Skip to content

dossiers · Tricolor Holdings

Tricolor Holdings: full relationship evidence register

The register keeps all accepted connections with source-specific capacities, periods and the relevant response or outcome. Association is not an attribution of another participant’s conduct.

published
14 oct 2026
records as of
13 oct 2026
entities
140
sources
125
cite entities.csv

the questionWhat supports every accepted capacity and period in the graph?

1Ownership capacities

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Founder and controlling member, as alleged in the SEC complaint. Period: Historical leadership before the September 2025 collapse; subsequent executive mandate not established.

Sources (41)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The register preserves dated professional histories and board affiliations, not an assertion that every office continued through or after liquidation. Brooke’s EY role ended in June 2019; Kollar’s nFinanSe office ended on 4 November 2011; joining Equifax in 1999 is not the start of Adams’s later Global Consumer Solutions presidency. A director’s outside employment, investor affiliation or board overlap does not transfer criminal responsibility. Unresolved namesakes and inferred family associations are excluded rather than fused into the graph.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Direct owner of all membership interests. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-18; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedGanas Investors, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Holder of all common equity, subject to the separately described preferred interests. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Insurance Agency. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Home Loans. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Real Estate Services. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TAG Asset Funding, LLC. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor California Auto Group. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Parent owning all interests according to the 2020 pleading. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-28; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Parent owning all interests according to the 2020 pleading. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-28; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedDaniel Chu — Ganas Investors, LLC. Capacity: Member of Ganas Investors; percentage not stated. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedTricolor Investors — Ganas Investors, LLC. Capacity: Member of Ganas Investors; percentage not stated. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedGanas Investors, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Holder of all common equity, subject to the separately described preferred interests. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedDaniel Chu — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Holder of 2,469 shares, below 1%, in the February 2024 disclosure. Period: Shareholding snapshot in the February 2024 disclosure; later ownership not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedBlackRock, Inc. — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Reported beneficial holder of 7.9% in the December 2023 disclosure. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Direct sole member of the warehouse borrower under the 2020 agreement. Period: Recorded from 2020-11-13; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedSerent Capital — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Former investor in Auto Group; investment sold in January 2016. Period: Transaction history:2010 investment; January 2016 exit.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The transaction sources support the investment and exit. The precise Serent percentages and accounts of earlier unrelated disputes are secondary reporting, not a complete historical capitalization register or an adjudication about Tricolor. A former investor’s ownership ended before the later conduct alleged in the current proceedings.

attributedSerent Capital — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Former investor in Auto Group; investment sold in January 2016. Period: Investment from 2010; sold January 2016.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The transaction sources support the investment and exit. The precise Serent percentages and accounts of earlier unrelated disputes are secondary reporting, not a complete historical capitalization register or an adjudication about Tricolor. A former investor’s ownership ended before the later conduct alleged in the current proceedings.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Executive reported to have regained control after Serent’s exit. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The transaction sources support the investment and exit. The precise Serent percentages and accounts of earlier unrelated disputes are secondary reporting, not a complete historical capitalization register or an adjudication about Tricolor. A former investor’s ownership ended before the later conduct alleged in the current proceedings.

attributedTricolor Investors — Ganas Investors, LLC. Capacity: Member of Ganas Investors; percentage not stated. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedFifth Third Bancorp — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Bank holding company identified as parent of the banking subsidiary. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-05; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TAG Asset Funding, LLC. Capacity: Parent group of a separately named jointly administered debtor; direct level not specified. Period: Source recorded 2026-01-12; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedGanas Investors, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Holder of all common equity, subject to the separately described preferred interests. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedDaniel Chu — Chu Family Investments LLC. Capacity: Reported owner of the LLC named in the separate recovery action. Period: Source recorded 2025-12-31; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Recovery allegations are the estate’s claims, not findings that each disputed asset belongs to the estate. A company named Chu Family Investments can be relevant as an identified litigation party without publishing relatives, home addresses or other residential identifiers.
response
Chu’s defense disputes his alleged role and challenges the evidential basis of the government’s account. The defense’s June letter explains that the trustee’s adversary case was stayed, while the separate Wilmington/Vervent investor case continued after remand.
outcome
The trustee’s adversary proceeding was stayed in June 2026 pending the criminal matter. The Los Angeles docket records dismissal without prejudice on 6 April 2026 as to Chu and Chu Family Investments, after withdrawal of the property notice. That disposition does not establish a merits judgment for either side.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Direct owner of all membership interests. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-02; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedFifth Third Bancorp — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Bank holding company identified as parent of the banking subsidiary. Period: Source recorded 2026-09-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Parent group according to the identified report; brand and legal entity require distinction. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-29; later status not established.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedGanas Investors, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Holder of all common equity, subject to the separately described preferred interests. Period: Source recorded 2019-02-01; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Parent owning all interests according to the 2020 pleading. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Parent owning all interests according to the 2020 pleading. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Indirect parent of SPV 4 through Auto Acceptance, supported by the contract. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

2People capacities

attributedJerome A. Kollar — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief financial officer, vice president and secretary. Period: Historical executive role before September 2025; later criminal outcome stated separately.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions.
outcome
An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive.

attributedAmeryn Seibold — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Senior director of finance and director of treasury. Period: Historical executive role before September 2025; later criminal outcome stated separately.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions.
outcome
An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive.

attributedDaniel Chu — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Former board director; resigned 7 September 2025. Period: Director from April 2022; resigned 7 September 2025.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedDaniel Chu — Origin Bank. Capacity: Former board director; resigned 7 September 2025. Period: Director from April 2022; resigned 7 September 2025.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Founder, chief executive and chair in the historical record. Period: Historical leadership before the September 2025 collapse; subsequent executive mandate not established.

Sources (53)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct. Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible. Chu’s defense disputes his alleged role and challenges the evidential basis of the government’s account. The defense’s June letter explains that the trustee’s adversary case was stayed, while the separate Wilmington/Vervent investor case continued after remand.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total. The trustee’s adversary proceeding was stayed in June 2026 pending the criminal matter. The Los Angeles docket records dismissal without prejudice on 6 April 2026 as to Chu and Chu Family Investments, after withdrawal of the property notice. That disposition does not establish a merits judgment for either side.

attributedDavid Goodgame — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Former chief operating officer. Period: Historical executive role before September 2025; later criminal outcome stated separately.

Sources (48)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions. The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.
outcome
An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Founder and former chief executive officer. Period: Historical leadership before the September 2025 collapse; subsequent executive mandate not established.

