[ad_1]
The former president Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle launched an offensive in court to avoid bankruptcy. This after last November 13, AVLA SA -credit and collateral insurance company- requested the forced liquidation of the ex-president within the millionaire scam that his own brother Francisco denounced himself in August 2019.
On Tuesday, December 1, the former Head of State presented before the Santiago Court of Appeals a lawsuit against the Private Investment Fund SGR; AVLA SAGR; Commercial Limited Strip -owned by the Frei Parada family- and Marta Ana Maria Parada Quesada, wife of his brother.
The action seeks to declare the “Absolute nullity” of promissory note No. 16,558, signed by Commercial Limited Strip and in which he appears as endorsement and joint co-debtor of the credit. The reason? According to him, he was never aware of the transaction and the alleged signature that appears on the documents is false.
The origin of the debt in question dates back to August 24, 2017, after the Private Investment Fund SGR agreed to deliver a loan for $ 121,231,140 to Comercial Franja Limitada.
However, due to a series of financial problems, the latter stopped complying with the payments, leaving an outstanding balance of $ 95,698,421, so the insurer requested the bankruptcy of the ex-president in an unprecedented action, since never before had a private individual requested the forced liquidation of a former president of the Republic.
In the brief, the attorneys for former President Frei – to which La Tercera PM had access – argue that “the contested loan title arises from an operation devised and orchestrated by Mr. Francisco Frei Ruiz-Tagle, who, taking advantage of his position as trusted man, and the good reputation, which, in his capacity as former president, his brother Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle had before financial institutions, forged his signature and fingerprint, to thus obtain huge sums of money as a mutual ”.
“Mr. Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle never consented to become a guarantor and joint co-debtor of the debts contracted by his brother for himself and his companies, since he never attended to celebrate the act that originates the promissory note that the defendant intends to collect. Everything is part of a fraud to sustain the great debt cycle that Francisco Frei Ruiz-Tagle maintained in his businesses. For this, it contracted loans with different banks and factoring companies, in order to, in turn, pay the installments that were due on previously requested loans, and maintain money flows, ”the lawsuit said.
“In his position as his brother’s henchman, managing his personal wealthIt not only used Inversiones Saturno SA to contract loans or constitute it as a guarantee and joint co-debtor without the agreement of the shareholders’ meeting; but also, he personally involved Mr. Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle in his various frauds, falsifying his signature and fingerprint on credit titles signed by his company Almadena SA, or by him as a natural person, constituting him as a guarantor and joint co-debtor ”, assured the written by the former president.
On November 27, the Minister of Jurisdiction Maritza villadangos decreed the admissibility of the lawsuit seeking the bankruptcy of former president Eduardo Frei.
The magistrate summoned the parties to an “initial hearing”, according to the provisions of article 120 of the Insolvency and Re-entrepreneurship Law, which will take place on the fifth day after the former president is notified of the lawsuit.
According to the resolution, the hearing will be held by videoconference through the WebEx platform due to the health emergency that exists in the country. Here the judge will officially communicate to the ex-president the presentation of a demand for forced liquidation against him. The magistrate also ordered the publication of the bankruptcy application in the Bankruptcy Bulletin of the Superintendency of Insolvency and Re-entrepreneurship.
Meanwhile, the defense of the former president scored a new procedural victory in the battle for his heritage. This is after the Santiago Appeals Court on December 1 accepted the order not to innovate presented by his lawyers in order to avoid the auction of an apartment of the former president located in La Parva for debts with Omega Factoring.
The financial debacle of the Frei Paradas is great and the acts confessed by Francisco have meant a deep family breakdown with the Frei Larraecheas. To date, Francisco Frei, his wife Ana María Parada Quesada and the companies Almacenes de Depósito Nacionales (Almadena) and Inversiones San Nicolás SA have been declared bankrupt.
But the biggest mess of the Frei Parada family is the onslaught launched by Francisco Frei’s meeting of creditors – represented by the liquidator Loreto Ried – and that they seek to cancel the transfer of the department located in Hermanos Cabot to Inversiones y Asesorias AMP SpA, whose representative Legal is Nicolás Frei Parada, son of Francisco.
The operation carried out on March 25, 2019, six months before Francisco Frei requested the bankruptcy of Almadena, raises suspicions among creditors, who believe that the debtor sought to damage his assets to avoid fulfilling his obligations.
On December 2, through a letter, Francisco Frei’s lawyer, Cristóbal Viñes answered the lawsuit, assuring that with the operation his client tried to seek new resources in order to pay his obligations to the financial system and get out of his financial situation. deficit, which did not work out.
According to his defense, “in the operation MásAval SAGR left a voucher at sight for $ 243,000,000 in favor of Banco Security and another voucher for $ 200,000,000 in favor of Proyecta Capital. Once the property was registered in the name of Inversiones y Asesorias, AMP SpA paid directly $ 37,500,000 to the institution that mediated in obtaining the loan, namely Inversiones Cata SpA, and paid the amount of $ 46,466,044 to Banco Security.
On the other hand, in the same process, Nicolás Frei -through his lawyer Nicolás Garrido- presented a letter in which he assured that “he had no knowledge, or less certainty, of the poor financial condition of his father -person of an outstanding professional career and undoubtedly relevant and significant connections in the political and financial world – but until very close to the point where the case was publicly known ”.
“Who would have had them, especially when it comes to his father, someone whom one trusts with closed eyes?”, The lawyer of the Moraga & Cía study asked in his letter.
