вторник, 9 августа 2022 г.

How bribes are taken out of Russia

3 million euros to Austria for the main witness in the judicial mafia case




The Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow denied parole to lawyer Alexei Litvinov. Litvinov is a key figure in a simply fantastic corruption story, which the VChK-OGPU telegram channel found out about. He, being a solver and intermediary in the transfer of gigantic bribes, was to become a key figure in one of the largest investigations into corruption in the Kuban. Didn't. Litvinov testified against dozens of judges, officials at both the regional and federal levels, and the then mayor of Sochi, Anatoly Pakhomov. Everything he said was confirmed. However, the materials were abruptly simply buried, having decided to attract only a few "switchmen" according to Pakhomov's testimony. Only the former deputy heads of Sochi, Anatoly Rykov and Sergey Yurin, turned out to be accused.



Rucriminal.info continues the corrupt "story No. 1".

In the court session of the Khamovniki Court of Moscow, the protocol recorded such an "opening statement" to the testimony of A.Yu. Litvinov. as a witness for the prosecution in the vice-mayors' case: "First of all, I would like to say, since we have not seen each other for a long time, that I regret what happened, and I am sincerely sorry for your loved ones, your relatives, this is really a big shock for your family, for my family.At the same time, I want to say that without wishing you harm, I MADE, I CONSIDER THE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT decision, initially NOT STUDYING THE MATERIALS OF THE CASE, not pausing to study them and see what is there, what is not, I decided for myself to cooperate with the investigation, because we all understand very well, everyone present in this hall understands very well that my testimony is truthful, that it is the absolute truth (quote from the testimony of 04/23/2021).

On 06/08/2019, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation refused to conclude a pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu., as he tried to present himself as an “intermediary”, and not an “organizer” of the scheme for legalizing unauthorized construction objects.

Pre-trial agreement with Litvinov A.Yu. was signed on the second attempt, after Litvinov decided to "recognize EVERYTHING that is written in the charge", namely:



- creation with his participation of the Org. Group in 2010



- on the receipt of a bribe by the group from the developer Stroganov I.A. for LCD "Sofia-Park" and "Marina-Park" at least 150 million rubles.



- about receiving bribes from the developer Klyus V.V. for residential complex "Svetlana-Park" not less than 40 million rubles. and a number of others.



On January 21, 2020, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation established that “the information available in the testimony of Liivinov A.Yu. about A.N. , Uleeva S.N., Borozdina M.S., Shafieva A.Yu."

The head of the investigation group of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation A.V. Salivonik established that Rykov A.N. received from Stroganov I.A. at least 25 million rubles. for allegedly having the opportunity to influence the trial with the administration of Sochi.

Also, the head of the investigation team of the Main Investigative Directorate of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation established that Litvinov A.Yu. received from Klyus V.V. 60 million rubles for "speeding up the process of signing a building permit." At the same time, Rykov and Yurin were not informed.

The foregoing indicates that Litvintv A.Yew. lying. Lying brazenly and systematically.

The position of the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, which has not yet taken measures in accordance with Art. 317.8 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation on the revision of the sentence passed against the defendant, with whom a pre-trial agreement on cooperation was concluded, due to the fact that it was discovered that the defendant reported false information.

Employees of the Directorate of the Security Service of the Federal Security Service of the FSB of the Russian Federation were absolutely right, pointing to the “scheme for commissioning unauthorized buildings in the form of the Marina-Park and Svetlana-Park complexes” in their reports addressed to the head of the department, Ivan Tkachev.

At the disposal of Rucriminal.info there are judicial acts that served as the basis for recognizing the objects as "commissioned" and recognizing the ownership of the developers on these objects.

Judicial acts on the complex "Marina-Park":

09/09/2015 in case N2-2550/2015 judge O.A. Didik of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi, at the claim of the developer against Rosreestr, recognizes the developer's ownership of the reconstructed pool building - 4 floors.

06/29/2016 case N 2a - 4990/2016 Judge V.A. Sluka of the central district court of the city of Sochi according to the claim of the developer against the administration of the Krasnodar Territory (Gosstroynadzor), the Marina-Park complex was recognized as put into operation - 10 floors.

03/23/2017 N 2-1511 / 2017 Judge V.A. Vlasenko of the Central District Court of Sochi on the claim of I.S. Vorobiev to the cadastral engineer recognizes the need to preserve the building in a reconstructed form and recognizes the ownership of the 11th and 12th floors.

Judicial acts on the complex "Svelana-Park":



1) 06/13/2019 Leninsky District Court of Krasnodar on the claim of M.A. Kostanovskiy to the administration of the Krasnodar Territory kept a 10-storey building in a reconstructed state. 08/08/2020 judges N.V. Dunyushkina, D.A. Bashinsky, Chaban L.N. upheld the decision of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi in case N2-2050/2019 dated 12/20/2019 to preserve the reconstructed 13-storey building of the complex.



However, for some reason, someone, for some reason, replaced the "scheme of legalization of unauthorized construction" about which the employees of the Department K of the SES of the FSB of the Russian Federation wrote with administrative processes that essentially replaced the procedure for issuing building permits, which ended in the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. And this someone forgot to notify the leadership of the FSB of the Russian Federation about this.



Information about the arrests of the Litvinovs' property is distorted. Neither the investigation nor the state prosecution found out, within the framework of the pre-trial agreement, information about the whereabouts of the funds, as taken out by Litvinov A.Yu. to Austria (3 million euros and 700 thousand dollars), and withdrawn by him and his father from the accounts already during the investigation. Also, for some reason, the Litvinovs, unlike other defendants, disposed of real estate without any problems, including after the court issued judicial acts on the imposition of arrests.







To be continued

Timofey Grishin

Source: www.rucriminal.info

Как из России вывозят взятки

3 млн евро в Австрию для главного свидетеля по делу судейской мафии





Бабушкинский райсуд Москвы отказал в условно-досрочном освобождении (УДО) адвокату Алексею Литвинову. Литвинов ключевой фигурант просто фантастической коррупционной истории, о которой узнал телеграм-канал ВЧК-ОГПУ. Он, являясь решальщиком и посредником при передаче гигантских взяток, должен был стать ключевой фигурой в одном из самых крупных расследований о коррупции на Кубани. Не стал. Литвинов давал показания на десятки судей, чиновников, как регионального, так и федерального уровня, и тогдашнего мэра Сочи Анатолия Пахомова. Все, что он говорил подтвердилось. Однако, материалы резко просто похоронили, решив привлечь по показаниям Пахомова лишь несколько «стрелочников». Обвиняемыми оказались только бывшие заместители главы Сочи Анатолий Рыков и Сергей Юрин.



Алексей Литвинов




Rucriminal.info продолжает коррупционную «историю №1».

