 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kata
Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Sat May 31, 2008 11:04 am Post subject: CZAW Bankruptcy Petition |
 |
|
Regional Court in Brno Court: Regional Court in Brno
Husova 15 Arrived: 21.05.2008, 07:50
601 95 Brno Number of parties/attachments: 17/
File no.: KSBR 44 INS 1207/2008
Prague, 20.5.2008
Petitioner: COMINVEST ASSOCIATED LIMITED, with its registered office at Pasea Estate, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands, company no. (registration no.): 626279
Debtor: CZECH AIRCRAFT WORKS spol. s r.o., with its registered office at Kunovice, Na Záhonech 212, Post Code 686 04, company no. 251 10 969, entered in the register maintained by the Regional Court in Brno, section C, file no. 33816
STATEMENT OF THE PLAINTIFF
I.
In the resolution of the Regional Court of 7.5.2008 the petitioner was called upon to give a statement to the pripis dluznika/registration of the debtor of 25.4.2008 and 30.4.2008.
On the basis of this call of the bankruptcy court, the petitioner submits this statement.
II.
Bankruptcy proceedings were launched against the debtor’s assets on 27.3.2008. As at today’s date the court has received notices or registrations of receivables of approximately 20 creditors, who have outstanding claims against the debtor with a total value of CZK 51,000,000 (DEPOSITS NOT INCLUDED) with appurtenances, and it can be assumed that other creditors will register their claims from this date onwards.
The debtor is currently unable to meet its legal obligations towards the District Social Security Administration (see this creditor’s notice dated 2.5.2008). A similar delay with the payment of outstanding obligations can also be expected in the case of the relevant tax office or health insurance companies. The debtor’s employees were not paid their salaries for April and May.
III.
In its submission of 25.4.2008, the debtor submitted to the court a list of its employees and a list of its assets (which is comprised of a list of warehouse inventories valued at CZK 20,390,329.61, a list of production in progress valued at CZK 12,220,365.06, a list of production in progress valued at CZK 616,000 and a list of finished products valued at CZK 4,866,227.71). Despite the debtor’s numerous declarations that these lists are “complete and correct”, the petitioner is convinced of the fact that the lists submitted by the debtor do not give a true reflection of the assets owned by the debtor, but rather than the debtor’s assets are overvalued.
Nevertheless, despite the petitioner’s above-mentioned reservations to the lists submitted, it must be stated that even from these records it is clear that the debtor meets all the legal prerequisites for over-indebtedness, as this term is defined in Section 3(3) of Act No. 182/2006 Coll., the Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter referred to as “BA”), namely:
i) the debtor has more than one creditor, and
ii) the sum of its obligations exceeds the value of its assets.
The petitioner is of the opinion that the documents submitted hitherto to the bankruptcy court by the individual creditors as well as by the debtor prove the debtor’s bankruptcy, as the debtor
i) has more than one creditor,
ii) has monetary obligations that are more than 30 days overdue,
iii) is unable to make good on these obligations.
In accordance with Section 3(2)(a) and (b) of the BA, the debtor’s inability to pay may be deduced from the fact that
i) the debtor stopped the payment of a significant part of its monetary obligations, whilst at the same time
ii) the debtor is not paying a significant part of its monetary obligations for more than three months after their due date.
At the same time, the petitioner states that, contrary to Section 128(3) and Section 104 of the BA, the debtor has yet to submit to the court the requested list of all its obligations, in spite of the fact that this list should form a mandatory part of the accounting records that the debtor is obliged to keep by law. Thus, by failing to submit the requested lists, another prerequisite for the debtor’s inability to pay pursuant to Section 3(2)(d) of the BA.
IV.
The debtor’s bad financial situation was also confirmed by the debtor’s executive director himself (see, for example, the declaration of the debtor’s executive director that the value of the obligations was lowered from an initial value of CZK 35.3 million to CZK 28.8 million; the declaration on page 1, where it is expressly stated that CZAW was already bankrupt back in 2007, etc.) in his statement (which forms an appendix to the statement of the debtor to the bankruptcy of 25.4.2008).
The petitioner would also like to take this opportunity to emphasise the fact that the statement of the debtor’s executive director contains a number of errors as far as the debtor’s obligations are concerned. As has already been stated above, the debtor’s executive director states that the debtor’s obligations reach CZK 28.8 million. However, the interim results of the bankruptcy proceedings show that this value is at least twice this amount (as at today’s date the bankruptcy court has received notices from creditors who have outstanding claims against the debtor in excess of CZK 51 million).
The debtor’s executive director further states that in the period from 31.12.2008 (clearly this should be the period from 31.12.2007), a loan from KB totalling CZK 5 million was to be paid by the debtor. But from the communication of the company FAME Jihlava, a.s., submitted to the above court on 12.5.2008 it ensues that this obligation was not settled by the debtor, but that this obligation continues in existence (albeit under the title of undue enrichment, on account of the debtor refusing, contrary to the loan agreement, to sign an amendment thereto). This obligation has not been settled by the debtor to this date, despite the fact that the debtor was repeatedly called upon to make good on this obligation.