Sources (23)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu has denied the criminal allegations. His lawyers also challenged seizure and use of property or communications, including a reported Fourth Amendment objection to seizure without a warrant. The competing loan-versus-bonus descriptions remain unresolved here. Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions. Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible. Chu’s defense disputes his alleged role and challenges the evidential basis of the government’s account. The defense’s June letter explains that the trustee’s adversary case was stayed, while the separate Wilmington/Vervent investor case continued after remand.
outcome
The California property-related action was dismissed without prejudice in April 2026, while the separate trustee adversary proceeding was stayed. Neither result is a judgment that all transfers were lawful or that all alleged amounts are recoverable. An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive. Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total. The trustee’s adversary proceeding was stayed in June 2026 pending the criminal matter. The Los Angeles docket records dismissal without prejudice on 6 April 2026 as to Chu and Chu Family Investments, after withdrawal of the property notice. That disposition does not establish a merits judgment for either side.

attributedAndrew DeLuca — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief compliance officer and deputy general counsel in the dated roster. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Former chief financial officer. Period: Historical executive role before September 2025; later criminal outcome stated separately.

Sources (51)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired. Chu has denied the criminal allegations. His lawyers also challenged seizure and use of property or communications, including a reported Fourth Amendment objection to seizure without a warrant. The competing loan-versus-bonus descriptions remain unresolved here. The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute. The California property-related action was dismissed without prejudice in April 2026, while the separate trustee adversary proceeding was stayed. Neither result is a judgment that all transfers were lawful or that all alleged amounts are recoverable.

attributedJames Li — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief risk officer in the dated roster. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedEduardo Perez — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief customer officer in the dated roster. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedStaci Tubbs — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief people officer in the dated roster. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — BlackRock, Inc.. Capacity: Managing director in the global credit business. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — BlackRock, Inc.. Capacity: Senior portfolio manager in the impact or alternative-solutions business. Period: Recorded from 2021; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (47)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director described as affiliated with the investing manager. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director described as affiliated with the investing manager. Period: Source recorded 2023-12-10; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2025-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedStan Erwin — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2025-07-30; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Chief executive signing the depositor’s securities filing. Period: Signature on the 2 June 2025 ABS-15G filing.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedDaniel Chu — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Former independent director and committee member; resigned 7 September 2025. Period: Director from April 2022; resigned 7 September 2025.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedDaniel Chu — PAACO Automotive Group. Capacity: Co-founder of the earlier automotive business; left in 1999. Period: 1992–1999.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.

attributedNick Brown — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief risk officer in the dated roster. Period: Recorded from 2020-12; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAlbert Hoover — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief corporate development and legal officer in the dated appointment. Period: Recorded from 2020-12; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedTroy Sterk — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief supply chain officer in the dated appointment. Period: Recorded from 2020-12; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJennifer Lee — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief product and strategy officer in the dated announcement. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-03; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedStacie Trier — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Chief compliance officer in the dated announcement. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-03; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2024-02-11; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Recorded from 2020-12; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Recorded from 2020-12; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Recorded from 2019-04-30; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Director and chair of the audit committee in the January 2021 appointment. Period: Recorded from 2021-01-06; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — eHealth, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-01-06; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Beta Bionics, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-01-06; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — SHEEX, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-01-06; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Ernst & Young. Capacity: Former EY global vice chair for public policy; role ended June 2019. Period: Historical EY leadership; ended June 2019.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — BlackRock, Inc.. Capacity: Managing director in the global credit business. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — Euroseas Ltd.. Capacity: Former board director of the identified shipping company. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — Eurodry Ltd.. Capacity: Former board director of the identified shipping company. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedChristian Donohue — Tennenbaum Capital Partners. Capacity: Managing director in the historical 2007–2018 period. Period: 2007–2018.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Recorded from 2020; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Kabbage, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Kabbage. Period: Recorded from 2008; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Keep Financial Technologies, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Keep Financial. Period: Recorded from 2022; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — PadSplit, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Recorded from 2019; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — CoreCard Corporation. Capacity: Independent director of CoreCard in the identified dated source. Period: 2022–2025.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Near Intelligence, Inc.. Capacity: Independent director of Near Intelligence in the identified historical record. Period: 2023–2024.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Atlanticus Services Corp.. Capacity: Former corporate-development executive at CompuCredit or its identified successor. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Recorded from 2020-10-31; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — The New York Times Company. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-09; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — eHealth, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-09; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — SHEEX, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-09; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Lehigh Valley Health Network. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021-09; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Kansas City Southern. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Recorded from 2010; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — White & Case LLP. Capacity: Counsel at White & Case in the dated professional record. Period: Recorded from 2009; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — MoneyGram International. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-24; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — The Greenbrier Companies, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-24; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — BBVA Compass. Capacity: Former board director of BBVA Compass. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-24; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — ClearForce, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-09-27; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — Equifax Inc.. Capacity: Equifax executive; joined in 1999 and held the later consumer-solutions presidency. Period: Joined Equifax in 1999; consumer-solutions presidency recorded from 2015/2016.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Chief executive signing the Auto Acceptance consent judgment in 2015. Period: Recorded from 2015; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Former chief executive, as recorded in the directory snapshot. Period: Ended by 2015-12-31.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Semantic Sciences, Inc.. Capacity: Founder of Semantic Sciences. Period: Recorded from 2003; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Highland Capital Management LP. Capacity: Former director of the identified investment organization. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Lehman Brothers Asset Management LLC. Capacity: Former vice president in the asset-management business. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Cityfunds I LLC. Capacity: Former chief financial officer. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Legato Systems, Inc.. Capacity: Former principal of the identified technology company. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-24; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — PadSplit, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — CARE USA. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Kansas City Southern. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — MoneyGram International. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Southern Methodist University. Capacity: Trustee of the university in the dated biography. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — BBVA Compass. Capacity: Former board director of BBVA Compass. Period: Source recorded 2020-12-07; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — eHealth, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — nFinanSe Inc.. Capacity: Former vice president of finance and controller; resigned 4 November 2011. Period: May 2007–4 November 2011.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — The Picture People, Inc.. Capacity: Former interim chief financial officer. Period: Recorded from 2005-10; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — FAO, Inc.. Capacity: Former liquidation trustee and acting chief financial officer. Period: Recorded from 2001-08; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-08; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — MACRO Media, LLC. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2023-08; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — IMB Partners. Capacity: Former IMB executive before joining BlackRock in 2021. Period: IMB from 2020; historical position before joining BlackRock in 2021.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — The Carlyle Group. Capacity: Former vice president in the U.S. buyout business. Period: Source recorded 2023-08; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — HPI Real Estate Services & Investments. Capacity: Co-founder and managing partner of HPI. Period: Recorded from 1992; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — Trammell Crow Company. Capacity: Former industrial-division marketing executive. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAnne Elizabeth Burns — Cavazos Hendricks Poirot, P.C.. Capacity: Bankruptcy lawyer at the identified firm. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Former chief executive and recipient of the disputed repayment demand. Period: Historical leadership before the September 2025 collapse; subsequent executive mandate not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu has denied the criminal allegations. His lawyers also challenged seizure and use of property or communications, including a reported Fourth Amendment objection to seizure without a warrant. The competing loan-versus-bonus descriptions remain unresolved here.
outcome
The California property-related action was dismissed without prejudice in April 2026, while the separate trustee adversary proceeding was stayed. Neither result is a judgment that all transfers were lawful or that all alleged amounts are recoverable.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Daniel Chu. Capacity: Company whose former chief executive was the subject of an internal expense investigation. Period: Source recorded 2023; later status not established.