В судебном заседании Хамовнического суда Москвы протоколом зафиксировано такое "вступительное слово" к показаниям Литвинова А.Ю. в качестве свидетеля обвинения по делу вице-мэров: "Я в первую очередь хотел бы сказать, поскольку мы длительное время не виделись, что я сожалею о том, что произошло, и мне искренне жаль ваших близких, ваших родственников, это действительно большое потрясение для семьи вашей, для моей семьи. В то же время, я хочу сказать, что не желая вам зла, Я ПРИНЯЛ, СЧИТАЮ АБСОЛЮТНО ПРАВИЛЬНОЕ решение, изначально НЕ ИЗУЧАЯ МАТЕРИАЛЫ ДЕЛА, не выдерживая паузы, чтобы их изучить и посмотреть, что там есть, чего нет, принял для себя решение о сотрудничестве со следствием, потому что все мы прекрасно понимаем, все присутствующие в этом зале прекрасно понимают, что мои показания являются правдивыми, что это абсолютная правда (цитата из показаний от 23.04.2021).

08.06.2019 Генеральная Прокуратура РФ отказала в заключении досудебного соглашения Литвинову А.Ю., так как он пытался представить себя "посредником", а не "организатором" схемы легализации объектов самовольного строительства.

Досудебное соглашение с Литвиновым А.Ю. было подписано со второй попытки, после того как Литвинов принял решение "признавать ВСЁ, что написано в обвинении", а именно:



- создание с его участием Орг.Группы в 2010 году



- о получении группой взятки от застройщика Строганова И.А. за ЖК "София-Парк" и "Марина-Парк" не менее 150 млн.руб.



- о получении взяток от застройщика Клюса В.В. за ЖК "Светлана-Парк" не менее 40 млн.руб. и ряд иных.



Генеральной прокуратурой РФ 21.01.2020 установлено, что "имеющиеся в показаниях Лиивинова А.Ю. сведения о способствовании Рыковым А.Н. в заключении договорных обязательств между администрацией города Сочи и Обществом ПРОТИВОРЕЧАТ другим материалам, в том числе протоколам допросов Ахадовой Л.Н., Улеева С.Н., Бороздиной М.С., Шафиева А.Ю."

Руководитель следственной группы ГСУ СК РФ А.В. Саливоник установил, что Рыков А.Н. получил от Строганова И.А. не менее 25 млн.руб. за якобы имеющиеся у него возможности повлиять на судебный процесс с администрацией Сочи.

Также руководитель следственной группы ГСУ СК РФ установил, что Литвинов А.Ю. получил от Клюса В.В. 60 млн.руб. за "ускорение процесса подписания разрешения на строительство". При этом Рыкова и Юрина в известность не ставил".

Изложенное свидетельствует о том, что Литвинтв А.Ю. врёт. Врёт нагло и системно.

Удивляет позиция Генеральной Прокуратуры РФ до сих пор не принявшей мер в соответствии со ст. 317.8 УПК РФ по пересмотру приговора, вынесенного в отношении подсудимого, с которым заключено досудебнте соглашение о сотрудничестве, в связи с тем, что обнаружено, что подсудимый сообщил ложные сведения.

Сотрудники управления К СЭБ ФСБ РФ были совершенно правы, указывая на "схему ввода в эксплуатацию самовольных построек в виде комплексов "Марина-Парк" и "Светлана-Парк" в своих рапортах на имя начальника управления Ивана Ткачёва.

В распоряжении Rucriminal.info имеются судебные акты, послужившие основаниями для признания объектов "введёнными в эксплуатацию" и признающие на эти объекты право собственности застройщиков.

Судебные акты по комплексу "Марина-Парк":

09.09.2015 по делу N2-2550/2015 судья О.А. Дидик Хостинского районного суда Сочи по иску застройщика к Росреестру признаёт право собственности застройщика на реконструированное здание бассейна - 4 этажа.

29.06.2016 дело N 2a - 4990/2016 судья В.А. Слука центрального районного суда города Сочипо иску застройщика к администрации Краснодарского края (Госстройнадзору) комплекс "Марина-Парк" признан введённым в эксплуатацию - 10 этажей.

23.03.2017 N 2-1511/2017 судья В.А.Власенко Центрального районного суда Сочи по иску И.С. Воробьева к кадастровому инженеру признаёт необходимым сохранить здание в реконструировнном виде и признаёт право собственности на 11 и 12 этажей.

Судебные акты по комплексу "Свелана-Парк":



1) 13.06.2019 Ленинский районный суд Краснодара по иску М.А. Костановского к администрации Краснодарского края сохранил в реконструированном состоянии 10-ти этажное здание.



2) 18.08.2020 судьи Н.В. Дунюшкина, Д.А. Башинский, Чабан Л.Н. оставили в силе решение Хостинского районного суда Сочи по делу N2-2050/2019 от 20.12.2019 о сохранении в реконструированном виде 13-тиэтажного здания комплекса.



Однако кто-то по каким-то причинам "схему легализации самовольного строительства" о которой писали сотрудники Управления К СЭБ ФСБ РФ заменил на административные процессы, по сути подменившие процедуру выдачи разрешений на строительство, завершившиеся в Верховном Суде РФ. И этот кто-то забыл поставить об этом в известность руководство ФСБ РФ.



Информация об арестах имущества Литвиновых искажена. Ни следствие, ни гос.обвинение не выясняли в рамках досудебного соглашения информацию о местонахождении денежных средств, как вывезенных Литвиновым А.Ю. в Австрию (3 млн евро и 700 тыс долл), так и снятых им и его отцом со счетов уже в период следствия. Также по каким то причинам Литвиновы в отличие от иных подсудимых без проблем распоряжались недвижимостью, в том числе и после вынесения судом судебных актов о наложении арестов.







Продолжение следует

Тимофей Гришин

Источник: www.rucriminal.info

понедельник, 8 августа 2022 г.

"Chief of the judges" decided to speak

Now the investigation does not know how to shut it up




According to the telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU, on 08/09/2022, the Babushkinsky District Court of Moscow will consider the petition of the convicted Krasnodar lawyer A.Yu. Litvinov on parole. Litvinov is a key person involved in a simply fantastic corruption story, which the Cheka-OGPU found out about. He, being a solver and intermediary in the transfer of gigantic bribes, was to become a key figure in one of the largest investigations into corruption in the Kuban. Didn't. Litvinov testified against dozens of judges, officials at both the regional and federal levels, and the then mayor of Sochi, Anatoly Pakhomov. Everything he said was confirmed. However, the materials were abruptly simply buried, having decided to attract only a few "switchmen" according to Pakhomov's testimony.

We remind you that on September 28, 2021, the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow, lawyer Litvinov A.Yu. sentenced to seven years and six months in prison, to be served in a strict regime colony and a fine of 60 million rubles. The basis for the sentencing was the recognition by the lawyer Litvinov A.Yew. guilt allegedly in the implementation of intermediary actions in the transfer of bribes to Sochi officials.

