- Tags:
- Show more
- Pages:
- 2
- Words:
- 550
Name Instructor Course Date of submission Question# 1 Bernard Flinn operated a business known as Harvey Investment Co., Inc./ High Risk Loans. Flinn worked as a loan broker, matching those who came to him with lenders willing to loan them money given their credit history and the amount involved. From 1982 through 1985, Flinn found loans for five people. Indiana requires that persons engaged in the business of brokering loans obtain a license from the state. Flinn was prosecuted for brokering loans without having a license. He raised the defense that he did not know that a license was required and that, accordingly, he lacked the criminal intent to broker loans without having a license. Does Flinn have a good defense? Answer Facts of the case Flinn, the owner of Harvey Investment Co. operated a loan brokering firm without a proper license. In between 1982 and 1985, Flinn managed to obtain finder fees from clients seeking loans but he did not connect them to the loans as he promised. He later even failed to answer their calls and the customers contacted the law enforcers for action. He was sued by Indiana for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) where he defended himself that he had no intention of defrauding the people for lack of a license. A law was present requiring loan brokers to have a license for their activities. The trial court ruled he was guilty but he appealed. The court of appeal affirmed the trial court’s decision and invalidated Flinn’s defense that he had no knowledge of registration and hence lacked the intent to commit the crime. It was immaterial whether Flinn had a license or not. The fact remained that he had failed
Leave feedback