The head of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency (ARMA), Olena Duma, accused the state-owned Oschadbank of manipulation and non-state position over the statement about the Gulliver shopping center, UNN reports.
Details
Earlier, the Chairman of the Board of Oschadbank Serhiy Naumov statedthat the court's decision to transfer the Gulliver shopping center to the management of the ARMA harms the interests of the bank, as it will deprive it of loan payments from the company that owns the capital's complex.
Olena Duma called such statements by Sberbank manipulative.
The Agency has already contacted the bank regarding the existing loan debt and the subject of the mall owner's pledge to the bank and received an official response. Therefore, all manipulative statements by certain representatives of the state-owned bank in the media can be easily refuted. If there is a court ruling that ensures the state's interests, the position of all state bodies and institutions should be unified - the state
The head of ARMA claims that the transfer of the Gulliver shopping center to ARMA does not violate the rights of any financial institution as a creditor.
I would like to note that the Agency did not transfer corporate rights and funds held on the accounts of TRI O LLC (Gulliver shopping center) for management. Accordingly, the rights of any financial institution as a creditor have not been violated in any way. The fulfillment of loan obligations depends entirely on the borrower and his willingness to fulfill them. Any statements by one of the banks regarding the seizure of accounts that could lead to a default on loan obligations are unfounded
According to her, ARMA has received court rulings on the transfer of property into management and is beginning to examine and evaluate the seized asset with the involvement of law enforcement agencies and appraisers.
At the same time, in an exclusive commentary to UNN, Arsen Miliutin, Deputy Chairman of the Board of Oschadbank responsible for NPL, said that the bank had never claimed that corporate rights or funds of TRI O LLC were transferred to ARMA.
The point is that the court order transfers the asset itself, the building itself, and it is the building that collects rent from tenants, and with this rent the LLC pays the loan to the bank... When Gulliver is transferred to ARMA, all income from managing this asset should go to the state budget, not to state-owned banks. This is the problem
He noted that TRI O LLC has no other assets or property that could generate income to cover the loan. In other words, BFC Gulliver is the only possible source of loan servicing at Oschadbank and Ukreximbank.
"Now the payments are not stopped because Gulliver has not yet been technically transferred to ARMA, but when it is, all payments will stop, because the revenues must go to the state budget. And we need to repay the loan. The interest of the state-owned bank is not taken into account here," points out the deputy chairman of the board of Oschadbank.
Add
In early June, the Shevchenkivskyi District Court of Kyiv granted the Prosecutor General's Office's motion and allowed the transfer of the Gulliver complex to the ARMA. However, representatives of Gulliver statethat this decision grossly violates procedural and substantive law and actually means a business takeover with the assistance of law enforcement and security agencies.
It is not yet known how this situation will develop further, as representatives of the company that owns the complex are arguing in court that this decision is groundless and illegal.