According to Evidence, Montana’s Largest Credit Union Steals Property from Members…Here is the Proof

As the fifteen year battle between a Montana businessman and the credit union who he trusted to service his loan comes to a conclusion in Federal Bankruptcy Court, several items have become painfully clear which outline the organized and blatant criminality of Montana’s largest credit union, Whitefish Credit Union (WCU)

Whitefish Credit Union was founded in 1934 during the Great Depression by five railroad employees in Whitefish, Montana, who each contributed $5 to form the initial capital of just $25. Since then, it has grown to become the largest credit union in Montana, with assets exceeding $2 billion and more than 60,000 members.

The rise of Whitefish Credit Union is certainly impressive as far as banking standards go. But as evidence continues to be revealed in the ongoing bankruptcy case, one can only conclude that WCU did not acquire all of their assets honestly. In fact, this article will provide definitive proof that WCU stole a $50 million piece of property in Somers, MT.

To get a full background on the voluminous number of criminal acts and banking violations perpetrated by WCU, take the time to review the Expert Witness Report by former banking VP, Gerald Fritts. As you will read, WCU has been trying to steal the property in Somers, MT owned by Thorco, Inc since they first approved the loan in 2009.

The above mentioned report is current through February 2022, and that’s where we will pick-up the narrative to outline the most recent criminal acts perpetrated by WCU.

After a hearing in front of the Montana Bank Oversight Committee, Montana Banking Commissioner Melanie Hall and Chief Legal Counsel for the Montana Banking Commission, Kelly O’ Sullivan admitted that Thorco had no judgement owed on their Somers property and that the case should be over. You can read an abbreviated testimony from both public servants by clicking the link below.

Testimony of Montana Banking Commissioner, Melanie Hall

Shortly after the aforementioned meeting with the Bank Oversight Committee, and at the behest of Donna Goodrich from WCU, the title company for WCU, Title Financial Specialty Services (TFSS), issued a Quitclaim Deed and Release of Mortgage to Thorco, Inc. for their long-contended Somers Property.

According to testimony by Shauna Romrell, the President of TFSS, WCU was afforded 90 days to object to the conveyance but failed to act. On the 91st day, TFSS filed the Quitclaim and Release of Mortgage on May 12, 2022. You can see the Expert Witness Report on TFSS by clicking the link below.

Interview with Shauna Romrell, President of Title Financial Specialty Services

At this point, and despite the ongoing criminal activity of WCU, Thorco Inc. had legally re-acquired their property and the matter should have been over. However, WCU CEO and arch criminal James Kenyon decided to break the law and steal Thorco’s property back. You can see the release of Mortgage and Quitclaim deed by clicking the link below.

Thorco Release of Mortgage and Quitclaim

On June 6, 2022, WCU CEO James Kenyon filed a “Corrected Release of Mortgage” with the Flathead County Clerk & Recorder, and by doing so committed 2 felonies. Kenyon blatantly and knowingly falsified the public record, which is a 10-year felony, then Kenyon hit the daily double and committed a 30-year felony by committing “felony conversion of property,” both with just 1 filing. See the document linked below.

James Kenyon’s Correction of Mortgage

There are several problems with Kenyon’s filing as it pertains to lawful conduct. First, Kenyon failed to follow Montana law when objecting to the property conveyance by TFSS. The Montana Rules of Civil Procedure clearly outlines the lawful process for objecting to a conveyance, and are highlighted below.

Key Steps for Objecting to a Conveyance of Property under Montana Rules of Civil Procedure:

1. Filing a Complaint:
   • To formally object to a conveyance, a party must file a complaint in a district court that has jurisdiction over the property. The complaint outlines the nature of the objection, such as a claim that the conveyance is fraudulent, invalid, or violates a legal right.
   • The complaint must meet the requirements outlined in Montana Rule of Civil Procedure 8, which mandates a “short and plain” statement of the claim and the grounds for the objection.
2. Lis Pendens:
   • Under Montana Code Annotated § 70-19-102, a party may file a lis pendens (a notice of pending litigation) with the county recorder. This notice informs the public that the property is the subject of a legal dispute and prevents the owner from transferring the property to a third party without resolving the dispute.
   • A lis pendens is often used to protect the objecting party’s interest in the property while the lawsuit is ongoing.
3. Injunctions and Temporary Restraining Orders (TROs):
   • A party can request an injunction or TRO to prevent the conveyance of the property while the dispute is being resolved. The procedures for obtaining injunctive relief are outlined in Montana Rule of Civil Procedure 65.
   • The party must demonstrate that they will suffer irreparable harm if the conveyance proceeds and that they are likely to succeed on the merits of their case.
4. Discovery and Evidence:
   • After the complaint is filed, the parties enter the discovery phase to gather evidence related to the property conveyance. Discovery can include depositions, requests for documents, and interrogatories, governed by Montana Rules of Civil Procedure 26–37.
   • The objecting party must provide evidence supporting their claim, such as proof of fraud, undue influence, or a title defect.
5. Motion for Summary Judgment:
   • If there are no genuine disputes of material fact, a party may file a motion for summary judgment under Montana Rule of Civil Procedure 56, asking the court to rule in their favor without a trial. This can be used to resolve objections to property conveyances quickly if the facts are clear and undisputed.
6. Trial and Judgment:
   • If the case proceeds to trial, the court will hear arguments and review evidence from both sides. If the court finds in favor of the objecting party, it may void or reverse the conveyance of the property or issue other remedies.
   • If the court finds no basis for the objection, the conveyance will proceed.

Grounds for Objecting to Property Conveyance:

• Fraud or Misrepresentation: The conveyance was obtained through deceit or falsified information.
• Undue Influence or Duress: The transfer was made under coercion or improper pressure.
• Title Defects: The title to the property is unclear, encumbered, or defective.
• Breach of Contract: The conveyance violates an agreement, such as a real estate contract or trust.

James Kenyon did not perform any of the steps outlined by Montana Code before he filed his correction, because criminals don’t follow laws. To make matters worse, a recent search of the Flathead County Clerk and Recorder’s records found no evidence that James Kenyon has Power of Attorney to transfer ANY property in Flathead County. Additionally, a recent search at the Montana Insurance Commission revealed that Kenyon’s Securities License is inactive, which means that it’s not valid to conduct real estate transactions. You can see both documents by clicking the respective links below.

Search Results from the Flathead County Clerk & recorder on Kenyon’s Power of Attorney

Search Results from the Office of the Insurance Commissioner

In light of the evidence presented, one can only conclude that WCU is guilty of property theft of one of its members by way of CEO James Kenyon. Stay tuned to Valley Broadcast Network for more updates as we unravel the operations of the Flathead Valley cell of the statewide organized crime network, who are stealing properties all across Montana.