Sentencing lawyer Litvinov A.Yu. and briber-developer Stroganov I.A. The Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow was associated with a scandal. Accomplice A.Yu. Litvinova entrepreneur-builder Storganov I.A. "decided to pay for A.Yu. Litvinov." capital lawyers Kveidze and Falomeikin 42 million rubles for assistance in imposing the most lenient sentence on Litvinov.

Further with the convicted lawyer Litvinov A.Yew. interesting things began to happen.

The Moscow City Court changed the convicted lawyer Litvinov's sentence from strict to general.

The management of FKU "SIZO-4" considered that the convict A.Yew. Litvinov falls under "exceptional circumstances" under the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, and left him to serve his sentence in a pre-trial detention center. In a short time, the management of the FKU "SIZO-4" considered that the convict A.Yu. Litvinov had completely recovered and was worthy of being released

The source of the Cheka-OGPU reports that the convicted lawyer Litvinov A.Yu. a key link in the operation to create obstacles to the ex-chairman of the Krasnodar Regional Court Chernov A.D. in moving to the post of chairman of the cassation instance of the court of general jurisdiction and appointing in his place the infamous Khakhaleva E.V. - the former chairman of the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases of the Krasnodar Regional Court who fled abroad. Our expert on the region believes that the Governor of the Krasnodar Territory V.I. Kondratiev.



During the implementation of the ORD for the lawyer Litvinov A.Yew. exhaustive material was collected on the relationship between Litvinov A.Yu. and Khakhaleva E.V. In particular, Litvinov A.Yu. openly demonstrated to clients his ability to obtain any judicial act in the Krasnodar Regional Court. He explained in detail what the size of "gratitude" is made up of. As an "advantage" of their services, they were guaranteed the minimum terms of legal proceedings: 2 weeks - the court of first instance, 5 days - the appointment of the case in the Krasnodar Regional Court, from 1 day to a week - for the refusal of a cassation appeal. These fantastic terms were actually used by the courts and gave a reasonable understanding to the interested parties of the seriousness of the possibilities of the lawyer Litvinov.

A Rucriminal.info source reports that during the arrest of Litvinov, the main problem was the amount of information coming from him. In addition to detailed stories about his relationship with Khakhaleva E.V., which included the registration of real estate belonging to her for assistant lawyers in the Olympic Sochi, Litvinov testified against a dozen judges of the Krasnodar Territory.

Our source reports that we are talking about the following judges:



1. Gorlov A.S. - former chairman of the Leninsky District Court of Krasnodar. By the decision of the QCJ of March 27, 2020, the powers were terminated ahead of schedule.



2. Yakimenko A.S. - ex-judge of the Adler district court. By the decision of the QCJ of February 26, 2019, the powers were terminated ahead of schedule.



3. Judges of the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases of the Krasnodar Regional Court:

- Agibalova V.O.

- Diyanova S.P.

- Yakobovskaya E.V.

- Dunyushkina N.V.

- Bashinsky D.A.

- Rogova S.V.

- Zenin V.A.

- Sibyatulova L.V. and others continue to work.

All these judges issued court decisions in cases in favor of persons who are currently being bribery (including Stroganov) in the case of "Sochi vice-measures", in which lawyer A.Yu. Litvinov was arrested and already received his sentence .

Given the "scale of the disaster" bordering on the complete discrediting of the Kuban justice, it was decided to "put the brakes on the case" against the judges. "Switchmen" are vice-measures of the Olympic capital.



Khakhaleva E.V. gave the opportunity to leave the country, A.S. Gorlov and A.S. Yakimenko “quietly left”, depriving them of the status of judges, while the rest “got off with a slight fright”. However, Not everyone agrees with such compromises within the FSB central apparatus.

In connection with the new introductory testimony Litvinova A.Yew. that he "could tell bribe-givers that money is needed for bribes to judges" change dramatically. Professional lawyer Litvinov began to assure that in the Krasnodar Territory there is a "vicious practice" when court decisions are made with the sole purpose of "securing" officials. Why do judges - they just don’t have time to come up with

In the court hearings of the Khamovnichesky District Court of Moscow, lawyer Litvinov, according to a source, took the position that judges become "victims" of the administration and the practice that has developed during the preparation of Sochi for the Olympic Games. He convinces that the courts of the Krasnodar Territory were "subordinate to the will of the Sochi administration." The leadership of the Krasnodar Regional Court was "discarded control lists of cases" from the administration of the city of Sochi and "demanded" their unconditional execution from the court.

Litvinov A.Yu. stated in court that he knew for certain that the head of the city of Sochi A.N. Pakhomov, in the presence of FSB officers, called the Chairman of the Krasnodar Regional Court A.D. Chernov and said: "What did you take out there ???" Allegedly, after such a call, the court decisions were immediately canceled.

Litvinov said that the deputies of the Head of Sochi did exactly the same. Litvinov described the relationship between officials and district courts as follows: "Rykov and Yurin opened the doors to the Sochi district courts with their feet."

Our source says that now the question arises of what to do with the minutes of the court sessions, because. A.Yu. Litvinov clearly "overdid it" in the above testimony. Our expert on the region says that it is unlikely that between A.D. Chernov and A.N. Pakhomov, a conversation in that tone was possible. At our disposal came the dictaphone recordings and their printouts of Litvinov's speeches in the Khamovniki Court of Moscow, as well as a number of materials that did not fall into the criminal case. They make it possible to publicly raise a number of questions about the reasons for "confidence" in the testimony of a lawyer in the framework of a pre-trial agreement with the Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation, which will be done in the near future.

In fact, within the framework of this case, the question of the independence of the judiciary in the territory of the constituent entity of the Russian Federation of the Krasnodar Territory was raised. It is surprising that someone's private interests allowed, in principle, such a formulation of the question.

Excerpts from the scandalous testimony of Litvinov A.Yu.: “Later, as I understand it, this is my personal opinion that both Rykov and Yurin (former vice-mayors of Sochi) liked the influence on the courts, that in principle the courts obeyed their will very well and later on, such checklists could absolutely easily be used for personal interests.”

Litvinov A.Yu.: “Where did this system originally come from? It was during the preparation for the Olympic Games that cases really arose that required some urgent action to resettle people who fell into the zone of resettlement and construction of Olympic facilities and there were control cases, there were instructions from the Government, and in such cases they really ran through the courts, provided these lists, referred to the fact that this is the control of the Government”.

Litvinov A.Yu.: “Rykov and Yurin opened the doors to the district courts of Sochi with their feet, those district courts overwhelmingly supported the position of the administration.”

