The experts' report on the "Bankia case" prepared by the Bank of Spain's inspectors has allowed the penal proceedings in the National Court to move forward. At the same time, it may open up new opportunities for civil claims by the shareholders involved.
The experts' report concludes that the financial statements on which the offer was based "did not express the real situation" of Bankia. In the absence of a judicial verdict on this question, the detailed report prepared ...
The experts' report on the "Bankia case" prepared by the Bank of Spain's inspectors has allowed the penal proceedings in the National Court to move forward. At the same time, it may open up new opportunities for civil claims by the shareholders involved.
The experts' report concludes that the financial statements on which the offer was based "did not express the real situation" of Bankia. In the absence of a judicial verdict on this question, the detailed report prepared by the experts is based on the paperwork used by the auditors (Deloitte) and offers decisive information on the improper accounting procedures applied to certain contingencies.
Bankia underwent the fastest stock-market launch in the history of Spain, and was taken over by the FOBR (Fund for Orderly Bank Restructuring) a few months later. Until now, Bankia has always maintained that its collapse was due to the losses that came to light when the accountancy rules were changed (by the Royal Decrees known as "Guindos I" and "Guindos II"). The new experts' report, issued by financial experts who are regarded as independent and objective, questions the very basis of this assertion, and conclude that the contingencies existed prior to this, and that Bankia's accounts contain evident "accounting errors" and "significant adjustments not included in the accounts". The report also casts doubt on the diligence of Bankia's auditors and of the regulatory bodies.
JAUSAS' report provides some guidelines on how to proceed to claim for damages related to Bankia's IPO.
