As part of disputes related to factoring agreements concluded for supplies for the IT integrator of Rosseti, Rosseti Tsifra, forgery of signatures of the former CEO of the state-owned company Alexei Agapov was revealed. The examination came to such conclusions after examining the documents provided by Blank Bank, the beneficial owner of which is Roman Avdeev, a businessman from the Forbes lists. The capital’s financiers demanded tens of millions from Rosseti Tsifra, referring precisely to the factoring agreement concluded with Smartech from St. Petersburg. This company, as it became known in the conflicts, attracted funding under a contract with the Rosseti asset in two banks at once, which caused, among other things, resonant clashes with Pervouralskbank. The financial structure from the Middle Urals also announced major claims against Smartech. As a result, the contractor of state-owned companies and businessmen associated with him went bankrupt, and the capital and Sverdlovsk bankers were forced to line up for funds. Now they, like Rosseti Tsifra, are suing for millions of rubles, and they are also challenging transactions with real estate and affiliated structures revealed in arbitrations.
The Arbitration Court of the city of Moscow refused Blank Bank LLC (according to the latest public reports, controlled by the Moscow Credit Bank of a businessman from the Forbes lists Roman Avdeev) to recover from Rosseti Tsifra JSC, an IT integrator of Rosseti Group of Companies – 59.4 million rubles.
To clarify, the claims were related to a factoring agreement concluded by the predecessor of Blank Bank with Smartech LLC (St. Petersburg). The latter, as Pravda UrFO reported, in turn concluded an agreement with Rosseti Tsifra for the supply, installation of subscriber terminals, connection (re-equipment) of subscriber terminals installed at controlled facilities. According to the documents, the maximum value of the contract amounted to 71.9 million rubles.
However, as it turned out later, a company from St. Petersburg attracted funding for this contract from both Blank Bank and JSC Pervouralskbank. This, in turn, led to a conflict between the bankers, which was also reported in detail by the publication.
For example, Moscow financiers demanded that the factoring agreement concluded between Pervouralskbank and Smartekh be declared invalid (insignificant), but were refused. Pervouralskbank also failed to challenge the general agreement on the provision of financing against the assignment of a monetary claim.
At the same time, the court later found that Pervouralskbank had priority in acquiring the rights of an assignee, since a factoring agreement had been concluded with it earlier. “This circumstance indicates the impossibility of presenting Blank Bank with claims against the VOLS-VL Management (now Rosseti Tsifra. – Ed.), since they belong to Pervouralskbank, which is an independent basis for dismissing the claim under this case,” follows from the materials of the proceedings for 59 million rubles.
Another key point of this dispute is the claims of falsifications. As Pravda UrFO told, representatives of the Rosseti integrator spoke with him. The signatures of Aleksey Anatolyevich Agapov, the former head of Rosseti Tsifra, who, according to Kontur.Focus, is now listed as Acting General Director of JSC Ramek-VS, were called into question. The latter, as CNews reported, previously positioned itself as an IT integrator of the Ministry of Defense, and “now provides services to somewhat more public law enforcement agencies.”
As a result, dealing with the documents, as follows from the materials, the expert came to the unequivocal conclusion that “that the signature <...> was not made by Agapov himself <...>, but by another person (s) with imitation by some his authentic signatures with preliminary training.”
“Since the forensic examination confirmed the fact of falsification of the evidence presented by the plaintiff (notification of the assignment of rights of claim <…>; acts of completion of installation <…>; acts of connection of controlled objects <…>) <…>, cannot be accepted by the court as evidence of the completion of work , notification of the defendant about the assignment of claims, since in this case the falsified documents are subject to exclusion from the evidence base, ”the court noted.
It should be noted that the confrontation for funds also unfolded as part of the bankruptcy of Smartech LLC, to which the same Pervouralskbank, based on court data, made claims for more than a hundred million. The dispute was also caused by the claims of Blank Bank, which, after a number of instances, were included in the amount of about 30 million rubles.
We add that businessmen associated with Smartech are also going through bankruptcy procedures: Alexander Viktorovich Moldavanov and Inessa Valerievna Yudina. As part of the insolvency case of the first, creditors, including Pervouralskbank, currently, for example, demand to invalidate real estate transactions worth tens of millions.