Sources (7)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The defense asserted privacy, privilege and constitutional objections and sought additional discovery and preparation time. The trustee also participated in disputes over subpoenas and a privilege log; those procedural acts do not determine the criminal allegations.
outcome
On 8 July 2026 the bankruptcy court granted an agreed motion allowing covered defense expenses under an excess CNA D&O policy up to its limit. The earlier request to restrict $15 million of coverage must not be presented as a final ban on defense funding.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — GAST Clearwater. Capacity: Board director appointed in March 2023. Period: Recorded from 2023-03-28; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedRichard E. Anderson — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-03-28; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — CoreCard Corporation. Capacity: Independent director of CoreCard in the identified dated source. Period: Recorded from 2022-10-04; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Keep Financial Technologies, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Keep Financial. Period: Source recorded 2022-10-04; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Kabbage, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Kabbage. Period: Source recorded 2022-10-04; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — ClearForce, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Recorded from 2019-11-20; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Near Intelligence, Inc.. Capacity: Independent director of Near Intelligence in the identified historical record. Period: Recorded from 2023-03-23; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2023-05-31; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — PadSplit, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2023-05-31; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — CoreCard Corporation. Capacity: Independent director of CoreCard in the identified dated source. Period: Source recorded 2023-05-31; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — The New York Times Company. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — The Bank of Nova Scotia. Capacity: Independent director from 14 April 2026. Period: Recorded from 2026-04-14; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — Canadian Pacific Kansas City Limited. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-04-14; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — The Greenbrier Companies, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-04-14; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedAntonio Garza — White & Case LLP. Capacity: Counsel at White & Case in the dated professional record. Period: Source recorded 2026-04-14; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — eHealth, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Recorded from 2019-08; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — The New York Times Company. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2021; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Beta Bionics, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2021; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedStan Erwin — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Board director in the dated source; later mandate not established. Period: Source recorded 2025-07-23; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedMauricio Delgado — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Former chief financial officer and then chief executive. Period: Source recorded 2020-09-21; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDerrick Weatherspoon — The Carlyle Group. Capacity: Former vice president in the U.S. buyout business. Period: Source recorded 2021-02-11; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — CoreCard Corporation. Capacity: Independent director of CoreCard in the identified dated source. Period: Recorded from 2022-10; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Kabbage, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Kabbage. Period: Source recorded 2023-04-04; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedBeth A. Brooke — Lehigh Valley Health Network. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Kabbage, Inc.. Capacity: Co-founder of Kabbage. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedKathryn Petralia — PadSplit, Inc.. Capacity: Director of the identified organization in the dated source. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

3Business capacities

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Operating subsidiary serving the group’s securitizations. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-18; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Depositor transferring receivables to the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-18; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bancorp. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Recorded from 2022-09; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — JPMorgan Chase & Co.. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Barclays Plc. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bank. Capacity: Borrower under Origin Bank’s disclosed notes-receivable-secured credit commitments. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedBlackRock, Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Manager of funds providing convertible preferred capital; minority investment. Period: Recorded from 2021-09; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Credit Suisse. Capacity: Group arranging an offering with the counterparty as underwriter. Period: Source recorded 2020-04-20; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The 2020 ownership representation and the later common-equity statement concern different dates and equity classes. They do not establish that Chu personally owned 100% of Holdings. A Delaware directory entry for Ganas Holdings has not been conclusively reconciled to the subject and is not used as its incorporation number. A 2020 pleading calls Tricolor Auto Group a Texas company, while directory and Texas tax records identify a foreign registration: the unresolved formation discrepancy is retained. Ganas Auto appears both as a brand and as a separately named LLC; a trade name is not enough to merge them. Apoyo Financial is a trade name of Auto Group and also the name of a distinct debtor LLC.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Group associated with the issuance; the trust is the legal issuer. Period: Source recorded 2025-07-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Provider of the July 2025 loan described in the SEC complaint. Period: Source recorded 2025-08-29; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These overlapping payments must not be counted twice as distinct transfers. The retained accounts of property purchases, a forfeited Aspen deposit and attempted recoveries are allegations or reported records; listings and estimates are not realized sale proceeds. Public discussion is confined to aggregate amounts and the identified recovery dispute. Residential locations, parcel or unit identifiers and family biographies are withheld.
response
Chu has denied the criminal allegations. His lawyers also challenged seizure and use of property or communications, including a reported Fourth Amendment objection to seizure without a warrant. The competing loan-versus-bonus descriptions remain unresolved here.
outcome
The California property-related action was dismissed without prejudice in April 2026, while the separate trustee adversary proceeding was stayed. Neither result is a judgment that all transfers were lawful or that all alleged amounts are recoverable.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Depositor transferring receivables to the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-02; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TBK Bank, SSB. Capacity: Borrower group under the floorplan facility; counterparty is agent and lender. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-30; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: 2020–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Barclays Bank PLC. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty participates as lender. Period: 2020–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Group associated with the warehouse vehicle; direct ownership level requires the identified chain. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 6 LLC — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: 2022–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 6 LLC. Capacity: Group associated with the warehouse vehicle; direct ownership level requires the identified chain. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: 2020–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Barclays Bank PLC. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: 2020–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: 2022–2025-09. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — J.P. Morgan Securities LLC. Capacity: Group whose trust offerings were arranged by the counterparty in the stated period. Period: 2022–2025-06.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Barclays Capital Inc.. Capacity: Group whose trust offerings were arranged by the counterparty in the stated period. Period: 2022–2025-06.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Securities, Inc.. Capacity: Group whose trust offerings were arranged by the counterparty in the stated period. Period: 2023–2025-06.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Wilmington Trust, National Association. Capacity: Servicer working with the indenture trustee for the identified trusts. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Depositor transferring receivables to the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — J.P. Morgan Securities LLC. Capacity: Depositor selling notes to the initial purchaser. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Barclays Capital Inc.. Capacity: Depositor selling notes to the initial purchaser. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TBK Bank, SSB. Capacity: Borrower group under the floorplan facility; counterparty is agent and lender. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Group whose portfolio was transferred to the counterparty for successor servicing. Period: Recorded from 2025-09; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-07-16; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Renasant Bank. Capacity: Borrower group; counterparty disclosed the inventory-secured credit exposure. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-11; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Sponsor of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2023-01-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Deloitte & Touche LLP. Capacity: Sponsor commissioning the counterparty’s agreed procedures. Period: Source recorded 2023-01-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Sponsor whose sampled title records named the counterparty or brand as lienholder. Period: Source recorded 2023-01-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Sponsor whose sampled title records named the counterparty or brand as lienholder. Period: Source recorded 2023-01-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: Recorded from 2020-11-13; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Warehouse borrower whose initial servicer was Auto Acceptance. Period: 13 November 2020 agreement; initial servicing terminated 5 September 2025.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Warehouse borrower whose backup and later successor servicer was Vervent. Period: Backup under 2020 agreement; successor to Auto Acceptance from 5 September 2025.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Wilmington Trust, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower whose custodian and account bank was Wilmington Trust National Association. Period: Source recorded 2025-08-15; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: Source recorded 2025-10-27; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedVervent Inc. — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Successor to Auto Acceptance as SPV 4 servicer from 5 September 2025. Period: Backup under 2020 agreement; successor to Auto Acceptance from 5 September 2025.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Parent group subject to a minimum-51% control covenant; exact holding not established by the covenant. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
A minimum-51% control covenant is not proof of an observed share percentage.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB. Capacity: Co-borrower under the 2020 loan for which WSFS is administrative agent. Period: Recorded from 2020-08-06; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — BlackRock, Inc.. Capacity: Group party to the loan and subscription arrangements identified by the BlackRock name. Period: Recorded from 2020-01-27; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Co-borrower under the BlackRock Loan Agreement. Period: Source recorded 2020-08-06; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Depositor party to the agreement with Auto Acceptance as servicer. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-18; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Wilmington Trust, National Association. Capacity: Depositor party to the agreement with the identified trustee. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-18; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Depositor party to the agreement with Vervent as backup servicer. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-18; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: Source recorded 2024-01; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Executive alleged to control the depositor’s securitization process. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Executive alleged to control the depositor’s securitization process. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TBK Bank, SSB. Capacity: Borrower group under the floorplan facility; counterparty is agent and lender. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-25; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Debtor or debtor group; counterparty appears as creditor or agent in the docket. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-25; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bank. Capacity: Debtor or debtor group; counterparty appears as creditor or agent in the docket. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Estate party to the successor-servicing agreement. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-17; later status not established.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty acts as lender or administrative agent under the identified instrument. Period: Source recorded 2024-02; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Barclays Bank PLC. Capacity: Warehouse borrower; counterparty participates as lender. Period: Source recorded 2024-02; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Performance guarantor under the warehouse agreement. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedVervent Inc. — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Backup servicer under the historical SPV 4 agreement; later successor. Period: Backup under 2020 agreement; successor to Auto Acceptance from 5 September 2025.