Litvinov A.Yu.: “And I was directly in court once, there was an assistant judge nearby, who was just called by Rykov or Yurin and the court employee received this list by e-mail, opened it, listened to everything. Yes, good. There is. I (unintelligible) work in court for this person, how can you say “yes” to municipal officials, somehow you respect yourself for a start”

(testimony of Litvinov A.Yu. at the court session of the Khamovniki Court of Moscow dated April 23, 2021 in case No. 01-0010/2022)

According to Rucriminal.info sources, the entire vertical of executive power has repeatedly demonstrated its intention to stop building the resort city of Sochi. In 2012, a ban on construction work was introduced in the "Olympic" law, in 2014 significant restrictions were introduced by a special Decree of the President of the Russian Federation, in 2015 a "landing force" of federal security forces headed by Deputy Prosecutor General Kikotem landed in Sochi.

Governor of Kuban V.I.Kondratiev and Mayor of Sochi A.S.Kopaigorodsky generally announced a complete ban on housing construction until the development and approval of the new General Plan of Sochi.

As a result, the price per square meter of housing in Sochi has rapidly approached the cost of housing in Dubai. And the center of decision-making on construction has moved from the executive branch to the judiciary. And the "impossible" became possible.

Rucriminal.info will analyze in detail the mechanism for the "legalization" of large apartment construction in the very center of Sochi. Its address is Chernomorskaya, 6, and it has been given the romantic name "Marina-Park". What is hidden behind these names?

On April 24, 2015, the judge of the Khostinsky District Court of Sochi in case No. 2-703 / 2015 dismisses the claims of the Prosecutor and the Administration of the city of Sochi against the developer E.V. Popandopulo about the demolition of the reconstructed pool of the Sanatorium "Svetlana", 4 storeys.

On August 18, 2015, the Krasnodar Regional Court (judges Makhalai G.A., Sagitova E.I., Shurova I.N.) upheld the decision, the complaint of the Sochi administration was denied.

On September 9, 2015, the federal judge of the Hostinsky Court of Sochi Didik O.A. in case N 2650/2015 satisfies the claim of the developer E.V. Popandopulo to Rosreestr and obliges to make changes to the cadastral registration of real estate, changing the functional purpose of the building and increasing its area by almost 1,000 sq.m. Rosreestr will not appeal the decision. As a result, E.V. Popandopulo no longer owns a swimming pool, but a four-story building with an area of ​​3,166 sq.m.

On October 1, 2015, the judges of the collegium for administrative cases of the Krasnodar Regional Court - Dunyushkina N.V., Bashinsky D.A., Rogova S.V. in case No. 2-5152/2015, they canceled the decision of the Central District Court of August 13, 2015, in favor of the Sochi administration, and ordered the Sochi city administration to issue a permit for the reconstruction of the Marina-Park apartment complex on a land plot with code number 23:49: 0302010:1289 in accordance with the parameters specified in the conclusion of the non-state examination dated 07/06/2015

At the same time, the Sochi administration refused the developer, since the land plot was located in the protected zone of the monument of cultural heritage of the peoples of the Russian Federation and construction on it was prohibited.

The absence of state expertise and state environmental expertise against the background of the above already seem like "little things."

On October 11, 2015, the federal judge of the Krasnodar Regional Court Sibyatullova A.V. makes a decision to refuse to transfer the cassation complaint received on 12.10.2015 for consideration in the court session of the cassation instance.

July 29, 2016 the judge of the Central District Court of Sochi Sluka V.A. in case N 2a-4990/2016 satisfies the claim of the developer against the administration of the Krasnodar Territory. With this judicial act, the judge recognizes the Marina-Park complex as put into operation.

08/22/2016, the judge of the Central District Court of Sochi Sluka V.A. by definition clarifies the decision of 07/29/2016 and obliges Rosreestr to register the property developer's right to the premises of the 10-storey Marina-Park complex with an area of ​​9,439.5 sq.m.

03/23/2017 the judge of the Central District Court of Sochi Vlasenko V.A. in case N 2-1511/2017 satisfies the claim of an individual N.S. Vorobyov. to the cadastral engineer Chernukha T.A. on the preservation of the reconstructed form of the 11th and 12th floors of the building and the registration of ownership of them.

As a result, the 12-storey complex "Marina-Park" is ready, the apartments are sold.

However, the dissatisfaction of the federal center is growing. They demand "landings" from the security forces, since it is simply impossible to ignore the 12-story building in the very center of the resort of Sochi. The answer was not found the first time. The source says that in 2017, the materials were refused.

But in the end, in October 2018, there are very high-profile arrests in Sochi, with news coverage on federal channels. The vice-mayors of Sochi - Rykov A.N., Yurin S.P. - were arrested. and lawyer Litvinov A.Yu.

It was the lawyer Litvinov who became a "find" for the Chekists. Having familiarized himself with the materials of the ORM, and realizing that at one time he “spoke” a lot about the judges and this is recorded, he decides to follow the path of least resistance and testifies to the investigation about the circumstances of the adoption of the above judicial acts. But the decision has already been changed and Litvinov is being created with a new version of what happened. It falsely testifies that the "mechanism of legalization" of the unauthorized building was planned and implemented ... by the administration of Sochi, and all the above decisions were made by the courts legally "under psychological influence" on the judges by the administration of Sochi.

As a result, following the old principle "while two fools are fighting, the smart one earns", someone gracefully ends the game. Representatives of the administration of the city of Sochi find themselves in prison for issuing an absolutely legal refusal to the developer and trying to defend him in court.

The only surprise is that the central apparatus of the FSB of the Russian Federation "believes" in such a mechanism, or, for some reason, pretends to believe it.

Testimony of lawyer Litvinov A.Yew. and the materials of the ORD of the FSB of the Russian Federation in relation to judges are almost sent to the shelf. Bye.

The problem is that such a result from the imposed bans is unlikely to suit the federal center.

The author of the "graceful scheme" loses sight of the main thing. In November 2014, the Decree on the restriction of construction in Sochi was signed by the President of the Russian Federation V.V. Putin.

Will it be possible to convince the President of the plausibility of the version of the "helplessness" of the federal judges of the Kuban, who issued the above decisions, which actually made it possible to build apartments in the center of Sochi, bypassing his ban under the influence of the "psychological persecution" of the Sochi administration ... is an interesting question. Time will tell.

Rucriminal.info, as it becomes ethically possible, will publish the dialogue of lawyer Litvinov A.Yu. with the developer of the complex "Marina-Park" Stroganov I.A. on the storage of marble for the renovation of the premises of the chairman of the board of administrative affairs Krasnodar Regional Court Khahaleva E.V. in the complex "Marina-Park".



