RSS
Логотип
Баннер в шапке 1
Баннер в шапке 2

Shlyakhova Andrei Zakharovich

Person

Content

Shlyakhova Andrei Zakharovich
Shlyakhova Andrei Zakharovich

Biography

2023: Seizure of property worth 10 billion rubles

On October 18, 2023, the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal seized the property of the beneficiary of Agrosoyuz Bank Andrei Shlyakhovoy in the amount of 10 billion rubles. The reason for this was the statement of the state corporation "Deposit Insurance Agency" (DIA).

The Bank of Russia revoked Agrosoyuz CB LLC's banking license on November 7, 2018 due to the fact that "adherence to risk led to the formation of a significant amount of distressed assets on the credit institution's balance sheet." After that, the Bank of Russia issued an order to Shlyakhov to reduce his share in his other credit institution, UM-Bank. The regulator revoked the license from UM-Bank on November 14, 2018.

On February 4, 2019, the Moscow Arbitration Court declared Agrosoyuz Bank bankrupt, and the DIA was approved as the bankruptcy trustee. The agency appealed to the court with a demand to recover 10 billion rubles in losses from 10 former top managers of Agrosoyuz. The defendants in the lawsuit were, among other things, the former chairman of the bank's board of directors Andrei Berezin, the former chairman of the boards Alexei Zelentsov, members of the board of directors Andrei Shlyakhovoy, Mikhail Lavrentiev, Valery Kuzmin, deputy chairmen Irina Bakina and Andrei Somov.

On December 15, 2021, the Moscow Arbitration Court partially granted the DIA's petition, arresting Zelentsov's property in the amount of 10 billion rubles. The Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal on March 15, 2022 upheld this decision. At the same time, the court of first instance refused the DIA to seize Shlyakhovoy's property. This ruling on October 18, 2023 was overturned by the Ninth Arbitration Court of Appeal.

File:Aquote1.png
Interim measures were taken within the framework of a separate dispute on bringing persons who controlled Agrosoyuz Bank to civil liability in the form of recovery of losses. The adoption of interim measures will increase the likelihood of actual receipt of funds in favor of the bank's creditors, the DIA said in a statement.[1]
File:Aquote2.png

2024: Sentence - 5.5 years in prison for securities fraud

On September 16, 2024, the Zamoskvoretsky District Court of Moscow issued a verdict against the founder of UM-Bank LLC, 64-year-old Andrei Shlyakhovoy, and the chairman of the board of this organization, 69-year-old Yakov Gembukh. They are sentenced to prison for securities fraud.

According to the Moscow prosecutor's office, according to the case file, Shlyakhova, being the sole founder and chairman of UM-Bank, together with unidentified persons under the guise of acquiring illiquid bonds at an inflated cost, planned to steal funds from a credit institution. Gembukh was involved in the fraudulent scheme. The accomplices prepared untrue documents on the cost and liquidity of bonds of the LLC commercial organization under their control. "Spectrum"

Ex-beneficiary of Um-Bank sentenced to 5.5 years in prison for fraud

File:Aquote1.png
To implement his plan, he [Shlyakhova] created an organized group, which included Gembukh, who is the chairman of the bank's board, as well as other persons, the prosecutor's office said in a statement.
File:Aquote2.png

As a result of fraud in April 2018, two transactions were carried out on the exchange to acquire securities of the specified organization from the bank for a total amount of more than 139.6 million rubles. At the same time, in reality, the value of bonds was zero. The members of the criminal group disposed of the money received at their discretion.

The defendants were found guilty under Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (fraud committed by a person using his official position, organized by a group, on an especially large scale). Taking into account the position of the state prosecutor, the court sentenced Shlyakhovoy to 5.5 years in prison, Gembukh to 6 years in prison, both with serving sentences in a general regime correctional colony. At the same time, the criminal case against other participants in the scheme was separated into a separate proceeding.[2]

Notes