Sources (12)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedWilmington Trust, National Association — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Collateral custodian and account bank under the warehouse agreement. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedCBIZ MHM, LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Provider of collateral procedures commissioned by the warehouse agent; not an audit opinion. Period: Source recorded 2024-02; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — CBIZ MHM, LLC. Capacity: Warehouse vehicle whose collateral was examined by CBIZ for the agent. Period: Source recorded 2024-02; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Barclays Bank PLC. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Group financed through the identified warehouse vehicle; counterparty or affiliate is lender or agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established. 114 45 46

qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The July opinion recites allegations as true only for purposes of testing the pleadings. It specifically rejects describing CBIZ’s work as an audit or examination of internal controls. The report recommended follow-up on particular items and included Tricolor’s remediation plan; it did not conclude that Tricolor was committing fraud or double pledging.
response
The court found the alleged profit motives and claimed warning signs insufficient to plead fraudulent intent or willful blindness. It also held that sophisticated investors could not establish reasonable reliance given the offering disclaimers and the inadequately pleaded knowledge of falsity. The alleged IPO episode did not adequately show communication between bank teams or substantiate the suggested reason for abandoning the IPO. Tricolor’s management had provided explanations for identified anomalies, including servicing pauses while cars were being repaired.
outcome
Judge Jed Rakoff granted dismissal on 10 June 2026 and issued the explanatory opinion on 16 July. Federal claims were dismissed with prejudice; remaining state claims were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. The docket records termination on 20 July. The court regarded the banks as victims and said the pleadings did not show conduct worse than negligence, if that. This result does not determine the separate Wilmington/Vervent contract case or every collateral-priority dispute.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Purchaser of receivables from Auto Acceptance under the identified agreement. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 3 LLC — CION Ares Diversified Credit Fund. Capacity: Borrower under the fund’s disclosed first-lien revolving investment. Period: Recorded from 2022-09-30; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedTricolor Auto Group, LLC — Ganas Group. Capacity: Business sold to Ganas Group in the January 2016 transaction. Period: Transaction history:2010 investment; January 2016 exit.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The transaction sources support the investment and exit. The precise Serent percentages and accounts of earlier unrelated disputes are secondary reporting, not a complete historical capitalization register or an adjudication about Tricolor. A former investor’s ownership ended before the later conduct alleged in the current proceedings.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Waterfall Asset Management. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Fifth Third Bancorp. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedCrowe LLP — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Financial-statement auditor for the reported 2022 period. Period: 2022–2022.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedGrant Thornton — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Financial-statement auditor for the reported 2023 and 2024 periods. Period: 2023–2024.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Credit Suisse. Capacity: Group borrower under the reported 2018 warehouse facility. Period: Recorded from 2018; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — JPMorgan Chase & Co.. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Barclays Plc. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — AllianceBernstein. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-10; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bank. Capacity: Borrower whose lender reported charge-offs and continuing recovery efforts. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-30; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Group whose financing is attributed to the counterparty or its affiliates. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-30; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Chariot Funding LLC. Capacity: Warehouse borrower using the conduit in the original lender schedule. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Purchaser receiving assigned collateral rights from Auto Acceptance. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedBlackRock, Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Party appearing as creditor in the bankruptcy docket; claim allowance not established. Period: Source recorded 2026-07-29; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. A motion, an agreed timetable, a production order and the substantive outcome of a claim are different events. “Senior Preferred Members” is a docket description, not a complete identification of beneficial owners or a finding that preferred equity was universally debt.
outcome
Later entries matter: the Barclays examination motion was withdrawn on 25 September 2026, without an explanation establishing a merits outcome in the retained entry. The FTI request was resolved by an agreed order on 30 September. An Ares timing stipulation and the 7 October BlackRock status conference are procedural steps, not final liability findings.