V.
The petitioner is unable to give an opinion on the other claims made by the debtor in the statement of the debtor’s executive director regarding the internal structure and management of CZAW, as it is not and never was a member of the debtor. Nevertheless, according to the debtor’s memorandum of association (filed in the collection of documents kept by the Regional Court in Brno) it is clear that the debtor’s general meeting only reached quorum if attended by members having at least 94.60% of the votes, with the member AIRCRAFT ENTERPRISES LTD. holding 4515 votes, the member SLAVIA CAPITAL AERO (SC AERO) LIMITED holding 4965 votes, and the member Trihold Limited holding 540 votes. For any resolution to be adopted, a 67% majority of all the votes of all members was always required.
From the above, it is clear that SLAVIA CAPITAL AERO (SC AERO) LIMITED did not have the majority of votes required to adopt or push through any resolution, and therefore was unable by itself (i.e. without the co-operation of another member, AIRCRAFT ENTERPRISES LTD., whose majority shareholder – as ensues from the Confirmation on Shareholder Status, again filed in the collection of documents kept by the Regional Court in Brno – is the debtor’s executive director, i.e. Mr Chip W. Erwin), to push through any decision, take any measure or to damage the debtor in any other way (as the debtor infers in its statement).
Evidence: Shareholder Status as at 13.11.2007
VI.
In its petition, the debtor states that it feels it has suffered damage, “as COMINVEST ASSOCIATED LIMITED did not contact it and evidently took no steps aimed at the payment of the alleged receivable”.
Once again, the above claim made by the debtor is not founded on truth, as documented by the facts presented by the petitioner below.
On 31.1.2008, the Bill of Exchange was presented to the domicilat/domicilatory for payment. By so doing, the condition of the due presentation of the bill of exchange was met. The debtor was subsequently called upon to pay the outstanding obligation. However, from the confirmation issued by ČSOB, a.s. of 14.2.2008 it is clear that the debtor did not react in any way to this call and failed to make any payment towards the outstanding obligation.
Evidence: collection order from the bill of exchange of 31.1.2008
confirmation issued by ČSOB, a.s. of 14.2.2008 (file no. KSBR 44 INS 1207/2008)
COMINVEST ASSOCIATED LIMITED
| | - The Matronics Czech-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Czech-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Bob_anderson
Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Posts: 17
Location: Atlanta
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 17, 2008 6:27 am Post subject: Re: CZAW Bankruptcy Petition |
|
|
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Letter 01
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Krajsky soud v Brne
Husova 15
601 95 Brno
Czech Republic
23 May 2008
Dear Sir,
Re: CZAW in liquidation
CASE FILE No. KSBR 44 INS 1207/2008
My name is Leonardo da Costa Sayago and I am the Managing Director and owner of
Aeromarine Lda.
Mr. Erwin offered to sell me 9% of CZAW for the sum of $800,000, but my financial advisers told
me not to invest.
A little later in the middle of 2006 I was given exclusive distribution rights to all products of
CZAW for Portugal and Spain (Atlantic to a meridian passing through the centre of Madrid).
For these rights Mr. Erwin convinced me to send CZAW the sum of $300,100, as a prepayment
of 5 Sportcruisers and deposits on 5 Sportcruisers and 1 Mermaid. This order was increased to
15 Sportcruisers and another $50,000 was sent. Deliveries were promised at a rate of 2 per
month starting March 2007.
In about May 2007 I visited the factory to see my planes and in the presence of Mr. John Mohr
Mr Erwin told me ”Why should I supply you the planes that you have already paid for, just send
another $300,000 “.
He proceeded to steal my order OC 3984 and sold it to a client of mine. I said “you have from
Aeromarine nearly $50,000 on this plane and now you are going to receive $75,000 from my
client. Do you want to be paid twice for the same plane? He replied, “What a good idea for my
cash flow “. My $15,000 commission was never paid and he refused to even discuss it.
He also sold another plane to one of my clients, Mr. Pereira, and contrary to our written
agreement he refused to pay my company around $25 000 due on the transaction.
Mr Erwin holds $70,000 in deposits, approximately $40,000 in unpaid commissions, $2,000 in
warranty work on faulty planes which we did not claim as we knew that he had been insolvent
for some time.
After many false promises of delivery, he signed new contracts, now for 7 planes in lieu of 8
outstanding (the stolen OC3984 he does not want to honour) .Deliveries were to start in Feb
2008.But as usual absolutely no deliveries were made. .Recently he promised to refund my
deposits. I asked that he build me one plane. He wrote a document in front of Mr. Robert Miller,
Managing Director, Aeromarine UK Ltd confirming the transfer of my deposits as payment in full
for a plane OC3988 which was to be delivered at the end of April. This plane has been in the
assembly line for 3 months but remains in the same state as the day the document was signed.
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Mr Erwin’s response when asked why it had not progressed was “why should I deliver it when it
has already been paid in full”.
I am a 64 year old Naval Architect. I have been in business since 1967. I have dealt with many
businesses from all over the World and I have NEVER come across anybody capable of so
much prevarication, fraud, lies, deception. I know this gentleman has been involved with other
companies that have gone bankrupt and by all accounts he has been able to buy them back
and continue to rob clients of their hard earned cash. I hope this will not happen on this
occasion. I am $112,000 short and he plainly refuses to deliver my goods.
Having sold me the rights to sell in Portugal and Spain he has taken a considerable amount of
my money and failed to supply the goods. I understand he has now given those rights to
another company. I consider this as the worst type of immoral behaviour.
Yours Faithfully
Leonardo da Sayago
C.Eng. FRINA
Managing Director
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Letter 02
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Kunovice 27th May 2008
Dear Sir,
CHIP ERWIN CAUGHT RED HANDED STEALING AIRCRAFT
Further to my letter of the 23rd of May, I decided to visit Mr. Erwin at CZAW to
collect my fully paid sportcruiser OC3989 (in error referred to OC3988 as I wrote from
the U.K. from memory), first contracted for delivery in middle 2007, then with written
contract for February 2008 and later for April 2008.
To my enormous surprise I found my aircraft OC3989 now being built for a new
client from HUNGARY, although Mr. Erwin did forget to change serial number,
original markings “3989 – RFT PORTUGAL” as can be seen on photograph enclosed.
Exibit 1.
I enclose photo taken on the 18th of March of the same plane with a client on the
background showing clearly whose aircraft this OC3989 is. Exibit 2.
For the avoidance of doubt I enclose several other photos clearly showing the aircraft
being switched from Aeromarine to a new client in Hungary. Mr. Erwin did not even
bother to charge the identity of our OC3989 serial No. 700725.
Already on OC3987 & OC3988 Aeromarine was asked to send extra funds so that
CZAW could buy engines and other fittings with the absolute promise that these items
bought with the extra $ 50.000 would be used for our aircraft. They were not used as
promised. Mr. Václav Kížek, than head of production, did promise me that as soon as
the items came into stock they would go to my 2 planes. After they were fitted Mr.
Erwin ordered him to take them off my 2 aircraft and fit them to other aircraft.
I just found out that without my knowledge and permission he has incorporated an
offshore company named “Aeromarine Consulting” probably with the aim of avoiding
taxes due in the Czech Republic.
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
The funds I have in CZAW are important to me as they are part of my Pension Fund.
I do hope you will not allow Mr. Erwin to consummate his theft of our aircraft and
determine this should be handed over to us immediately.
Yours faithfully
For Aeromarine lda
Leonardo Sayago
Managing director
P.S. Today is the 28th May 2008 and I am reliably informed that at 15.50 a lorry Reg.
No. KAP-089 driver Mr. Hadinger Passport No. 5214801A left the factory with my
fully paid aircraft OC3989 to a destination in Hungary!
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Letter 03
AEROMARINE, Lda Contribuinte nº 507 349 253
Av. Sabóia 401 A - 2765-278 M. Estoril –Tel/Fax 242-901234 Email:aeromarine(at)clix.pt
Kunovice 31st of May 2008
Ref. case file No KSBR 44 INS 1207/2008
Dear Sir,
CHIP ERWIN UNREPENTANT AFTER THEFT OF OC 3989
I was able to meet yesterday Mr. Erwin who did not think it was wrong to sell my
fully paid aircraft OC 3989 RTF PORTUGAL originally for delivery middle 2007, then
contracted for February 2008, then promised for April 2008 and just sold again to
another owner in Hungary and shipped on the 28th of May at 15.50 hours. The local
Police could not act.
The terms for the supply of 2 Kits are on document dated 30th of May. The alteration
in my handwriting were crossed by Chip Erwin. He made it clear to me that I sign what
he wanted or go home with nothing at all. ‘DURESS’ is the right word for this situation.
The former chief engineer of CZAW advised me the equipment collected is worth at
best US $ 30 000 but quite useless as CZAW will not supply essential parts not
available outside the factory.
The credit in my company’s favour was US $ 112 000 and I have been given goods
worth US $ 30 000.This is how Mr. Erwin conducts business. I should consider myself
lucky I did not loose my US $ 350 100 initial payment because I now understand he was
already insolvent at that time but talking to him nobody would imagine that. I’m sure
there are agents much worse off than myself. A different idea of ‘business ethics’.
Yours faithfully
For Aeromarine lda
Leonardo Sayago
| | - The Matronics Czech-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Czech-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