Timofey Grishin

To be continued

Source: www.rucriminal.info

«Главный по судьям» решил заговорить

Теперь следствие не знает, как его заткнуть



Как сообщил телеграм-канал ВЧК-ОГПУ, 09.08.2022 в Бабушкинском районном суде города Москвы будет рассмотрено ходатайство осужденного краснодарского адвоката А.Ю. Литвинова об условно-досрочном освобождении. Литвинов ключевой фигурант просто фантастической коррупционной истории, о которой узнал ВЧК-ОГПУ. Он, являясь решальщиком и посредником при передаче гигантских взяток, должен был стать ключевой фигурой в одном из самых крупных расследований о коррупции на Кубани. Не стал. Литвинов давал показания на десятки судей, чиновников, как регионального, так и федерального уровня, и тогдашнего мэра Сочи Анатолия Пахомова. Все, что он говорил подтвердилось. Однако, материалы резко просто похоронили, решив привлечь по показаниям Пахомова лишь несколько «стрелочников».

Напоминаем, что 28.09.2021 года Хамовническим районным судом города Москвы адвокат Литвинов А.Ю. приговорён к семи годам и шести месяцам лишения свободы, с отбыванием наказания в колонии строгого режима и штрафу в 60 млн.рублей. Основанием для вынесения приговора явилось признание адвокатом Литвиновым А.Ю. вины якобы в осуществлении посреднических действий в передаче взяток сочинским чиновникам.

Вынесение приговоров адвокату Литвинову А.Ю. и взяткодателю-застройщику Строганову И.А. Хамовническим районным судом города Москвы было сопряжено со скандалом. Подельник А.Ю. Литвинова предприниматель-застройщик Сторганов И.А. "решил заплатить за Литвинова А.Ю." столичным адвокатам Квеидзе и Фаломейкину 42 млн. рублей за содействие в назначении Литвинову максимально мягкого наказания.

Далее с осужденным адвокатом Литвиновым А.Ю. начали происходить интересные события.

Московский городской суд изменил осужденному адвокату Литвинову режим отбывания наказания со строгого на общий.

Руководство ФКУ "СИЗО-4" сочло, что осужденный А.Ю. Литвинов попадает под "исключительные обстоятельства", предусмотренные УПК РФ, и оставило его отбывать наказание при следственном изоляторе. Уже в скором времени руководство ФКУ "СИЗО-4" сочло, что осужденный А.Ю.Литвинов исправился полностью и достоин быть освобождённым

Источник ВЧК-ОГПУ сообщает что осужденный адвокат Литвинов А.Ю. ключевое звено в проведении операции по созданию препятствий экс-председателю Краснодарского краевого суда Чернову А.Д. в перемещении на пост председателя кассационной инстанции суда общей юрисдикции и назначении на его место скандально известной Хахалевой Е.В. - сбежавшей за границу экс-председателя судебной коллегии по административным делам Краснодарского краевого суда. Наш эксперт по региону считает что за постановкой такой задачи может стоять губернатор Краснодарского края В.И. Кондратьев.



Александр Чернов




В ходе осуществления ОРД за адвокатом Литвиновым А.Ю. был собран исчерпывающий материал о взаимоотношениях Литвинова А.Ю. и Хахалевой Е.В. В частности, Литвинов А.Ю. открыто демонстрировал клиентам свои возможности по получению любого судебного акта в Краснодарском краевом суде. В деталях объяснял из чего складывается размер "благодарности". В качестве "преимущества" своих услуг им гарантировались минимальные сроки судопроизводства: 2 недели - суд первой инстанции, 5 дней - назначение дела в Краснодарском краевом суде, от 1 дня до недели - на отказ в кассационной жалобе. Эти фантастические сроки действительно применялись судами и давали обоснованное понимание заинтересованным лицам в серьёзности возможностей адвоката Литвинова.

Источник Rucriminal.info сообщает что при задержании Литвинова главной проблемой стал объем информации исходящий от него. Помимо детальных рассказов о своих взаимоотношениях с Хахалевой Е.В., которые включали оформление принадлежащей ей недвижимости на помощников адвоката в олимпийском Сочи, Литвинов дал показания на десяток судей краснодарского края.

Наш источник сообщает, что речь идёт о следующих судьях:



1. Горлов А.С. - экс-председатель Ленинского районного суда Краснодара. Решением ККС от 27.03.2020 полномочия досрочно прекращены.



2. Якименко А.С. - экс-судья Адлерского районного суда. Решением ККС от 26.02.2019 полномочия досрочно прекращены.



3. Судьи судебной коллегии по административным делам Краснодарского краевого суда:

- Агибалова В.О.

- Диянова С.П

- Якобовская Е.В.

- Дунюшкина Н.В.

- Башинский Д.А.

- Рогова С.В.

- Зенин В.А.

- Сибятулова Л.В. и иные продолжают работать.

Все указанные судьи выносили судебные акты по делам в пользу лиц, которые в настоящее время время проходят взяткодателеми (в т.ч. Строганов) по делу "сочинских вице-меров", в рамках которого арестован и получил уже свой приговор адвокат Литвинов А.Ю.

Учитывая "масштабы бедствия", граничащие с полной дискредитацией кубанского правосудия, было принято решение "спустить дело на тормозах" в отношении судей. "Стрелочниками" становятся вице-меры олимпийской столицы.



Елена Хахалева




Хахалевой Е.В. дали возможность покинуть страну, А.С. Горлова и А.С. Якименко "тихо ушли", лишив статуса судей, остальные пока "отделались лёгким испугом". Однако, далеко не все согласны с подобным компромиссов внутри центрального аппарата ФСБ.

В связи с новыми вводными показания Литвинова А.Ю. о том, что он "мог говорить взяткодателям, что деньги нужны на взятки судьям" кардинально меняются. Профессиональный адвокат Литвинов стал уверять, что в Краснодарском крае существует "порочная практика", когда судебные решения выносятся с единственной целью "обезопасить" чиновников. Зачем это судьям - придумать просто не успевают

В судебных заседаниях Хамовнического райсуда города Москвы адвокат Литвинов, как говорит источник, занял позицию, согласно которой: судьи становятся "жертвами" администрации и той практики, которая сложилась при подготовке Сочи к Олимпийским играм. Он убеждает в том, что суды Краснодарского края были "подчинены воле администрации Сочи". Руководству Краснодарского краевого суда "сбрасывались контрольные списки дел" из администрации города Сочи и от суда "требовали" их безусловного исполнения.

Литвинов А.Ю. заявил в суде, что ему доподлинно известно, что глава города Сочи А.Н. Пахомов в присутствии сотрудников ФСБ звонил Председателю Краснодарского краевого суда А.Д. Чернову и говорил: "Что вы там повыносили???" Якобы после такого звонка судебные решения сразу отменялось.

Литвинов сообщил, что точно также поступали и заместители Главы Сочи. Взаимоотношения чиновников с районными судами Литвинов охарактеризовал следующим образом: "Рыков и Юрин ногами открывали двери в районные суды Сочи".