attributedWilmington Trust, National Association — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Collateral custodian and account bank for certain warehouse facilities; indenture trustee and custodian for certain securitization trusts. Period: Source recorded 2026-07-01; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The federal court remanded the Wilmington/Vervent case to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. The dismissal of the bank case does not dispose of these contract and fiduciary claims.

attributedDaniel Chu — Origin Bank. Capacity: Reported borrower under a personal mortgage; separate from Tricolor’s corporate loan. Period: Financing reported in August 2025; loan termination not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. These overlapping payments must not be counted twice as distinct transfers. The retained accounts of property purchases, a forfeited Aspen deposit and attempted recoveries are allegations or reported records; listings and estimates are not realized sale proceeds. Public discussion is confined to aggregate amounts and the identified recovery dispute. Residential locations, parcel or unit identifiers and family biographies are withheld.
response
Chu has denied the criminal allegations. His lawyers also challenged seizure and use of property or communications, including a reported Fourth Amendment objection to seizure without a warrant. The competing loan-versus-bonus descriptions remain unresolved here.
outcome
The California property-related action was dismissed without prejudice in April 2026, while the separate trustee adversary proceeding was stayed. Neither result is a judgment that all transfers were lawful or that all alleged amounts are recoverable.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Group whose portfolio was transferred to the counterparty for successor servicing. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-05; later status not established.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 3 LLC — CION Ares Diversified Credit Fund. Capacity: Borrower under the fund’s disclosed first-lien revolving investment. Period: Source recorded 2022-09-30; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Executive alleged to control the group’s trust transactions. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (40)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The register preserves dated professional histories and board affiliations, not an assertion that every office continued through or after liquidation. Brooke’s EY role ended in June 2019; Kollar’s nFinanSe office ended on 4 November 2011; joining Equifax in 1999 is not the start of Adams’s later Global Consumer Solutions presidency. A director’s outside employment, investor affiliation or board overlap does not transfer criminal responsibility. Unresolved namesakes and inferred family associations are excluded rather than fused into the graph.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Executive alleged to control the group’s trust transactions. Period: Source recorded 2026-02-26; later status not established.

Sources (40)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The register preserves dated professional histories and board affiliations, not an assertion that every office continued through or after liquidation. Brooke’s EY role ended in June 2019; Kollar’s nFinanSe office ended on 4 November 2011; joining Equifax in 1999 is not the start of Adams’s later Global Consumer Solutions presidency. A director’s outside employment, investor affiliation or board overlap does not transfer criminal responsibility. Unresolved namesakes and inferred family associations are excluded rather than fused into the graph.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedWilmington Trust, National Association — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Indenture trustee for the securitization trusts identified in the separate investor contract case. Period: Source recorded 2026-06-05; later status not established.

Sources (6)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Recovery allegations are the estate’s claims, not findings that each disputed asset belongs to the estate. A company named Chu Family Investments can be relevant as an identified litigation party without publishing relatives, home addresses or other residential identifiers.
response
Chu’s defense disputes his alleged role and challenges the evidential basis of the government’s account. The defense’s June letter explains that the trustee’s adversary case was stayed, while the separate Wilmington/Vervent investor case continued after remand.
outcome
The trustee’s adversary proceeding was stayed in June 2026 pending the criminal matter. The Los Angeles docket records dismissal without prejudice on 6 April 2026 as to Chu and Chu Family Investments, after withdrawal of the property notice. That disposition does not establish a merits judgment for either side.

attributedTricolor Auto Group, LLC — Origin Bank. Capacity: Debtor or debtor group; counterparty appears as creditor or agent in the docket. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedStone Point Capital — Vervent Inc.. Capacity: Manager of funds investing in the servicing company from 2016. Period: Recorded from 2016; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer working with the separately identified depositor. Period: Source recorded 2022-04-29; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2022-1. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2022-04-29; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedFifth Third Bank, National Association — Tricolor Funding SPV 6 LLC. Capacity: Administrative agent and lender for the SPV 6 warehouse facility. Period: Source recorded 2026-09-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedBlackRock, Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Manager of funds providing convertible preferred capital; minority investment. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedFlexi Compras Autos, LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Originator transferring receivables to Auto Acceptance. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedFlexi Compras Autos, LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Originator whose receivables could enter the warehouse pool. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedJPMorgan Chase & Co. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Lender group reporting losses connected with Tricolor. Period: Source recorded 2025-10-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedFifth Third Bancorp — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Lender group reporting losses connected with Tricolor. Period: Source recorded 2025-10-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — BlackRock, Inc.. Capacity: Group receiving a reported social-impact fund investment. Period: Source recorded 2022-11-11; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The original SPV 4 facility began with a $100 million lender commitment. Later litigation describes a limit of $777 million and SPV 6’s $250 million limit. Limits, outstanding debt and collateral values are different measures. The indictment anonymizes lenders; named-company matches require independent support. A later stated 70–80% advance rate does not rewrite the original 2020 contract’s 40% credit enhancement, which ordinarily left a 60% advance against the eligible balance. The bankruptcy estate and the non-debtor warehouse companies also have different assets and obligations.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Daniel Chu. Capacity: Warehouse vehicle subject to the covenant naming Chu as key executive. Period: Recorded from 2020-11-13; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — KLDL, LLC. Capacity: Party to the letter agreement identified in the warehouse contract. Period: Recorded from 2020-11-13; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association. Capacity: Pledgor granting security to the administrative agent for the secured parties. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Pledgor supporting the warehouse borrower’s obligations. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Warehouse purchaser of originated receivables through the contractual transfer chain. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor California Auto Group. Capacity: Warehouse purchaser of originated receivables through the contractual transfer chain. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Flexi Compras Autos, LLC. Capacity: Warehouse purchaser of originated receivables through the contractual transfer chain. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Contractual representations of clean title and required UCC filings are not proof that every receivable actually existed, was unencumbered or had a completed filing. The agreement’s minimum 51% Holdings-to-Auto-Acceptance control condition is a covenant, not a measured ownership percentage. A blank release form is not an executed release. The clause naming Chu as key person is a contractual trigger, not ownership by SPV 4 of Chu. The historical document does not establish that every term remained unchanged until collapse.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Depositor for the identified trust issuance. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-09; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-09; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJ.P. Morgan Securities LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Bookrunner and structuring agent for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-09; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedBarclays Capital Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Co-manager for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-09; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedFifth Third Securities, Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1. Capacity: Co-manager for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2023-02-09; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-1. Capacity: Depositor for the identified trust issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-01-25; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-1. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2024-01-25; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedBarclays Capital Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-1. Capacity: Bookrunner and structuring agent for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-01-25; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJ.P. Morgan Securities LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-1. Capacity: Joint bookrunner for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-01-25; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-2. Capacity: Depositor for the identified trust issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-2. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2024-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJ.P. Morgan Securities LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-2. Capacity: Bookrunner for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedBarclays Capital Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-2. Capacity: Joint bookrunner for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedFifth Third Securities, Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-2. Capacity: Co-manager for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-05-14; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-3. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2024-10-07; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2024-3. Capacity: Depositor for the identified trust issuance. Period: Source recorded 2024-10-07; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-1. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2025-03-11; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-1. Capacity: Depositor for the identified trust issuance. Period: Source recorded 2025-03-11; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJ.P. Morgan Securities LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-1. Capacity: Bookrunner for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2025-03-11; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Receivables 2 LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Depositor transferring receivables to the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Sponsor and servicer of the issuing trust. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedBarclays Capital Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Bookrunner and structuring agent for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedJ.P. Morgan Securities LLC — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Joint bookrunner for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedFifth Third Securities, Inc. — Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2025-2. Capacity: Co-manager for the identified issuance. Period: Source recorded 2025-06-10; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The SEC table labels remaining principal “as of Tricolor bankruptcy,” although adjacent prose introduces offerings outstanding on 31 July 2025. This dossier preserves the table’s balance label. The SEC’s 14 TAST offerings and more than $1.9 billion since 2013 are not the same stated population as a separate account’s 17 securitizations or roughly $2.7 billion. Statistical pool descriptions, initial transferred pools and later servicing analyses also differ: 2025-2’s statistical pool of 12,570 loans is distinct from the 12,486 actually analyzed after transfer. The 2023-1 agreed-procedures file counts 10,077 statistical loans, whereas the quoted offering description counts 10,068; that snapshot difference is unresolved.
response
Deloitte’s retained agreed-procedures report did not provide assurance about the existence, ownership or actual characteristics of all pool loans. Its sample of 50 loans and comparison procedures cannot be presented as an audit that verified absence of double pledging. Its observed vehicle titles named Auto Group or Ganas Auto, which requires care when comparing contractual transfers with title records.

