XML 32 R21.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.8.0.1
Litigation
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Litigation
Litigation
In the normal course of business, Valley is a party to various outstanding legal proceedings and claims. In the opinion of management, the financial condition, results of operations and liquidity of Valley should not be materially affected by the outcome of such legal proceedings and claims. However, in the event of an unexpected adverse outcome in one or more of our legal proceedings, operating results for a particular period may be negatively impacted. Disclosure is required when a risk of material loss in a litigation or claim is more than remote, even when the risk of a material loss is less than likely. Unless an estimate cannot be made, disclosure is also required of the estimate of the reasonably possible loss or range of loss.
Although there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome, Valley has generally denied, or believes it has a meritorious defense and will deny liability in litigation pending against Valley and claims made, including the matter described below. Valley intends to defend vigorously each case against it. Liabilities are established for legal claims when payments associated with the claims become probable and the costs can be reasonably estimated.
Merrick Bank Corporation v. Valley National Bank and American Express Travel Related Services v. Valley National Bank litigation. For about a decade, Valley served as the depository bank for various charter operators under regulations of the Department of Transportation (DOT) and contracts entered into with charter operators under those regulations. The purported intent of the regulations is to afford some protection to the customers of the charter operators. A charter operator has several options with regard to fulfilling its obligations under the regulations, with one option requiring the charter operator to deposit the proceeds of tickets purchased for a charter flight into an FDIC insured bank account. The funds for a flight are released when the charter operator certifies that the flight has been completed. Valley stopped serving as a depository bank for the charter business due to the narrow profit in that business combined with the legal expenses incurred to defend itself in a prior case in which Valley was completely successful and the anticipated legal expenses from the following similar cases that are still pending.
Valley served as the depository bank for Myrtle Beach Direct Air (Direct Air) under a contract between Direct Air and Valley approved by the DOT under the DOT regulations. Direct Air commenced operations in 2007 but in March 2012 Direct Air ceased operations and filed for bankruptcy. Thereafter the United States Justice Department charged three of the principals of Direct Air with criminal fraud; that case is expected to go to trial in March 2018. Merrick Bank Corp. (Merrick) was the merchant bank for Direct Air and processed credit card purchases for Direct Air. Following the bankruptcy of Direct Air, Merrick incurred chargebacks in the approximate amount of $26.2 million when the Direct Air customers whose flights had been canceled obtained a credit from their card issuing banks for the cost of the ticket or other item purchased from Direct Air. Merrick was not able to recover the chargebacks from Direct Air. Direct Air’s depository account at Valley contained approximately $1.0 million at the time Direct Air ceased operations.
Merrick filed an action against Valley with ten counts in December 2013. Valley moved to dismiss five of the counts and, in March 2015, the court dismissed four of the five counts. American Express Travel Related Services (American Express) filed a similar action against Valley claiming about $3.0 million in charge-backs. Five of American Express’ eleven counts have been dismissed. The two cases have now been consolidated in the Federal District Court of New Jersey.
During April 2017, all parties attended a mediation, however it was unsuccessful. Shortly before the mediation, Valley filed summary judgment motions on all of the remaining counts in both the Merrick and American Express cases. Merrick and American Express also filed summary judgment motions against Valley. As of the present time, the Court has not rendered any decisions on these pending motions.
At September 30, 2017, Valley could not estimate an amount or range of reasonably possible losses related to the matter described above. Based upon information currently available and advice of counsel, Valley believes that the eventual outcome of such claims will not have a material adverse effect on Valley’s consolidated financial position. However, in the event of unexpected future developments, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of the matters, if unfavorable, may be material to Valley’s results of operations for a particular period.