Wicked UIFAND plan surfaces in the BPA case
In complicity with the AREB, they use the tricky PwC auditing process to move forward with the blocking of hundreds of accounts
As part of a wicked complicity, the Andorran Financial Intelligence Unit (UIFAND) irresponsibly makes use of the reports and auditing procedures performed by the discredited firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC). These have already proven to throw misleading results, to accuse former clients of the Banca Privada d’Andorra(BPA) of money laundering and begin legal procedures, without any sentence from a judge. Its sole intention is to continue blocking the accounts of hundreds who trusted their savings and assets to the BPA and to set traps to keep the clients’ money in the end.
Even though the irregular PwC reports lack financial authority and have no grounds, the UIFAND (led by Carles Fiñana) along with the Andorran State Agency for Resolution of Banking Institutions (AREB), led by Albert Hinojosa Besolí, present them before the Andorran justice to continue withholding the legitimate funds of business men from around the world, who have been living a financial nightmare for three years now.
Acting in a completely dishonest manner, the Andorran authorities have managed to weave a mesh of traps and complicities to stall and keep the millionaire funds from the clients, who are unable to do much, but have not given up. Furthermore, in the next days, they will reinforce their legal procedures, supported by international entities, mainly advocating in the field of human rights and the constitutional right.
During the auditing procedures performed to the extinct BPA by the PwC, hired by the AREB, an inappropriate methodology was implemented, which led the BPA to bankruptcy.It wrongly carried out losses estimates considering two scenarios: liquidation and continuity, but failed to consider the resolution scenario, which led to negligence by not making sure that the destruction of assets through the liquidation scenario would be higher.This mistake brought about as consequence that thousands of savers and investors lost everything, in March 2015, when the bank entity was intervened.
Only last year the UIFAND reported 116 statements of suspicious money laundering transactions, 107 of which correspond to bank entities, and among these, 44 are related with the BPA case. However, the UIFAND has not been able to prove anything, since they are nothing more than suspicions.The Prosecution, also negligent, keeps 56 cases filed in the archives.
The voracity and greed of the UIFAND executives has no boundaries; in 2016, 437 people were investigated; in 2017, that number ascended to 1729, and so far this year, already more than 50, which represents a profitable business of 254 million euros.It is quite curious that these “investigations” do not reach other sectors such as notaries, lawyers, economists or real estate companies, but then again, it is not profitable for them because of the volume of business they generate.
In light of so many irregularities, the UIFAND is in the “eye of the storm”, to the point where the SDP’s general councilor Víctor Naudi, has demanded the Government to provide answers regarding the Intelligence Unit’s situation, and shares his concerns surrounding what appears to be a weakening of its structure.Among the demands is also the number of suspicious reports processed between 2011 and 2017, in view of the new prevention and anti-money laundering fight legislation, seeing the weakening in their technical and human resources.
The truth is that the regulating bodies within the Andorran financial system, like the Andorran National Institute of Finances (INAF), led by Ramón López, the UIFAND and the AREB, turned out to be a fiasco.According to a report issued a few days ago, several critiques have been received due to the constant rejections of the ones responsible to submitthe reports to the general councilors from the Legislature, resorting to the confidentiality clauses, allowing them to infringe in their clients’ cases, when they so needed it.
The Special Committee for Control and Prevention of Risks for the Financial Stability is already really close behind them, for it is their obligation and duty to collaborate with the BPA Committee, and report on the unjustified procedures and actions of these entities.