Recently, a number of banks were listed as executors by the court for being involved in a fraudulent fund raising case.
A few days ago, the brokerage China reporter learned from the China Enforcement Information Public Network that the corresponding branches of three banks, Construction Bank, CITIC Bank and Everbright Bank, added dozens of new executee information in one day, and the enforcement court of the enforcement cases were all Zhuzhou Tianyuan District People’s Court, and the filing time was all on May 21 this year.
According to the content disclosed on the Judgment Document Network, the above three banks were enforced by the court at the same time, in connection with a fraudulent case of illegal fund raising using false fund products, all of which were sentenced by the court to bear joint and several liability.
According to the court, 9 years ago, Huang Mouhua, Qiu Moubiao and others have registered two companies through others, since then issued false fund products, through the CCB Zhuzhou branch and staff billing advisory fees, commissions, dividends and other ways to sell the above-mentioned fund products, and promised customers “capital preservation and interest” ” annualized return rate of 12%”, thus raising a total of more than 50 million yuan in fraud, resulting in dozens of bank customers victimized.
As the fund sales promoter of the construction bank, the fund custodian of CITIC Bank, Everbright Bank was also sentenced to joint and several liability.
The bank recommended the fund was actually a false product, 37 VIP customers were “trapped”
The ruling documents show that in 2012, Huang Mouhua, Qiu Moubiao and other people through others, respectively, Zhuzhou Huatai Equity Investment Fund Management Co. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Huatai Company” and Hanhong Equity Investment Fund Management Company (hereinafter referred to as “Hanhong Company”), and they also asked others to hold shares of the company on their behalf. The court found that, after the establishment of the two companies, without the approval and filing of the relevant departments, the issue and marketing of the so-called “annualized rate of return on investment 12%,” “company guarantee,” “guaranteed capital and interest “The company’s products were not approved by the relevant authorities.
On May 2, 2013, after the former president of CCB Zhuzhou Branch, Dai Moujun, the president of Xiangjiang Branch, Wang Mou and other people inspected Huatai, CCB Zhuzhou Xiangjiang Branch signed the “Consultant Agreement” with Huatai. The agreement stipulated that Xiangjiang Sub-Branch of CCB Zhuzhou Branch would recommend investors and investment projects for Huatai and conduct due diligence on the matters involved in the investment projects.
In return, Huatai paid 1.5% of the proceeds to Xiangjiang Branch as the consultancy fee. The agreement also agreed that if the branch later recommended projects to Huatai and assisted Huatai in obtaining investment interests such as equity and options, the bank would also receive 5% of the dividends from such investment interests.
Subsequently, with the assistance of Wang Mou, the head of Xiangjiang Branch, Qiu Moubiao, a core member of Huatai, and others held a promotion meeting for Huatai’s mother fund at CCB Zhuzhou Xiangjiang Branch in May 2013, which was also attended by more than 20 marketing executives from CCB Zhuzhou branches. At the promotion meeting, Huatai promised the account managers a commission of 1% of the investment amount. Thereafter, Qiu Moubiao also raised funds through CCB Zhuzhou Branch in the same way in the name of Hanhong Company.
With Qiu Moubiao and others using Huatai and Hanhong to offer substantial advisory fees, commissions and dividends to banks and bank account managers, CCB recommended to customers the sale of fund products issued by the two companies. According to a lawsuit filed in court by a victimized customer Kuang Moutian, CCB Zhuzhou Branch, Zhuzhou Xiangjiang Sub-branch, Changjiang Sub-branch, Power Sub-branch and Tianxin Sub-branch all met at CCB to promote, launch and organize their staff to issue and sell funds from Huatai and Hanhong using electronic scrolling screens in business halls, ATM machines and official website displays.
In their own account manager recommended in turn, Kuang Moutian then in the CCB Zhuzhou branch office with its account manager signed a contract to buy the Hanhong company’s fund. Kuang Moutian finally invested 860,000 yuan, the funds were transferred to the Hanhong company’s account in the CCB Zhuzhou Xiangjiang branch. The defense of Kuang Moutian shows that the same encounter with its 37 people, are CCB VIP customers, the whole process, the investors did not have any contact with the company, and Hanhong company or Huatai company signed the agreement all by the CCB Zhuzhou branch and the branch account managers.
Another victim, Cheng Mouxiang’s defense revealed that Huatai and Hanhong raised a total of more than 50 million through CCB Zhuzhou branch, of which more than 16 million yuan to repay its loan in CCB Zhuzhou branch. 2015 onwards, Cheng Mouxiang and other victimized customers did not receive the investment income from the purchase of Huatai and Hanhong funds and the principal cheated away, Cheng Mouxiang and other customers countless times to the defendant CCB Zhuzhou branch to no avail.
The verdict shows that from June to September 2015, Huatai’s core personnel Huang Mouhua and Tang Mouping were criminally detained by the public security authorities on suspicion of fund-raising fraud. on July 26, 2016, the company’s general manager Qiu Moubiao was also criminally detained by the public security authorities on suspicion of fund-raising fraud.
CCB, Everbright and CITIC were ordered to bear joint and several compensation
Only after Huang Mouhua and Qiu Moubiao, the core personnel of Huatai and Hanhong, were caught in the net did many of CCB’s defrauded customers learn that Huatai and Hanhong’s funds were illegal fictitious funds.
According to the relevant judgment, since Everbright Bank Changsha Branch and CITIC Bank Changsha Branch acted as the fund custodian banks of the above companies, the relevant victimized customers of CCB took CCB Zhuzhou Branch, Everbright Bank Changsha Branch and CITIC Bank Changsha Branch to court for supplementary compensation.
After several rounds of trial, the court made the verdict. Taking the victim Kuangmoutian as an example, the court ruled that Hanhong compensated Kuangmoutian with investment losses of 756,800 yuan. At the same time, CCB Zhuzhou Branch bore 60% of the supplementary liability for the loss; and Everbright Bank Changsha Branch bore 40% of the supplementary liability for the loss. In Cheng Mouxiang’s case, CCB Zhuzhou Branch and CITIC Bank Changsha were awarded 60% and 40% of the supplementary liability, respectively.
According to the China Enforcement Information Public Website, as of May 27, CCB Zhuzhou Branch, Everbright Bank Changsha Branch and CITIC Bank Changsha Branch were repeatedly listed as executors by the Zhuzhou Tianyuan District People’s Court, involving filing dates of April 25, 26 and May 21 this year, respectively.
Among them, CCB Zhuzhou Branch currently has a total of 78 executed information, with a total executed amount of 24.276 million yuan; CITIC Bank Changsha Branch currently has a total of 59 executed information, with an executed amount of 18.4339 million yuan; Everbright Bank Changsha Branch has 18 records, with a total executed amount of 4.842 million yuan.
Recent Comments