The purpose of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is to prevent fraudulent transfers of property by a debtor who intends to defraud creditors by placing assets beyond their reach.” Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Personnel Staffing Group, LLC, 2018 IL App (1st) 172281, ¶18, 105 N.E.3d 979, 423 Ill.Dec. 571. See also Harris Bank St. Charles v. Weber, 298 Ill.App.3d 1072, 700 N.E.2d 722, 727, 233 Ill.Dec. 194 (2d Dist. 1998) (“[T]he purpose of the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act is to ‘invalidate otherwise sanctioned transactions made with a fraudulent intent.’ ”), quoting In re Marriage of Del Giudice, 287 Ill.App.3d 215, 678 N.E.2d 47, 49, 222 Ill.Dec. 640 (1st Dist. 1997).

Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act
Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act – stops lies

A new Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act Third District Appellate case that is of interest to secured lenders.

The case of Pluciennik v. Vandenberg provided the first time that Illinois applied the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) and its definition of “asset” on an encumbered piece of real estate.

Plaintiffs filed a UFTA action seeking to avoid transfers of three parcels of real estate from companies owned and managed by Defendant to companies held in irrevocable trusts for the benefit of his minor daughters. Valid mortgages encumbered all the real estate transferred.

The Trial Court erred in determining, as a matter of law, that the real estate were not assets under the UFTA because they were fully encumbered because no evidence of the fair market value of the real estate was considered in granting a motion to dismiss the UFTA complaint.

“That the fair market value of encumbered property that exceeds the value of a valid lien qualifies as an asset under Illinois’s Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. “

Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) Case Law

The trial court made a mistake by not taking evidence on the fair market value of the real estate transferred.

As a result, there continued to be a material issue of fact as to the reasonable value of the properties and whether, in light of the fair market value, the properties were fully encumbered.

Therefore, Illinois law recognizes the value of the asset over and above the encumbrance upon it to be subject to the UFTA.

How to Know if you Have a Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (UFTA) Claim?

  1. Look at the both the fair market value of the asset,
  2. and check the payoff of the debt encumbering the asset
  3. If there is extra money beyond the collateral’s fair market value, then there is a UFTA claim.

Whether this is your first land use issue or most recent, our office has helped people and businesses alike.

Thomas Howard was on the ball and got things done. Easy to work with, communicates very well, and I would recommend him anytime.

Picture of Thomas Howard

Thomas Howard

Tom Howard is an experienced lawyer and the leader at Collateral Base. He has been working in law and business consulting for over 15 years and focuses on helping businesses in the cannabis industry. Tom guides them through tricky rules, helps them get licenses, and finds money for their projects. He has helped clients in several states and is a Certified Ganjier, which means he's an expert in cannabis. Tom also runs a well-known YouTube channel called "Cannabis Legalization News," where he shares updates and explains cannabis laws and industry news.

Do you want a FREE Quote?

Give us a call about what you are looking for and we’ll let you know if we can help and how much we think it will cost. 

Thomas Howard

Business Lawyer & Consultant

At Collateral Base we help clients get organized, licensed, capitalized and exert their rights in court. We have #GoodProblems

Table of Contents

Related Posts

Get in Touch with Us Today!