Наш источник говорит, что сейчас встаёт вопрос, что делать с протоколами судебных заседаний, т.к. А.Ю. Литвинов в вышеуказанных показаниях явно "переусердствовал". Наш эксперт по региону говорит от том, что вряд ли между А.Д.Черновым и А.Н. Пахомовым разговор в таком тоне был возможен. В наше распоряжение попали диктофонные записи и их распечатки выступлений Литвинова в Хамовническом суде города Москвы, а также ряд материалов не попавших в уголовное дело. Они позволяют публично поставить ряд вопросов о причинах "доверия" к показания адвоката в рамках досудебного соглашения с Генеральной прокуратурой РФ, что и будет сделано в ближайшее время.

По сути в рамках данного дела поставлен вопрос о независимости судебной власти на территории субъекта РФ Краснодарского края. Удивительно, что чьи то частные интересы позволили в принципе такую постановку вопроса.

Выдержки из скандальных показаний Литвинов А.Ю.: «В последствии, я так понимаю, это лично моё мнение, что и Рыкову и Юрину (бывшие вице-мэры Сочи) понравилось воздействие на суды, что в принципе суды очень хорошо подчинились их воле и в последствии такие контрольные списки уже абсолютно спокойно могли использовать в личных интересах».

Литвинов А.Ю.: «А изначально эта система появилась откуда? Именно при подготовке к олимпийским играм действительно возникали дела, которые требовали каких-то безотлагательных действий по расселению людей, попавших в зону расселения и строительства олимпийских объектов и были контрольные дела, были поручения Правительства, и по таким делам они действительно бегали по судам, предоставляли эти списки, ссылались на то, что это контроль Правительства».

Литвинов А.Ю.: «Рыков и Юрин ногами открывали двери в районные суды Сочи, те районные суды в подавляющем большинстве поддерживали позицию администрации».

Литвинов А.Ю.: «И я непосредственно один раз находился в суде, рядом был помощник судьи, которому как раз звонил Рыков или Юрин и сотрудник суда получил этот список по электронной почте, открыл, всё послушал. Есть, хорошо. Есть. Я этому человеку (неразборчиво) работаете в суде, как Вы можете муниципальным чиновникам говорить «есть», как то Вы себя уважайте для начала»

(показания Литвинова А.Ю. в судебном заседании Хамовнического суда города Москва от 23.04.2021 по делу № 01-0010/2022)

Как отмечают источники Rucriminal.info, вся вертикаль исполнительной власти неоднократно демонстрировала своё намерение прекратить застройку города-курота Сочи. В 2012 году вводился запрет на строительные работы в "олимпийском" законе, в 2014 введены существенные ограничения специальным Указом Президента РФ, в 2015 в Сочи высаживается "десант" федеральных силовиков во главе с замом Генерального прокурора Кикотем.

Губернатор Кубани В.И.Кондратьев и мэр Сочи А.С.Копайгородский вообще заявляли о полном запрете жилищного строительства до разработки и утверждения нового ГенПлана Сочи.

В результате цена квадратного метра жилья в Сочи стремительно приблизилась к стоимости жилья в Дубае. А центр принятия решений о строительстве переместился от исполнительной власти к судебной. И "невозможное" стало возможным.

Rucriminal.info детально разберёт механизм "легализации" крупного апартаментного строительства в самом центре Сочи. Его адрес - Черноморская, 6, и ему дано романтическое наименование "Марина-Парк". Что скрывается за эти названием?

24 апреля 2015 года судья Хостинского районного суда Сочи по делу N 2-703/2015 отказывает в исках Прокурора и Адмнистрации города Сочи к застройщику Е.В.Попандопуло о сносе реконструируемого бассейна Санатория "Светлана" этажностью 4.

18 августа 2015 года краснодарский крайсуд (судьи Махалай Г.А., Сагитова Е.И., Шурова И.Н.) оставил решение в силе, в жалобе администрации Сочи отказано.

9 сентября 2015 года федеральный судья хостинского суда Сочи Дидик О.А. по делу N 2650/2015 удовлетворяет иск застройщика Е.В. Попандопуло к Росреестру и обязывает внести изменения в кадастровый учёт недвижимости, изменив функциональное назначение здания и увеличив его плошадь почти на 1 000 кв.м. Росреестр решение не обжалует. В итоге Е.В. Попандопуло становится собственником уже не бассейна, а четырёхэтажного здания, площадью 3 166 кв.м.

01 октября 2015 года судьи коллегии по административным делам Краснодарского краевого суда - Дунюшкина Н.В., Башинский Д.А., Рогова С.В. по делу N 2-5152/2015 отменили решение Центрального райсуда от 13.08.2015, вынесенное в пользу администрации Сочи, и обязали администрацию города Сочи выдать разрешение на реконструкцию комплекса апартаментов "Марина-Парк" на земельном участке с к/н 23:49:0302010:1289 в соответсвии с параметрами указанными в заключении негосударственной экспертизы от 06.07.2015

При этом администрация Сочи отказала застройщику, так как земельный участок находился в охранной зоне памятника объектов культурного наследия народов РФ и строительство на нём запрещено.

Отсутствие государственной экспертизы и государственной экологической экспертизы на фоне вышеизложенного уже кажутся "мелочами".

11 октября 2015 года федеральный судья Краснодарского краевого суда Сибятуллова А.В. принимает решение об отказе в передаче кассационной жалобы, поступившей 12.10.2015 для рассмотрения в судебном заседании кассационной инстанции.

29 июля 2016 года судья центрального районного суда Сочи Слука В.А. по делу N 2а-4990/2016 удовлетворяет иск застройщика к администрации Краснодарского края. Данным судебным актом судья признает комплекс "Марина-Парк" введённым в эксплуатацию.

22.08.2016 года судья центрального районного суда Сочи Слука В.А. определением разъясняет решение от 29.07.2016 и обязывает Росреестр зарегистрировать право собственности застройщика на помешения 10-этажного комплекса "Марина-Парк" площадью 9 439,5 кв.м.

23.03.2017 года судья Центрального районного суда Сочи Власенко В.А. по делу N 2-1511/2017 удовлетворяет иск физ.лица Воробъёва Н.С. к кадастровому инжнеру Чернуха Т.А. о сохранении в реконструированном виде 11-го и 12-го этажей здания и регистрации права собственности на них.

В итоге 12-этажный комплекс "Марина-Парк" готов, апартаменты проданы.

Однако недовольство федерального центра нарастает. От силовиков требуют "посадок", так как игнорировать 12-тиэтажное здание в самом центре курортного Сочи просто невозможно. Ответ был найдет не с первого раза. Источник говорит о том, что в 2017 году по материалам был дан отказ.

Но в итоге в октябре 2018 происходят очень громкие аресты в Сочи, с освещением в новостях федеральных каналов. Арестованы вице-мэры Сочи - Рыков А.Н., Юрин С.П. и адвокат Литвинов А.Ю.

