ARMA is defending itself to Oschadbank and distancing itself from responsibility for the loan default of the Gulliver shopping center.

The Asset Recovery and Management Agency recalled the interests of the state-owned "Oschadbank" midway through the competition for selecting a manager for the capital's shopping and entertainment center "Gulliver" and decided to send a letter to them with justifications, reports UNN.

Details

As is known, ARMA announced a competition to select a manager for the "Gulliver" shopping and entertainment center. The agency's head, Elena Duma, proudly stated that she approached the selection of a manager for this high-profile asset with maximum rigor and even established a maximum of 4 criteria for candidates. Among the requirements that participants must meet are an asset value of at least 100 million hryvnias, a professional team, verified experience in managing similar facilities, and confirmed financial viability.

The "Gulliver" shopping center building serves as collateral for a mortgage loan in state banks, including "Oschadbank." However, among the criteria set by ARMA, there is no mention of the necessity to repay the loan.

"Oschadbank" has repeatedly stated that the decision to transfer "Gulliver" to ARMA harms the interests of the state bank, as it would deprive it of loan payments from the owning company of the capital complex. Losses for "Oschadbank" due to the cessation of loan payments could reach over 20 billion hryvnias.

In fact, midway through the competition for selecting a manager, ARMA remembered the state bank and its interests and informed that it sent a letter to "Oschadbank."

"ARMA sent a letter to Oschadbank, noting that: corporate rights and funds in the company's accounts were not transferred to ARMA's management; the rights of financial institutions as creditors remain intact; and the fulfillment of credit obligations depends solely on the borrower," the agency stated.

The Asset Recovery and Management Agency chose the easiest way to justify its actions - shifting the responsibility onto others. It claims that corporate rights were not transferred and that the borrower must pay the loans.

However, even at "Oschadbank," it was noted that the company "TRI O," which owns the shopping center, considers this asset to be its only source of income and that if it is transferred to a new manager, it will not be able to repay the loan.

Reminder

After the publication of information regarding the assessment of the capital "Gulliver," ARMA head Elena Duma immediately began to justify herself in light of criticism regarding the manager selection competition for this asset.

Moreover, in the case of the appraiser for the "Gulliver" shopping center, the public has already raised several questions that remain unanswered. In particular, what criteria did ARMA use to select "Business Consulting" as the winner and what compensation will the company receive for its work? Indeed, apart from Elena Duma's statements claiming that the competition was "transparent," no information about it can be found.

It is known that ARMA employees were unable to conduct a full inspection of the entire "Gulliver" shopping center and business center. After the spectacle with cover numbers, "mama's agents" were still forced to act according to the law. Accordingly, if a complete inspection of the asset was not conducted, how can its value be objectively assessed?