Donald Trump's real estate appraisal can't explain how his stake in the skyscraper at 40 Wall Street more than doubled in value in three years, according to a new court filing.
The lawyer for the real estate giant told the AG's office in January that it was a good question.
According to the filing, lawyers with James' office posed a good question to the Cushman attorney during a meeting about documents she is seeking from the firm.
Trump used his lease at 40 Wall Street as a security for a loan from Capital One Bank, the AG says.
Three years later, the firm valued the building at $550 million, more than doubling its value, when Trump used it as a security for a $160 million loan from Ladder Capital Finance, according to the AG.
At our meeting on January 5, 2022, you claimed that the valuation increase was the result of an increase in the New York real estate market between 2012 and 2015, according to the latest court filing.
Thompson asked the lawyer if he could identify any other buildings that had doubled in value, and he promised to look into it.
Eight weeks later, we have not received any follow-through from Cushman on any of the factual questions it committed to answer at that meeting.
The AG said that most of the increase in appraised value was attributed to a hike in assumed rental rates.
The rent roll for 40 Wall Street showed rates 10 to 17 percent below the assumed market rate in June of 2015, according to the filing.
In previous court papers, James has said that Capitol's valuation of Trump's stake in the building came in at $257 million. The loan was handled by Ladder Capital after Capitol refused to restructure the mortgage.
The ground lease that Trump has to the office building is not the building itself.
James has accused the appraiser of failing to comply with four subpoenas she has issued, seeking documents explaining how it arrived at values for multiple Trump properties.
She asked a judge to order Cushman to comply with the subpoenas. There is a pending request.
A company spokesman said Monday that the AG's allegations are not true.
The Attorney General's filings do not accurately depict the responses to prior subpoenas. We stand behind our work.