attributedBlackRock, Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Manager of funds providing convertible preferred capital; minority investment. Period: Source recorded 2025-11-07; later status not established.

Sources (9)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The BlackRock brand does not identify every legal fund or make the public parent the direct lender. The 2024 reorganization of the public BlackRock registrant cannot supply the identity of a 2021 investing fund. A contract’s treatment of preferred equity as debt is specific to its definitions. SPV 4 is expressly excluded from the defined BlackRock loan obligation; that is not evidence of a direct loan from BlackRock to SPV 4. CION’s disclosed position does not conclusively identify an anonymous lender in the criminal indictment. BlackRock’s separately disclosed 7.9% Origin Bancorp shareholding is not evidence of coordinated lending decisions.
outcome
A later retained report says the BlackRock Impact Opportunities fund was being closed to new investments and wound down after Tricolor’s failure. That is a reported fund-management decision, not a finding that the investor participated in fraud.

attributedSMBC Nikko Securities America, Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Organization appearing as creditor in the bankruptcy docket. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Joint administration is procedural and does not itself merge all assets, ownership or liabilities. The broad $1–10 billion petition liability bracket is not an audited loss calculation. A party labeled creditor on a docket may hold an asserted or disputed claim; that status is not a final allowance of its amount. TAG Asset Funding and Tricolor Asset Funding are alternative names attached in the retained sources to case 25-33492.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedVervent Inc. — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Successor servicer of the affected group portfolio after collapse. Period: Recorded from 2025-09-19; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedVervent Inc. — Wilmington Trust, National Association. Capacity: Servicer coordinating the transition with the indenture trustee. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-22; later status not established.

Sources (13)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Different facility transitions and the broader portfolio arrangement should not be reduced to one universal start date. Consumer complaints are accounts of difficulties, not proof of every alleged contractual violation. The retained 2024 Marcella Fox Truth in Lending docket identifies a filed action but does not establish its final outcome. A ruling declining to dismiss the earlier Shen telephone-contact case is not a final merits judgment.
response
Vervent states that it was a backup servicer before collapse, with no involvement in Tricolor’s prior origination or servicing. The statement explains its asserted scope of responsibility; it does not decide the pending contract claims.
outcome
In the distinct 2015 FTC case, a stipulated judgment against Auto Acceptance imposed an $82,777 civil penalty and permanent requirements for accurate credit-reporting policies and reasonable investigation of direct disputes. The company neither admitted nor denied the allegations except jurisdiction. The California regulator’s retained index lists an April 2019 license-revocation order and a May settlement; the full settlement terms have not been verified here, so no present-license conclusion is inferred.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Alvarez & Marsal. Capacity: Company that retained Alvarez & Marsal for consulting work. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-17; later status not established.

Sources (7)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. A government request to reject privilege claims is advocacy, not an order establishing that every communication is unprivileged. One passage dates laptop imaging to September 2026, but the same motion’s chronology and later passage identify September 2025; the precise imaging date is not used to resolve the privilege dispute here.
response
The defense asserted privacy, privilege and constitutional objections and sought additional discovery and preparation time. The trustee also participated in disputes over subpoenas and a privilege log; those procedural acts do not determine the criminal allegations.
outcome
On 8 July 2026 the bankruptcy court granted an agreed motion allowing covered defense expenses under an excess CNA D&O policy up to its limit. The earlier request to restrict $15 million of coverage must not be presented as a final ban on defense funding.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — TBK Bank, SSB. Capacity: Borrower group under the floorplan facility; counterparty is agent and lender. Period: Source recorded 2025-12-31; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. The bank subsidiary, its public holding company, an administrative-agent role and a lender’s own economic participation are not interchangeable. An anonymous later Renasant reference to a large bankruptcy relationship is insufficient to assign every reported collateral change to Tricolor. Reported exposure, commitment, reserve, charge-off and final recovery must remain separate.
response
As of 31 December 2025, TBK believed its collateral adequately secured its outstanding floorplan position, while acknowledging that other creditors asserted competing interests and a court might need to resolve priority. This is inconsistent with treating all Tricolor lender collateral as worthless.
outcome
Renasant placed its facility on nonaccrual after the bankruptcy; TBK’s cited year-end account did not report a Tricolor charge-off. The favorable dismissal in the separate noteholder bank lawsuit remains relevant to claims of participation in fraud, but does not allocate collateral in the bankruptcy.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bank. Capacity: Borrower whose lender reported charge-offs and continuing recovery efforts. Period: Source recorded 2025-12-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Origin Bancorp, Inc.. Capacity: Borrower of the bank subsidiary whose holding company disclosed the loss. Period: Source recorded 2025-12-31; later status not established.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate. Origin’s aggregate loans to directors and related parties cannot be used to identify Tricolor’s exact inclusion without a specific disclosure. Chu’s board role and the bank’s lending coexist, but do not themselves establish an improper approval or fraud by the bank. A separately reported personal mortgage is not the same loan as Tricolor’s corporate credit line.
response
Origin said it was pursuing available recoveries. A charge-off recognizes an accounting loss; it does not establish that future recoveries are impossible.
outcome
Origin’s later annual disclosure reports $29.5 million of 2025 net charge-offs connected with Tricolor and approximately $29.6 million of provision, comprising $29.3 million for loans and $338,000 for off-balance-sheet commitments. It reports a $0.77 adverse effect on diluted EPS. These annual figures supersede the narrower third-quarter $28.4 million net charge-off for the year’s total.

