I have to add my own two cents to this discussion about OmaSp’s lending mess.
I personally took out a loan for my company from OmaSp exactly during that period of Sydänlammi’s rapid growth. The loan was for real estate investments, and the amounts were a few hundred thousand. We went through extremely detailed discussions and negotiations regarding how much credit could be granted. As for collateral values, I recall negotiations started at 40%, and eventually, the collateral was valued at 60%. Personal guarantees had to be provided, and despite it being a corporate account, I had to move my personal banking there as well to get the loan approved. In no way did I get the impression that credit was easy to come by. It has been confusing to read discussions about how people apparently got loans from the bank just by walking through the door, regardless of whether they even had legal business plans in place.
By no means am I defending OmaSp’s conduct, which seems to have been a total shambles. I just wanted to bring a slightly different perspective to the general sentiment regarding the bank’s operations.
It should also be noted that I don’t really enjoy being a customer of the bank, and I will terminate the relationship the day the loans are paid off. There are stupid extra fees for everything possible, and the customer service isn’t nearly as exceptional as the bank advertises. At least as a premium customer, I get faster service from Nordea.
In the heat of aggressive growth, there was no desire to maintain normal risk management. The main priority was growing faster than the competitors. The board didn’t seem to understand the risks of rapid growth, and the management apparently didn’t care, instead choosing to boast about the expansion. Things have never ended well for that kind of banking. There are numerous concrete examples of this, yet new ones keep emerging. They likely want to believe they are much smarter than everyone else and have invented a perpetual motion machine for faster and winning growth. The aftermath has always been ugly, just as it is now.
This is indeed how a somewhat normal credit granting process should go, but at this point, it’s worth remembering how OmaSp was formed. Behind OmaSp are over a dozen formerly independent savings and cooperative banks, all of which had their own corporate cultures. That culture doesn’t change just by swapping the signs on the roof; it also requires the implementation of a new operating model and personnel changes.
OmaSp expanded aggressively not only through acquisitions but also by opening new branches. New branches hired juniors with a sales-first mindset who lacked banking experience, while simultaneously pushing out old banking professionals who weren’t used to handing out money to everyone who asked for it.
It is therefore very credible that many customers have had very different experiences when dealing with different regions and branches. The most amusing thing I’ve encountered is the loans granted to a shared investment company of Fincap’s key personnel for the acquisition of Fincap shares. These key individuals also had to provide personal guarantees for the company’s loan, but at the same time, the bank was practically giving unsecured loans ten times that size to Fincap and its subsidiaries.
I followed the public appearance of these so-called bank managers from the very beginning, and generally, their attitude was one of smug grins and pure arrogance. They rode around on Harleys and wouldn’t greet anyone, not even their neighbors in the residential area. It begs the question: was criminal gain the plan from the start? How could these gentlemen reach such positions in the banking world in the first place without anyone questioning it… after all, the “Pasit” buddies aren’t even remotely from the local area. The grass is always greener on the other side, while the home turf is left to rot.
I feel like the difference between you and Sarajärvi and Kotamäki might have been that you didn’t conduct an underpriced private placement from your company to investment firms owned by Little-Pasi or Big-Pasi. With that, you would have secured a 150% financing rate plus a debt restructuring (akordi) immediately on top of it.
I came across some coffee table talk today regarding usury and even aggravated usury-level discussions directed at OmaSp’s operations. This was the second time this issue has come up. Does anyone else have information about this?
This is a typical example, and not the only one from the savings bank world, where the so-called “Pasis” have achieved an almost mythical status as so-called profit-makers and masters of aggressive growth. The picture naturally includes a board of directors who were the “Pasis’” nice buddies from around town, lacking sufficient expertise, courage, and the will to intervene in matters in time. Furthermore, the “Pasis” have been allowed to conduct and manage their own business transactions and cashing-in almost freely. There has been a lack of discipline and order. The marks are visible and being felt. Personal assets are likely safe somewhere.
FIN-FSA’s performance is quite tragicomic, considering I believe I wrote here already 2 years ago about the deficiencies in reporting large customer risks, as they were obvious even to an outsider. What is the actual point of a supervisor like this?
The bank is recording a cost provision of 2.5 million euros for the Q2 results regarding this case.
District Court Grants One-Year Extension for Filing Fraud Charges Related to Oma Savings Bank (yle.fi)
Oma Savings Bank’s former CEO Pasi Sydänlammi and former Deputy CEO Pasi Turtio are suspected of aggravated fraud. A third man, who was not employed by Oma Savings Bank, is also a suspect.
An employee in a leading position was deemed to have manipulated the credit process. In 2024, approximately 84 million euros in credit losses were recorded, of which 64 million euros were related to activities contrary to instructions.
This just goes to show that they are now conducting a proper and deep cleanup. A lot of new material will surely pop up as the investigation progresses. It’s going to be a long wait for the final… verdicts?
It is my understanding that not all lines of investigation have been disclosed to the public yet. Therefore, the number of suspects is unlikely to remain limited to the three currently reported in the media. The group under investigation is probably already much larger than these three, and the number will continue to grow as the investigation proceeds.
Based on this, the one-year extension recently granted will likely not be enough, and on that assumption, this case will be heard in the district court at the earliest in late 2027 or early 2028.
Article in Kauppalehti about major client Sarajärvi, no paywall at least for now.
Fincap was shut down / turned into Fisyr so it wouldn’t be confused with Fincap Asunnot, it is stated.
“I haven’t heard that it’s the borrower’s responsibility to define what size client they are at a bank.”
Do you consider yourself innocent in this matter? At the very least, it is certain that I haven’t done anything wrong in this matter.
The paywall only showed the headline, but usually, in these matters, a person who classifies themselves as innocent tries to escape the true nature of things. In other words, the excuse-making has begun.
Where is this information coming from, an article in Kauppalehti? It hasn’t been publicly stated that he is charged with anything, but he may still be a suspect/under investigation.
I don’t know what verdict has been passed here, but are you really of the opinion that Sarajärvi is not largely linked to over 60 million euros in credit losses? Even Sarajärvi no longer denies his involvement in them, as he did when the mess first came to light. Now he just reassures everyone of his innocence in other respects, and someone is still swallowing this drivel.
If he obtained these loans “through crime and wrongdoing,” then he would likely be in the dock along with the management of OmaSp.
But if he were under investigation, there is a high probability that his assets would be seized, just like everyone else’s, and all business operations would effectively be at a complete standstill.
But if that is not the case, then it is just another credit loss like any other where the debts haven’t been paid.
Turtio was under investigation for almost 2 years before coercive measures were implemented. Regarding Sydänlammi, there is no precise information on the timelines, but it is highly likely that he had also been under investigation for a long time before the seizure. Furthermore, it was not publicly disclosed that Turtio’s business partner was under investigation before the seizure, but his assets were also subject to a seizure request of 2 million.
So, I wouldn’t draw far-reaching conclusions based on the criteria you presented. The main thing is that the matter is thoroughly investigated and the guilty parties receive their sentences. The bailiff likely already has significant amounts of Sarajärvi’s personal assets tied up, as OmaSp demanded a payment of 7.7 million euros from him and Kotamäki for Casyr’s debts before filing for bankruptcy. This demand was based on a personal guarantee.
If a customer provides the correct information when applying for a loan and the bank grants it with insufficient collateral, the customer is not committing any crime. In its growth frenzy, OmaSP seems to have granted loans while believing that business plans would be executed almost perfectly; when anything unforeseen happens, they are then left bewildered.
I agree that it’s good that it’s being investigated, and now the accused and OmaSP have a very strong incentive to get more people accused to share in any potential proceeds of the crimes and damages.
The police have surely left the door open on this, and that likely relates to why Sarajärvi hasn’t even been heard as a witness (in relation to that interview).
But still, if a bank lends you money against its own guidelines, that doesn’t make the customer guilty.
At the very least, it is certain that I haven’t done anything wrong in this matter.