XML 33 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.24.3

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2024
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Financial Instruments The Bank is party to credit-related financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers. These financial instruments include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit. Such instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amount recognized in the consolidated balance sheets. The Bank’s exposure to credit loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. The Bank uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. Such commitments and conditional obligations were as follows:
| Contractual Amount
(dollars in thousands) | September 30, 2024 |  | December 31, 2023
Commitments to extend credit | $ | 873,649 |  |  | $ | 869,013 |
Standby letters of credit | 23,560 |  |  | 23,732 |
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses and may require payment of a fee. Since many of the commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. The Bank evaluates each customer’s credit worthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary, by the Bank upon extension of credit is based on management’s credit evaluation of the customer. Collateral held varies, but may include real estate, accounts receivable, inventory, property, plant, and equipment, and income-producing properties. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Bank to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. Those standby letters of credit are primarily issued to support extensions of credit. The credit risk involved in issuing standby letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loans to customers. The Bank secures the standby letters of credit with the same collateral used to secure the related loan. Allowance for Credit Losses on Unfunded Lending-related Commitments The Company estimates expected credit losses over the contractual period in which the Company is exposed to credit risk via a contractual obligation to extend credit, unless that obligation is unconditionally cancelable by the Company. The allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments is included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets and is adjusted through a charge to provision for credit loss expense on the consolidated statements of income. The allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments estimate includes consideration of the likelihood that funding will occur and an estimate of expected credit losses on commitments expected to be funded over its estimated life. The allowance for credit losses on unfunded commitments was $4.1 million and $3.8 million as of September 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively. Legal Contingencies In the normal course of business, the Company, or its subsidiaries, are involved in various legal proceedings. In the opinion of management, any liability resulting from pending proceedings would not be expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements. DeBaere, et al v. Heartland Bank and Trust Company The Bank was a defendant in a purported class action lawsuit filed in June 2020, in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. The plaintiff, a customer of the Bank, alleges that the Bank breached its contract with the plaintiff by (1) charging multiple insufficient funds fees or overdraft fees on a single customer-initiated transaction, and (2) charging overdraft fees for transactions that were authorized on a positive account balance, but when settled, settled into a negative balance. Miller, et al v. State Bank of Lincoln and Heartland Bank and Trust Company The Bank was a defendant in a purported class action lawsuit filed in May 2020, in the Circuit Court of Logan County, Illinois. The plaintiff, a customer of State Bank of Lincoln, which previously merged with the Bank, alleges that the Bank breached its contract with the plaintiff by charging multiple insufficient funds fees or overdraft fees on a single customer-initiated transaction. On May 15, 2023, the Bank reached an agreement in principle to settle both the DeBaere, et al and Miller, et al cases in which the Bank would make one-time cash payments totaling $3.4 million, without admitting fault, to release the Bank from further liability and claims in both the cases. Definitive settlement agreements reflecting the terms of the agreement in principle were approved by the Court on December 15, 2023 in the DeBaere, et al case and on February 16, 2024 in the Miller, et al case. The Bank made the one-time cash payments totaling $3.4 million during the fourth quarter of 2023. The settlements do not include any admission of liability or wrongdoing by the Bank, and the Bank expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing with respect to any matter alleged in the Class Action and Receiver’s Action. The Bank agreed to the settlements to avoid the cost, risks and distraction of continued litigation. The Company believes the settlements are in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. An initial $2.6 million accrual was recognized in other noninterest expense during the fourth quarter of 2022, reflecting management’s best estimate at that time, and an additional $0.8 million accrual was recognized in other noninterest expense during the second quarter of 2023, following the agreement in principle to settle both the DeBaere, et al and Miller, et al cases. John Pickett v. Town and Country Bank The Bank is a defendant in a purported class action lawsuit filed in October 2023, in the Circuit Court of Sangamon County, Illinois. The plaintiff, a customer of Town and Country Bank, which previously merged with the Bank, alleges that the Bank breached its contract with the plaintiff by charging overdraft fees for transactions that were authorized on a positive account balance, but when settled, settled into a negative balance. On March 29, 2024, the Bank reached an agreement in principle to settle this case in which the Bank would make a one-time cash payment of $0.3 million, without admitting fault, to release the Bank from further liability and claims in the case. A definitive settlement agreement reflecting the terms of the agreement in principle was approved by the Court on July 9, 2024. The Bank made the one-time cash payment of $0.3 million during the third quarter of 2024. The settlement does not include any admission of liability or wrongdoing by the Bank, and the Bank expressly denies any liability or wrongdoing with respect to any matter alleged in the case. The Bank has agreed to the settlement to avoid the cost, risks, and distraction of continued litigation. The Company believes the settlement is in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. An initial accrual of $0.2 million was recorded during the fourth quarter of 2023, reflecting management's best estimate at that time, and an additional $0.1 million accrual was recorded during the first quarter of 2024. As of December 31, 2023, the Company had $0.2 million accrued related to this matter. Heartland Bank and Trust Company v. Meadows Mennonite Retirement Community Association, Inc. This lawsuit arises out of a suit filed in the Circuit Court of Woodford County, Illinois, (the "Trial Court") by the Bank for breach of a note and commercial security agreement. The defendant, Meadows Mennonite Retirement Community Association, Inc. ("Meadows"), a beneficiary of a trust for which Bank was trustee, filed a counterclaim for rescission of the note seeking compensatory and punitive damages, including attorneys’ fees. In September 2024, the Appellate Court of Illinois Fourth District (the "Appellate Court") entered an order directing that summary judgment should be entered in favor of Meadows and against the Bank, rescinding the note and commercial security agreement. The Appellate Court remanded the case to the Trial Court which will now determine Meadows' compensatory and punitive damages, including reasonable attorneys’ fees. The Bank intends to vigorously defend the lawsuit. However, the Company believes an unfavorable outcome is reasonably possible at this time, as that term is used in assessing loss contingencies. The Company is unable to predict when the matter will be resolved or potential costs or damages to be incurred.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments, contingencies, and guarantees. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent Reference 3: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 460 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/460/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsContingenciesAndGuaranteesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration