Farmers Caught in Multimillion-Dollar Machinery Loan Nightmare

The beginning of the end of Echelbarger Hay, LLC landed as a letter at Kim and Justin Hannah’s farm near Greentown, Indiana, early last September. It was from John Deere Financial. It struck Kim as odd. Justin did repairs and field work for Echelbarger Hay – a custom hay business he co-owned with Dustin Echelbarger. Echelbarger lined up the work and handled all finances. 

“I called John Deere Financial because it had Justin’s name on it,” Kim Hannah said. The woman who answered described a lien, an unpaid loan, on a tractor the Hannahs no longer owned. According to the Hannahs, without telling Justin, Echelbarger had sold that tractor to another farmer. It had a loan on it in Justin’s name that was still unpaid. Using Justin Hannah’s Social Security number, Kim says the John Deere Financial staffer found more unpaid loans in either Echelbarger Hay or Justin’s name — a total of 28. The Hannahs suddenly faced more than a million dollars in debt, mainly held by the hay business. 

After that shock, they hired a lawyer. In October 2024, Justin filed a civil suit against Echelbarger, which is still pending in a county court. The suit alleges that Echelbarger used his position as a machinery salesman at Truland Equipment in nearby Swayzee to engage in various frauds, including the unauthorized sale of Hannah’s tractor and taking out fraudulent equipment loans, mainly to Echelbarger Hay. Truland Equipment is a John Deere dealer about 10 miles east of Greentown.

Dealings with Echelbarger hit other farmers as well, including at least one outside of Indiana and a local Amish farmer. The case highlights a risk of buying used machinery.

“I’ve been an attorney for 20 years. I’ve farmed all my life. I’ve never heard of a case like this,” said John Schwarz, II, Justin’s attorney.

Last December, Judge Rebecca Vent, the first judge to hear Hannah’s case, entered a preliminary injunction against Echelbarger and ordered Echelbarger to account for all of Echelbarger Hay’s finances since its formation in 2022. He didn’t show up to the hearing and failed to comply with the order.

“It is clear to this Court that Echelbarger has engaged in fraudulent behavior that was not consented to by [Justin] Hannah, unknown to Hannah, and has been detrimental to Hannah personally and also the Company,” Vent wrote in the order. “Echelbarger used his position as a salesman at Truland to create fictitious loans, invent non-existent machinery, and partake in other fraudulent action that has left Hannah and/or the Company owing on dozens of loans in the neighborhood of 1.9 million dollars.” 

Echelbarger and his lawyer haven’t responded after multiple attempts to reach them for comment.

Borrowed John Deere 8200 Sold for $90,000

In the fall of 2024, when the Hannahs learned of the bad loans, they discovered that another Greentown farmer, Lee Kendall, was impacted by a bogus machinery sale. 

“They [the Hannahs] called us and told us what they found, and of course, that wasn’t a very good day,” Kendall recalled.

Kendall owned a John Deere 8200 tractor that he sometimes loaned to Echelbarger. As he testified in the Hannahs’ lawsuit against Echelbarger, he most recently loaned the tractor to Echelbarger in 2023 for use by Echelbarger Hay.

According to his testimony, when Kendall went to pick up the tractor from the Echelbarger Hay shop, it was washed, which he noted was unusual. He further testified that, although he didn’t know it at the time, it turned out that Echelbarger had sold the 8200 in November 2023 to Chris and Vanessa Monroe, owners of a construction company in nearby Kokomo. The Monroes allegedly wrote a check for $90,000 to V.K. Kendall Farm, Inc., run by Kendall and his brother Russ.

The Kendall brothers claim they never saw the $90,000 check. Lee Kendall testified that “…the check was kept by Dustin [Echelbarger] and deposited by Dustin. The endorsement of the check is not my signature, it is a forgery, which I believe was done by Dustin.”  

Kendall said he didn’t learn of the sale until last fall, when Chris Monroe arrived at a corn maze the two brothers ran and told him. Monroe recently sent Kendall a letter demanding the return of his $90,000. Kendall’s attorney wrote back that Kendall doesn’t owe the money he never received on the tractor he didn’t sell.

New Holland Square Baler With a Lien Sold for $40,000

Jack Polm, of Fremont, Ohio, is another Echelbarger customer. Most of Polm’s revenue on his 80-acre farm comes from selling freezer beef from about 60 steers, starting with bottle calves from dairy farms. The three oldest of Jack and his wife, Shawanna’s, five sons help put up hay for the steers.

In June 2024, a used New Holland BB9060 3x3x8 square baler posted online caught Polm’s eye.

“There was an ad in TractorHouse. Me and my boys had been talking about upgrading just because you can’t find the help for small bales,” Polm recalled. Echelbarger was selling the baler at his farmhouse near Greentown, Indiana, more than two hours away.

“Me and my wife talked it over. We both drove there and looked at it. It’s a big purchase for us,” Polm said. “I got a good deal on it,” he recalled, but the price wasn’t suspiciously low, either. It came to about $40,000 with delivery to Ohio. They planned to help pay for the baler with custom haying.  

All seemed fine until last October, when Polm says he got a call from Truland, checking on the baler’s serial number to verify ownership. Polm referred the caller to his lender, Ag Credit. Another search by the lender using a serial number supplied by Truland revealed a John Deere Financial lien on the baler. Polm says the lien was not disclosed at the time of his purchase.

When asked what he’ll do if the dealership takes back the baler, Polm replied, “It would not be good at all.” He needs it for custom work to help with payments.

“Even right now, Ag Credit is using that as a $40,000 loan with no asset,” he said. 

$90,000 Paid in Cash for a Baler That Was Never Delivered

The case of Amish farmer Amos Meister may be the most poignant. The bearded farmer, wearing a black hat and holding his 5-year-old son on his lap, recently joined other farmers in the shop of Lee and Russ Kendall. All had ties to Echelbarger.

Meister has paid Echelbarger to haul his hay and, like others, thought he knew him well. Yet, a John Deere 324 skid loader in Meister’s barn is one piece of equipment related to the 28 troubled loans the Hannahs discovered last fall. Meister said he bought it and other equipment from Echelbarger “because they were supposedly Echelbarger’s.”

“Meister has physical possession of it, but it’s in our name,” Kim Hannah explained.

Before learning that, Meister agreed to buy a new baler from Echelbarger last May; each would pay half. Meister said he gave Echelbarger $90,000 in cash. The baler didn’t show up and Echelbarger wasn’t coming up with his half of the price.

“I was pretty sure already in June that it was a bad deal. I was pretty scared. Then I went to John Deere and asked them about it. They said there never was no baler,” Meister said. “It was kind of hard to sleep that first night.” 

“I don’t believe Dustin ever ordered the baler,” Rex Riggs, an owner of Truland Equipment said. Riggs added that he didn’t know about the arrangement between Echelbarger and Meister until Meister visited Truland to inquire about the baler and told him. “He has a little four-year-old boy with him. What do you say?” Riggs said. “I didn’t know what to say. There was no baler.”

A few other Amish farmers got bogus deals, according to Meister. He believes his loss was the largest.

“I think he did all this stuff to us Amish people because he knew we weren’t going to sue him,” he said. 

When asked why the Amish wouldn’t sue, Meister cited the Biblical command to turn the other cheek when wronged.

“You forgive and move on,” Meister said.

Editor’s note: Amos Meister is a pseudonym. The Amish farmer agreed to talk more openly about the case if he wasn’t named.

Risks of Shared Ventures

The Hannah’s claimed losses arose from joining Echelbarger in a shared business venture.

Justin said his hay-related business with Echelbarger began in 2021 and was initially informal. Before that, Justin and an uncle had put up hay on their livestock and crop farm. 

In March 2022, Justin said Echelbarger suggested a formal partnership. “I have cattle to feed. That would help me get my hay done anyway,” Justin said. “He offered up half ownership of the business. I’m the mechanic and the guy running the equipment.”

The Hannahs contributed $125,000 of their own equipment as an investment in Echelbarger Hay, LLC.

“Really, until we found out all this stuff, it went pretty smoothly,” Kim Hannah added. “Echelbarger was the face of the company.” Justin ran the equipment, and few people knew he was part owner. But it was Hannah’s formal ownership of Echelbarger Hay that facilitated the fraudulent conduct at issue in his lawsuit.

Lessons Learned for Used Equipment Purchases

Many farmers are uncomfortable talking about their financial losses. Such reticence is the norm in most rural communities. But the Hannahs want farmers elsewhere to know about the risks of buying used machinery without due diligence.

“It’s scary. How do you know what you’re buying? Do you get to keep it?” Kim said. “Basically, the only way is to check [Uniform Commercial Code (UCC)] UCC filings online.” Searches for liens filed under the UCC must be done state by state. Fees range from about $10–$25 at secretary of state websites.

Schwarz, Justin Hannah’s attorney, agrees. “I think a really good practice is running the reports from the dealer and running a UCC search. That, I think, goes a long way,” he said. Although the Echelbarger case is unusual, Schwarz offers a few other tips that could help farmers avoid the problems it highlights. 

Learn the Fine Points of Searches

• Check the serial number on machinery you’re buying. That number can be used to have the dealer provide a historical report that often contains the names of previous owners. If the person you are buying from does not show up in the report, more investigation is likely warranted.
• Try different forms of names in your UCC search — Jonathan vs. John, for example — in case a variation of the seller’s name was used for the UCC filing. It might mean another search. “Spend a little money and find out,” Schwarz said.
• Watch for blanket liens. Even old pieces of equipment already paid off could be covered by these liens on all personal property “down to your barn cats,” Schwarz said. These liens are typically used for operating lines of credit from banks. You might have to get a release from the seller’s bank on such machinery.

Define Business Relationships

“I tell clients, when you go into business with somebody, it’s like a marriage,” Schwarz. In case you don’t know that person as well as you thought, a few safeguards include:

• Establish a formal company such as an LLC. An LLC should have an operating agreement that outlines rights and duties of each member. “If you don’t set up an LLC, at least write down your partnership agreement,” Schwarz said. “Above all, ask yourself what your exit strategy is if the relationship does not work out.”
• LLC members should have a right to inspect the books, which is mandated by law in most states. “If your partner is not giving you access to the books, that is about as big of a red flag as there can be,” Schwarz said.
• All checks and deposits should have more than a single signer. “That can be a pain, but it enables everybody to be aware of the finances and what’s going on,” he said.

Listen to Your Spouse

This tip comes from farmer Lee Kendall. His wife was uneasy about Echelbarger, especially after he didn’t come through with his half of the loan payment on the JD 8200 tractor. 

“Listen to the wives. I guess if they’ve got a [bad] feeling, you know, you might as well go with it,” Kendall said.

What Lies Ahead?

More lessons lie ahead. The Hannahs have negotiated a court-approved partial settlement to their civil case against Echelbarger. It gives them $75,000 from the sale of Echelbarger’s house and kicks him out of the partnership. The Echelbarger Hay LLC likely is insolvent, but they won’t know until seeing all of the accounts. 

Some of the machinery owned by the old hay partnership is now at the Truland dealership in Swayzee. The Hannahs and Truland have been negotiating the equipment’s fate. Meanwhile, the Hannahs hope to continue cutting hay along with farming and Kim’s photography business, Farm Truck Photography and Design.

“We don’t know what machinery we’ll have to start this season,” she said. 

On March 5, an attorney for Echelbarger filed Chapter 7 bankruptcy for him as an individual. At this time, Echelbarger faces no criminal charges. 

Who’s Who?

Dustin Echelbarger

• Former employee at Truland Equipment in Swayzee, Indiana
• Partner in Echelbarger Hay 
• Accused of fraudulent equipment loans and sales.

Kim and Justin Hannah

• Farmers in Greentown, Indiana
• Partners in Echelbarger Hay who contributed $125,000 of their own equipment as an investment. 
• Hannahs and Echelbarger Hay owe on dozens of fictitious equipment loans created by Echelbarger in the neighborhood of $1.9 million, according to the judge in a civil suit the Hannahs filed against Echelbarger. 

John Schwarz, II

• Lifelong farmer and agricultural law attorney in Royal Center, Indiana
• Attorney for Justin Hannah, Lee Kendall, and Jack Polm

Lee Kendall

• Farms with his brother, Russ, under the farm business V.K. Kendall Farm, Inc., in Greentown, Indiana
• Purchased a John Deere 8200 tractor that Echelbarger allegedly sold without permission to Chris and Vanessa Monroe.

Chris and Vanessa Monroe

• Owners of a construction company in Kokomo, Indiana
• Allegedly, purchased the Kendalls tractor from Echelbarger for $90,000, but never took possession.

Jack Polm

• Farmer in Fremont, Ohio
• Purchased a baler from Echelbarger for $40,000 that has a John Deere Financial lien on it. The baler is in Polm’s possession – for now.

Amos Meister

• Pseudonym for an Amish farmer in Greentown, Indiana
• Allegedly entered into an agreement with Echelbarger to purchase a baler together, with each partner paying $90,000. Meister paid $90,000 in cash to Echelbarger and never received the baler.