attributedWilmington Trust Company — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Owner trustee for certain notes issued by Tricolor securitization trusts; exact series not identified here. Period: Historical financing capacities described in the 1 July 2026 discovery record.

Sources (6)
qualification
Wilmington Trust Company is separate from Wilmington Trust, National Association. The group connection does not make Holdings the legal issuer or identify any particular trust series. These are distinct legal entities and capacities. Common involvement in several financing stages does not establish participation in fraud. The trustee’s investigation of possible claims and the investors’ litigation also are different proceedings.
response
Vervent states that before the collapse it was only backup servicer and did not participate in Tricolor’s loan origination or servicing operations.
outcome
The separate case against Wilmington Trust, National Association and Vervent was remanded to New York’s state Commercial Division on 5 June 2026. The retained June defense filing describes continued litigation under index 650228/2026, with a summer motion schedule. This procedural outcome is not attributed to Wilmington Trust Company merely because of its distinct owner-trustee capacity.

5Infrastructure capacities

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — C T Corporation System. Capacity: Company using the counterparty as registered agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Auto Group, LLC — C T Corporation System. Capacity: Company using the counterparty as registered agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Auto Group, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-27; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor SPV 3 Holdings, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2020-09-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor SPV 3 Holdings, LLC — C T Corporation System. Capacity: Company using the counterparty as registered agent. Period: Source recorded 2020-09-14; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedDaniel Chu — Tricolor Funding SPV 4 LLC. Capacity: Named recipient of borrower notices; this capacity does not itself prove ownership. Period: Recorded from 2020-11-13; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (4)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Serent Capital. Capacity: Historical correspondence or registration record routed through Serent. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (11)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Funding SPV 6 LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — C T Corporation System. Capacity: Company using the counterparty as registered agent. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Home Loans — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Insurance Agency — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Real Estate Services — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTAG Asset Funding, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Separately named debtor in the jointly administered Chapter 7 cases. Period: Source recorded 2025-09-10; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.
outcome
The latest retained October account describes approximately 2,100 vehicles still unsold, with title processing obstructing completion. The trustee requested an extension of sales to 30 November and procedures for vehicles without clear title, with a hearing scheduled for 14 October. A requested extension and hearing date are not proof of approval or completed sales.

attributedFlexi Compras Autos, LLC — Tricolor Holdings LLC. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedSerent Capital — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Historical correspondence or registration record routed through Serent. Period: Source recorded 2010-04-01; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

attributedTricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC — Wells Fargo Bank, National Association. Capacity: Account customer; Wells Fargo is the master collection account bank. Period: Source recorded 2020-11-13; later status not established.

Sources (4)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.
response
In its October 2025 filing, JPMorgan as agent preserved the lenders’ ownership and lien claims, contested the estate’s description of cash and vehicles as estate assets, and supported only specified cash uses subject to protections. The agent acknowledged uncertainty over fictitious and double-pledged loans; an asserted first lien is not a judicial resolution of competing collateral claims.
outcome
The agent’s account says Auto Acceptance’s SPV 4 servicing role ended on 5 September 2025 and Vervent succeeded it. It reports $612,748,356 principal outstanding on 15 August 2025. SPV 4 was not one of the jointly administered debtors.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Foundation. Capacity: Shared business-address record; not proof of ownership. Period: Source recorded 2026-10-13; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
Shared business infrastructure or an address record does not by itself establish ownership or financial control.

6Associations capacities

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Group, LLC. Capacity: Affiliated operating company in the identified source. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-18; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Tricolor Auto Acceptance, LLC. Capacity: Affiliated operating company in the identified source. Period: Source recorded 2026-08-18; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.

attributedJerome A. Kollar — Ameryn Seibold. Capacity: Cooperating defendants who entered guilty pleas in separate informations. Period: Separate guilty pleas 16 December 2025.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions.
outcome
An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Affiliated operating company in the identified source. Period: Source recorded 2021-09-09; later status not established.

Sources (15)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.

attributedTricolor Holdings LLC — Ganas Auto Group. Capacity: Group associated with the California retail brand; brand use does not merge legal entities. Period: Source recorded 2019-04-30; later status not established.

Sources (10)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.

attributedKathryn Petralia — Castle Creek Capital LLC. Capacity: Advisory board member in the dated directory record. Period: Recorded from 2021; precise appointment or transaction scope follows the source.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedJ. Dann Adams — Moovila. Capacity: Adviser in the dated professional record. Period: Source recorded 2026-09-27; later status not established.

Sources (39)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
The proceedings discussed here identify particular accused or pleading individuals. No blanket claim is made that the other directors, former executives, advisers or outside organizations participated in the alleged conduct.

attributedDaniel Chu — David Goodgame. Capacity: Originally co-accused; Goodgame pleaded guilty and Chu remains not guilty. Period: Original December 2025 charges; Goodgame pleaded guilty 24 June 2026; Chu pleaded not guilty.

