TALKING POINTS, LEGAL CLAIMS.
Despite the active resistance of the owners, the bank lost the licensee put the point in the fate of Ugra, the regulator found that the collapse of the bank was the implementation of his leadership and owners of a business model based on financing projects related to beneficiaries, at the expense of individuals. At the same time, the scale of the activities of companies receiving loans from Ugra did not comply with the volume of these loans. "The supervisory authority in the activities of the credit institution has repeatedly revealed operations with signs of the withdrawal of assets and qualitative collaterals, dubious transit operations, the facts of submission of substantially unreliable reporting data, the scheme execution of the requirements of the prescriptions of the Bank of Russia and violating the introduced restrictions," the Central Bank reports. In proof of this, the regulator provides information that during 2017 six times informed the General Prosecutor's Office on the facts of the withdrawal of assets from Ugra and twice – Rosfinmonitoring on conducting questionable transit operations. Three times with respect to the credit institution introduced restrictions on attracting deposits of the population, which she managed to bypass, including, with the help of a scheme known for Kesi Mosoblbank, – entering bank depositors with shares of a credit institution. In addition, the Temporary Administration established the facts of providing inaccurate reporting "In order to conceal the real financial situation".
Official representative of the main shareholder of the Yugra Bank Alexei Khotina Anatoly Vereshchagin on the air "B FM": "The decision is quite expected, it fits into the Strategy of the Central Bank, which by its actions artificially destroyed the Bank's capital. This is a biased subjective assessment of the Central Bank. We are absolutely ready for this. We also consider the securities of the Central Bank as an emotional pressure on the Bank's customers who have no hurry to take their deposits. There were many complaints, but none of the charges were confirmed. Shareholders' strategy – go to the end. They feel the right point and will go to the end. There are legal ways of struggle for the asset, in particular, judicial claims in the DRC and the Central Bank ". Read more details
On July 10, the Bank "Ugra" was introduced the temporary administration of the ASV for a period of six months. In addition, a moratorium was set to satisfy the requirements of the Bank's creditors for a period of three months. The volume of insurance payments that the DCA had to pay to the depositors of the individuality, was estimated at 170 billion rubles.
What does the situation with "Ugra" negatively affect
July 19, the Prosecutor General's Office made a protest against the decisions of the Bank of Russia. Banks selected by agents for the payment of insurance compensation to the depositors of "Ugra" received a letter from the Prosecutor General's Office demanding to stop insurance payments, the beginning of which was scheduled for July 20. DSA refused to cancel plans, and payments began in the planned time. As of Thursday, July 27, the insurance compensation was paid 136.5 thousand. Depositors "Ugra" for a total amount of about 109.9 billion rubles.
On July 20, it became known that the head of the ASV Yuri Isaev and the head of the time administration of the Ugra bank Dmitry Onegin were caused by the Prosecutor General's Office with a telephone. In the evening of the same day, the press service of the Bank of Russia reported on the evidence of the justice of its decisions against "Ugra".
On July 24, Moscow Arbitration Court registered a statement by the Yuga Bank on behalf of the Ex-Chairman of the Board of the Credit Organization of Dmitry Shileev on the recognition of the illegal decisions and actions of the Bank of Russia for the introduction of a temporary administration and a moratorium to meet the requirements of creditors. The bank argued these requirements in that at the time of the introduction of the Temporary Administration, the Ugra did not violate the standards, conducted client payments and had enough funds on accounts and at the bank's cash desks. Consideration of the claim appointed on August 15.
As "Ugra" tried to challenge the supervisory actions of the Central Bank
On July 27, representatives of the main shareholder of the Ugra Bank Alexei Khotina announced the bank's rescue plan. Among the proposed measures – Returns Agency for Insurance Deposits 170 billion rubles. For ten years, while the majority shareholder of the Bank was ready to personally provide "Ugra" financial assistance in the amount of 21 billion rubles. In addition, Mr. Khotin offered to implement highly liquid shares of companies totaling 36.3 billion rubles located on the balance sheet. According to the analyst of the Expert RA rating agency Yuri Belikova, the plan proposed by shareholders was insolvent. "As a provision of obligations to QU in the amount of about 170 billion. rub. (Insurance payments) Shareholders offered a bank loan portfolio. More on 01.07.2017 According to reporting, which today is officially recognized in unreliable, reserves on a loan portfolio (that is, losses on it) amounted to 86 billion rubles. with a cumulative portfolio value of 253 billion rubles., In terms of financial recovery, an increase in reserves to 147 billion rubles was assessed.,- ON.- Thus, the requirements for loans not covered with reserves (not conventionally impaired), remained in the amount of 107 billion rubles., what was not enough to cover the obligations to the QA ".
On December 12, 2016, the Ugra Bank was under the control or significant influence of the following persons: Mikhail Grašeshev (2.57%), faith of Esionova (7.10%), Maya Alandghi (9.41%), Elena Laikova (7, 39%), Natalia Ivanova (6.37%), Alexey Nefedova and Yuri Guseva (4.41%), Elena Belousova (3.72%), Anastasia Centoo (3.31%). Alexey Khotin owns a share in 43.6%.