Именно адвокат Литвинов и стал "находкой" для чекистов. Ознакомившись с материалами ОРМ, и поняв что в своё время много "наговорил" о судьях и это зафиксированно, он решает идти по пути наименьшего сопротивления и дает следствию показания об обстоятельствах принятия вышеперечисленных судебных актов. Но решение уже изменено и Литвинов создаётся с новой версией произошедшего. Он лжесвидетельствует о том, что "механизм легализации" самовольнопостроенного здания спланирован и реализован ... администрацией Сочи, а все вышеуказанные решения судами вынесены законно "под психологическим воздействием" на судей администрацией Сочи.

В результате, следуя староми принципу "пока двое дураков дерутся - умный зарабатывает", кто-то изящно завершает партию. В тюрьме оказываются представители администрации города Сочи за то что выдали абсолютно законный отказ застройщику и пытались отстоять его в суде.

Удивление вызывает лишь то, что в подобный механизм "верит" центральный аппарат ФСБ РФ, или, по каким то причинам, делает вид, что верит.

Показания адвоката Литвинова А.Ю. и материалы ОРД ФСБ РФ в отношении судей почти отправлены на полку. Пока.

Проблема в том что подобный результат от введённых запретов впяд ли устроит федеральный центр.

Автор "изящной схемы" упускает из виду главное. В ноябре 2014 года Указ об ограничении строительства в Сочи подписан Президентом РФ В.В.Путиным.

Удастся ли убедить Президента в правдоподобности версии о "беспомощности" федеральных судей Кубани, вынесших вышеперечисленные решения фактически сделавшие возможным строительство апартаментов в центре Сочи в обход его запрета под воздействием "психологического возбействия" администрации Сочи..., вопрос интересный. Время покажет.

Rucriminal.info, как станет этически возможным, опубликует зафиксированным в ходе ОРД диалог адвоката Литвинова А.Ю. с застройщиком комплекса "Марина-Парк" Строгановым И.А. о хранении мрамора для ремонта помещений председателя коллегии по административным делам Краснодарского крайсуда Хахалевой Е.В. в комплексе "Марина-Парк".



Тимофей Гришин

Продолжение следует

Источник: www.rucriminal.info

воскресенье, 7 августа 2022 г.

"Former UBEP members decided that they are the owners of Gazprom"

Corruption in the gas monopoly. A look from within.





Rucriminal.info and the Telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU continue to talk about corruption in the state company GazpromEnergoHolding (GEH). We managed to talk with an employee, in whose eyes the “corruption” plot developed, and who was removed from the state-owned company as an inconvenient witness.

“I am a former police officer, UUR. Back in the late 90s, I met Ivanov S.G., we started a good relationship with him and they lasted until 2018. In 2016, Ivanov, under the patronage of Dzhambulatov Z.I. (a former employee of the GUEBiPK of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation, a defendant in a mass of corruption stories - Ed.) headed the Procurement Department of PJSC MIPC. Ivanov invites me to head the MIPC warehouse. Everything was going well, until some moments began to emerge. MIPC began to receive materials and equipment of low quality and at a very high price. At that time, I thought that these were isolated cases - the marriage of suppliers. But, no, Ivanov explained that it was necessary. To my objections, he said that very "high" people decide, not you. He was talking about Dzhabulatov. I knew Dzhambulatov from my service in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and did not betray this special significance.

In February 2018, I personally met Zaurbek Islamovich in his office. There he made it very clear to me that I needed to quit. He then acted as a benefactor, said to write a letter of resignation right in his office. He said that he gives me two months and three salaries and I can not go to work so as not to interfere with the process.

Then I was not the only one who suffered, many people were fired. So this team selected convenient shots for itself, and cleared uncomfortable ones.

In 2018, at the invitation of my friend, I am going to work at the GPTE MO as the head of the corporate protection department, then everything was just beginning GPTE MO was just being formed. I invited my acquaintances, pensioners from various law enforcement agencies, to work. He headed the GPTE MO Trinoga AM. The company was part of Mezhregiongaz. At some point, Mezhregiongaz was headed by Gustov and Trinoga started having problems. He kept running and fussing, so as not to lose an easy chair. Something didn’t work out with Gustov, Trinoga was afraid of him. By hook or by crook, through the board of directors of PJSC Gazprom, Trinoga ensured that the GPTE and subsidiaries came out of the influence of Mezhregiongaz and passed under the GEH (GazpromEnergoHolding). But Trinoga's misfortune did not take into account that Dzhambulatov, the main fighter against corruption, was Trinoga's sworn enemy in St. Petersburg (Dzhambulatov has dirt on Trinoga, remember the high-profile pipe case in St. Petersburg?) and the show began.



As Trinoga did not creep in front of Dzhambulatov, he had to accept all his conditions, step aside and play the role of a wedding general. True, he does not really cope with this role either (another daughter of Gazpromteploenergo, Orel, filed for bankruptcy).

Dzhambulatov ordered Trinogi to fire all those who once dared to contradict him. I will not name names, but many suffered. This is their secret. I was offered by Trinoga to leave on good terms, otherwise Dzhambulatov would initiate a criminal case using his connections in the Ministry of Internal Affairs and my “head would fly off”. It was funny and ridiculous, because I was only doing my job. Many options were tried by comrades from the Dzhambulatov team, many things were done, nothing worked, and this went on for almost a year (2021). Finally, in the month of June, they found a sore point and the meanest option. They began to fire all those with whom I spoke and explained that it was because of me, since I did not leave (the actions of just the officers, they are officers and always drink for it, they just forgot what it means). Whom I once brought to the GPTE, they began to fire Trinoga, bluntly stated this - quit or we will fire all your friends. I had to quit in July. But neither Trinoga nor Dzhambulatov kept their word and fired everyone anyway.

There was nothing to lose, and I went to court with a claim for reinstatement, because I believed and still believe that I was fired under duress. The trial lasted 8 months and, having studied all the materials of the case on February 22, 2022, reinstated me in my previous position. You understand what a shock Trinoga and Dzhambulatov were. If the court decision is settled, they will face administrative responsibility, not to mention business reputation. They don’t let them work, they arrange provocations, Dzhambulatov’s people say wait for an answer (he is an aged man, quick-tempered)!

Not so much afraid, but not seeing further prospects, at the end of June 2022 I am leaving the company. And the answer arrived at the appeal meeting in the Moscow Regional Court. 08/01/2022 judge Kolotovkina makes a historic decision! The court decision of the first instance is canceled, and the case is allowed to turn around.

It is clear that this is complete nonsense!

The case was investigated for 8 months, the evidence was studied, supported by the Prosecutor's Office, but Kolotovkina decided in 5 minutes that everything was wrong, calling into question the competence of the Court of First Instance and the actions of the Prosecutor, who, by the way, in the second instance insisted on the decision of the first instance.