Sources (8)
qualification
The connection records the stated capacity at its source date. It does not transfer another participant’s conduct or establish a current mandate.
response
Chu pleaded not guilty to all eight counts. His June defense letter sought more preparation time after the superseding charges and Goodgame’s cooperation, challenged the reliability and incentives of the cooperators, and said important discovery and potentially exculpatory material remained to be examined. In August his lawyer said many allegations were inaccurate and raised substantial legal questions.
outcome
An August 2026 account reports that the judge declined to dismiss the continuing-financial-crimes-enterprise charge and set trial for 25 January 2027. This supersedes the earlier October 2026 setting in the retained docket. No conviction of Chu is established by this archive.
Sources (125)
  1. Media source · s-d163 identified by category only · Media
  2. Other source · s-d175 identified by category only · Other
  3. Media source · s-d177 identified by category only · Media
  4. Company statement source · s-d178 identified by category only · Company statement
  5. Company statement source · s-d179 identified by category only · Company statement
  6. Other source · s-d180 identified by category only · Other
  7. Other source · s-d199 identified by category only · Other
  8. Other source · s-d200 identified by category only · Other
  9. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  10. Other source · s-d208 identified by category only · Other
  11. Court record concerning Tricolor or the identified participant Federal Trade Commission
  12. Other source · s-d227 identified by category only · Other
  13. Company statement source · s-d240 identified by category only · Company statement
  14. Corporate registry source · s-d248 identified by category only · Corporate registry
  15. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  16. Company statement source · s-d260 identified by category only · Company statement
  17. Other source · s-d265 identified by category only · Other
  18. Company statement source · s-d267 identified by category only · Company statement
  19. Corporate registry concerning Tricolor or the identified participant State Bar of Texas
  20. Company statement source · s-d27 identified by category only · Company statement
  21. Company statement source · s-d281 identified by category only · Company statement
  22. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  23. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  24. Company statement source · s-d284 identified by category only · Company statement
  25. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  26. Corporate registry source · s-d287 identified by category only · Corporate registry
  27. Corporate registry source · s-d288 identified by category only · Corporate registry
  28. Company statement source · s-d293 identified by category only · Company statement
  29. Company statement source · s-d294 identified by category only · Company statement
  30. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  31. Other source · s-d309 identified by category only · Other
  32. Media source · s-d311 identified by category only · Media
  33. Company statement source · s-d317 identified by category only · Company statement
  34. Other source · s-d328 identified by category only · Other
  35. Other source · s-d329 identified by category only · Other
  36. Other source · s-d33 identified by category only · Other
  37. Other source · s-d330 identified by category only · Other
  38. Other source · s-d34 identified by category only · Other
  39. Regulatory record concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  40. Other source · s-d39 identified by category only · Other
  41. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  42. Other source · s-d111 identified by category only · Other
  43. Media source · s-d114 identified by category only · Media
  44. Regulatory record concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Department of Justice
  45. Company statement source · s-d63 identified by category only · Company statement
  46. Court record source · s-d72 identified by category only · Court record
  47. Company statement source · s-d83 identified by category only · Company statement
  48. Company statement source · s-d84 identified by category only · Company statement
  49. Media source · s-d9 identified by category only · Media
  50. Court record source · s-d125 identified by category only · Court record
  51. Company statement source · s-d132 identified by category only · Company statement
  52. Other source · s-d134 identified by category only · Other
  53. Other source · s-d150 identified by category only · Other
  54. Other source · s-d151 identified by category only · Other
  55. Other source · s-d249 identified by category only · Other
  56. Other source · s-d313 identified by category only · Other
  57. Other source · s-d7 identified by category only · Other
  58. Other source · s-d85 identified by category only · Other
  59. Court record source · s-d87 identified by category only · Court record
  60. Court record source · s-d88 identified by category only · Court record
  61. Other source · s-d120 identified by category only · Other
  62. Media source · s-d155 identified by category only · Media
  63. Other source · s-d157 identified by category only · Other
  64. Corporate registry source · s-d202 identified by category only · Corporate registry
  65. Company statement source · s-d22 identified by category only · Company statement
  66. Court record source · s-d25 identified by category only · Court record
  67. Company statement source · s-d26 identified by category only · Company statement
  68. Corporate registry concerning Tricolor or the identified participant Texas Open Data Portal
  69. Corporate registry concerning Tricolor or the identified participant Texas Open Data Portal
  70. Other source · s-d36 identified by category only · Other
  71. Other source · s-d67 identified by category only · Other
  72. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  73. Media source · s-d135 identified by category only · Media
  74. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  75. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  76. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  77. Company statement source · s-d73 identified by category only · Company statement
  78. Corporate registry concerning Tricolor or the identified participant Global Legal Entity Identifier Foundation
  79. Other source · s-d70 identified by category only · Other
  80. Other source · s-d113 identified by category only · Other
  81. Other source · s-d161 identified by category only · Other
  82. Company statement source · s-d209 identified by category only · Company statement
  83. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  84. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  85. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  86. Corporate registry concerning Tricolor or the identified participant Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
  87. Media source · s-d215 identified by category only · Media
  88. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  89. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  90. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  91. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  92. Court record source · s-d126 identified by category only · Court record
  93. Other source · s-d129 identified by category only · Other
  94. Company statement source · s-d149 identified by category only · Company statement
  95. Other source · s-d160 identified by category only · Other
  96. Media source · s-d266 identified by category only · Media
  97. Regulatory record concerning Tricolor or the identified participant California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation
  98. Court record source · s-d131 identified by category only · Court record
  99. Court record source · s-d164 identified by category only · Court record
  100. Court record source · s-d174 identified by category only · Court record
  101. Court record source · s-d181 identified by category only · Court record
  102. Media source · s-d219 identified by category only · Media
  103. Media source · s-d220 identified by category only · Media
  104. Company statement source · s-d258 identified by category only · Company statement
  105. Other source · s-d286 identified by category only · Other
  106. Regulatory record concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Department of Justice
  107. Court record source · s-d127 identified by category only · Court record
  108. Court record source · s-d148 identified by category only · Court record
  109. Media source · s-d222 identified by category only · Media
  110. Media source · s-d234 identified by category only · Media
  111. Other source · s-d159 identified by category only · Other
  112. Company statement source · s-d274 identified by category only · Company statement
  113. Media source · s-d297 identified by category only · Media
  114. Court record source · s-d62 identified by category only · Court record
  115. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  116. Corporate registry source · s-d211 identified by category only · Corporate registry
  117. Media source · s-d242 identified by category only · Media
  118. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  119. Company statement concerning Tricolor or the identified participant U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
  120. Company statement source · s-d165 identified by category only · Company statement
  121. Other source · s-d320 identified by category only · Other
  122. Media source · s-d221 identified by category only · Media
  123. Other source · s-d77 identified by category only · Other
  124. Other source · s-d92 identified by category only · Other
  125. Other source · s-d93 identified by category only · Other

cite this dossier

DossierTwist, “Tricolor Holdings: auto-loan financing, collapse and the different court outcomes”, dt.008, 14 October 2026, https://dossiertwist.com/dossiers/tricolor-holdings/

Free to read, cite and republish with credit under CC BY 4.0: credit “DossierTwist” and link to the dossier.

Data: JSON, CSV and the network graph.

We listen to all sides: responses are shown next to the claims they answer. To send a correction or a reply, write to dossiertwist@proton.me.