Stock Markets February 27, 2026

Tricolor Noteholders Sue Major Banks Alleging Complicity in Fraud

Investors representing over $230 million in notes accuse JPMorgan, Barclays and Fifth Third of overlooking signs of misconduct while profiting from underwriting fees

By Hana Yamamoto JPM FITB JHG
Tricolor Noteholders Sue Major Banks Alleging Complicity in Fraud
JPM FITB JHG

Investment firms that hold more than $230 million of debt issued by Tricolor Holdings have initiated litigation in New York claiming JPMorgan Chase, Barclays and Fifth Third Bancorp. enabled or ignored fraudulent conduct at the bankrupt used-car lender. The suit points to alarming audit findings from 2022 and 2024 and contends the banks prioritized fee income from securitization deals over flagging problems.

Key Points

  • Investors holding over $230 million of Tricolor notes filed suit against JPMorgan, Barclays and Fifth Third alleging banks ignored evidence of fraud.
  • The complaint cites alarming audits from 2022 and 2024 and asserts banks continued underwriting securitized notes while collecting millions in fees.
  • Tricolor declared bankruptcy in September; founder and former CEO Daniel Chu was criminally charged in December and has pleaded not guilty.

Several holders of Tricolor Holdings notes filed suit on Thursday in New York against JPMorgan Chase & Co., Barclays Plc and Fifth Third Bancorp., alleging the banks played a role in allowing fraud at the now-bankrupt used-car dealer and lender. The complaint was lodged by a group of investment firms that includes One William Street Capital Management and Janus Henderson Group Plc.

The plaintiffs say they own in aggregate more than $230 million of Tricolor notes and contend the lending banks ignored clear indicators of wrongdoing. According to the suit, those indicators include internal and external audits performed in 2022 and again in 2024, which the noteholders describe as alarming. The complaint accuses the banks of turning a blind eye to those findings while earning substantial underwriting fees tied to Tricolor’s securitized notes.

Tricolor filed for bankruptcy in September. In December, prosecutors charged the company’s founder and former chief executive officer, Daniel Chu, along with others, with allegedly defrauding Tricolor’s banks and investors. The indictment alleges that loan collateral was either double-pledged or had its value inflated, and that much of the collateral was effectively "near-worthless." Chu has pleaded not guilty to those criminal charges.

The civil suit from noteholders is focused on the banks’ role in the lead-up to the bankruptcy, arguing that the lenders had access to information and audit results that should have prompted action. The plaintiffs assert the banks instead continued to underwrite and market securitized notes, collecting millions in fees.

The litigation names JPMorgan, Barclays and Fifth Third as defendants and seeks to hold them accountable for losses sustained by the noteholders. The complaint highlights specific audit periods and the timing of fee income as central to its allegations that the banks prioritized revenue over rigorous scrutiny.


Summary

Noteholders representing more than $230 million in Tricolor debt have sued three banks in New York, alleging the institutions ignored troubling audit findings from 2022 and 2024 and continued underwriting securitized notes while collecting significant fees. Tricolor declared bankruptcy in September; its founder and former CEO has been criminally charged and pleaded not guilty.

Key points

  • Investors holding over $230 million in Tricolor notes initiated a lawsuit against JPMorgan, Barclays and Fifth Third, alleging the banks overlooked evidence of fraud.
  • The complaint references audit findings from 2022 and 2024 described as alarming and ties the banks' alleged inaction to substantial underwriting fees from securitized notes.
  • The matter follows Tricolor’s September bankruptcy and criminal charges filed in December against founder and former CEO Daniel Chu, who has pleaded not guilty.

Risks and uncertainties

  • Outcome of the civil litigation is uncertain; it could affect the banks' legal exposure and reputations in the lending and securitization sectors.
  • Criminal proceedings against the former CEO remain pending and Chu’s not-guilty plea keeps the factual and legal picture unresolved.
  • The extent to which audit findings influenced parties' actions is a central factual dispute in the case and may be contested in court.

Risks

  • Uncertain outcome of civil litigation could create legal and reputational risk for the named banks, affecting the banking and securitization sectors.
  • Pending criminal case against Tricolor’s former CEO leaves factual determinations unresolved, presenting uncertainty for investors and creditors in the auto-finance sector.
  • Disputes over interpretation and impact of the 2022 and 2024 audits are central to the lawsuit and may prolong legal proceedings and recovery timelines.

More from Stock Markets

Becle Predicts a Tough 2026 as U.S. Distribution Shake-up Meets Softer Demand Feb 27, 2026 Merck to Cut About 150 Roles at North Carolina Plant as Gardasil Sales Ease Feb 27, 2026 Investors Sue JPMorgan, Barclays and Fifth Third Over Tricolor Losses, Alleging Missed Red Flags Feb 27, 2026 Applied Optoelectronics Shares Jump After Q4 Beat, Encouraging Q1 Outlook Feb 27, 2026 Bernstein Lays Out Valuation Targets for Five Major Hotel Chains Feb 27, 2026