Experts insist that the IPO of Bankia was “fraudulent” – Yahoo Finance Spain

Madrid, March 31 (EFE) .- The Bankia IPO was “fraudulent” because the group accounts since its establishment and until after reformulation the resignation of Rodrigo Rato, including those served to the stock debut, did not express his true image, as insisted upon by the legal experts.

in a new document sent to the instructor of the case Bankia, Fernando Andreu, which has had access Efe, inspectors assigned by the Bank of Spain ratified the conclusions reached in December 2014, however, differ from those given by experts, both hired by Rato as Bankia.

Moreover, even contradicts the view expressed by the fund Spanish rescue, the FROB, who defended the accounts of the financial group based on the accounting criteria provided by the Bank of Spain and the CNMV.

This new report comes after judge Andreu inspectors should urge Victor Sanchez and Antonio Busquets to issue a final assessment that “increasing, amend, clarify or would correct” the conclusions of writing with which revolutionized the case in 2014.

Now, Sanchez and Busquets, after considering all the documents submitted by the defendants, they reiterate that the IPO of Bankia was “fraudulent” because the financial statements included in the prospectus reported a provision for bad debts 6,913 million euros that both experts consider “false”.

According to experts, this information was used by the entity, its directors and executives “as a commercial argument, to convey to potential buyers of the shares a misconception of the security of their investment. “

Thus, they argue that the stock debut” was not a model of concurrency “because the price was set based on offers of 29 groups “with strong business relations” with Bankia and its parent, reason also reaffirmed their doubts about the real interest of some investors.

and say “no Mapfre and his foundation” associated BFA possessed 15% of its capital, “he would not have covered the institutional tranche”.

in addition, as described expert reports, “adjustments BFA and Bankia refer to accounting of different operations, the impact on income and assets not recognized correctly in the financial statements “.

for legal experts, each of the adjustments made by Bankia and its parent distorted their true image, “failing to comply with accounting standards and exceed the limits of materiality of the consolidated accounts.”

rebut also the idea of ​​the rest of accountants and the FROB that there were provisions enough insolvency in itself financial group to absorb future losses.

According to experts, provisions for insolvency disappeared at the same moment in which Caja Madrid, Bancaja and five other entities decided to join through a SIP, a system institutional protection or “cold fusion”.

“in the consolidated financial statements of Bankia at 30 June 2011 and subsequent adjustment of fair value of SIP masquerades as provisions for bad debts, which is a clear case of accounting fraud “sentencing court experts.

the new report will be decisive for the High court to conclude the investigation and decide if you open trial and sits on the bench at the old dome of Bankia, headed by Rato, who could face up to 6 years in prison for providing incorrect information in prospectuses IPO, as recorded by the new Criminal Code

.