The point has not been set. There is Supervision in the Prosecutor's Office, there is The Court of Cassation is the Supreme Court. The truth is always the same. Marvelous. When these people, the former Ubepovtsy, decided that they were the owners of Gazprom. What can they do!!!! Sometimes it’s not clear what these people are capable of to save their savings. But I also have teeth and principles, and I will not back down. Yes, for everyone, I'm not at war with Gazprom. Many decent and honest people work there, even those surrounded by Dzhambulatov.





To be continued

Yaroslav Mukhtarov

Source: www.rucriminal.info

«Бывшие УБЭПовцы решили , что они хозяева Газпрома»

Коррупция в газовом монополисте. Взгляд изнутри.





Rucriminal.info и телеграм-канал ВЧК-ОГПУ продолжает рассказывать о коррупции в госкомпании ГазпромЭнергоХоллдинг (ГЭХ). Нам удалось побеседовать с сотрудником, на глазах которого и развивался «коррупционный» сюжет, и которого убрали из госкомпании, как неудобного свидетеля.

«Я бывший сотрудник милиции, УУР. Еще в конце 90-х я познакомился с Ивановым С.Г., у нас завязались с ним неплохие отношение и продлились они до 2018 года. В 2016 году Иванов по протекции Джамбулатова З.И. (бывший сотрудник ГУЭБиПК МВД РФ, фигурант массы коррупционных историй- Ред.) возглавил Управление закупок ПАО МОЭК. Иванов приглашает меня возглавить складское хозяйство МОЭК. Все шло хорошо, пока не стали всплывать отдельные моменты. В МОЭК стали поступать материалы и оборудование низкого качества и по очень завышенной цене. В то время я думал, что это единичные случаи- брак поставщиков. Но, нет Иванов объяснил , что так надо. На мои возражения он сказал , что очень «высокие» люди решают, а не ты. Это он говорил про Джабулатова. Я знал Джамбулатова по службе в МВД и не предал этому особого значения.

В феврале 2018 года я лично познакомился с Заурбеком Исламовичем в его кабинете. Там он мне очень четко дал понять, что мне надо уволится. Поступил он тогда как благодетель, сказал написать заявление на увольнение прямо в его кабинете. Сказал, что дает мне два месяца и три оклада и на работу я могу не ходить, чтоб не мешать процессу.

Тогда ни я один пострадал, многих людей уволили. Так эта команда подбирала удобные кадры себе, а неудобных расчищала.

В 2018 году я по приглашению моего знакомого иду работать в ГПТЭ МО начальником отдела по корпоративной защиты, тогда только все начиналось ГПТЭ МО только формировался. Я пригласил для работы своих знакомых- пенсионеров из разных правоохранительных органов. Возглавлял ГПТЭ МО Тринога АМ. Компания входила в состав Межрегионгаз. В какой то момент Межрегионгаз возглавил Густов и у Триноги начались проблемы. Он все бегал и суетился, как бы не потерять мягкое кресло. У них что-то не сложилось с Густовым, Тринога его боялся. Всеми правдами и неправдами через совет директоров ПАО Газпром , Тринога добился чтоб ГПТЭ и дочерние Общества вышли из под влияния Межрегионгаз и перешли под ГЭХ (ГазпромЭнергоХоллдинг). Но вот беда Тринога не учел , что в ГЭХ главный борец с коррупцией Джамбулатов, еще по Питеру заклятый враг Триноги (у Джамбулатова есть компромат на Триногу , помните громкое трубное дело в Питере?) и началось шоу.



Артур Тринога




Как Тринога не стелился перед Джамбулатовым, пришлось принять все его условия , отойти в сторону и выполнять роль свадебного генерала. Правда и с этой ролью он не особо справляется ( очередная дочка Газпромтеплоэнерго Орел подала на банкротство).

Джамбулатов приказал Триноги уволить всех тех, кто когда-то осмелился ему перечить. Не буду указывать фамилии, но пострадали многие. Это их тайна. Мне было предложено Триногой уйти по хорошему, а иначе Джамбулатов возбудит уголовное дело, используя свои связи в МВД и моя «голова слетит». Это было смешно и нелепо, ведь я только выполнял свою работу. Многие варианты перепробовали товарищи из команды Джамбулатова , многие вещи предприняли, ничего не получалось и это продолжалось почти год (2021). Наконец, в июне месяце они нашли больную точку и самый подлый вариант. Стали увольнять всех тех, с кем я общался и пояснили, что из-за меня, так как я не ухожу (поступки как раз офицеров, они ведь офицеры и всегда пьют за это , только забыли , что это значит). Кого когда-то я привел в ГПТЭ, стали увольнять об этом прямо заявил Тринога- увольняйся или уволим всех твоих друзей. Пришлось в июле уволится. Но ни Тринога, ни Джамбулатов слова своего не сдержали и все равно всех уволили.

Терять было уже нечего, и я обратился в суд с иском о восстановлении, так как считал и считаю, что меня уволили под принуждением. Суд длился 8 месяцев и, изучив все материалы дела 22.02.2022, восстановил меня в прежней должности. Вы понимаете какой был шок у Триноги и Джамбулатова. Если судебное решение устоится, их ждет административная ответственность, не говоря уже деловой репутации. Работать не дают , устраивают провокации, люди Джамбулатова говорят жди ответочку ( он мужик в возрасте, вспыльчивый)!

Не столько испугавшись , а не видя дальнейших перспектив, в конце июня 2022 я ухожу из компании. И ответочка прилетела на апелляционном заседание в Мособлсуде. 01.08.2022 судья Колотовкина принимает историческое решение ! Судебное решение первой инстанции отменить, допустить поворот дела.

Понятно, что это полная ерунда!

Дело расследовалось 8 месяцев, изучались доказательства, поддержала Прокуратура, но Колотовкина решила за 5 минут , что все не так , поставив под сомнение компетенцию Суда первой инстанции и действия Прокурора, который, кстати, во второй инстанции настаивал на решении первой инстанции.

Точка не поставлена. Есть Надзор в Прокуратуре, есть Кассационный суд и есть Верховный суд. Правда всегда одна. Удивительно. Когда эти люди, бывшие Убэповцы решили , что они хозяева Газпрома. Что они могут все!!!! Иногда бывает не по себе на что способны еще эти люди чтоб спасти свои накопления. Но у меня есть тоже зубы и принципы, и я не отступлюсь. Да для всех, я не воюю с Газпром. Там работает много порядочных и честных людей, даже в окружении Джамбулатова.





Продолжение следует

Ярослав Мухтаров

Источник: www.rucriminal.info

суббота, 6 августа 2022 г.

"It's much tastier than paying a million"

Chubais team discusses money laundering and tax evasion




The telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU obtained an audio recording of the so-called working meeting in the spring of 2016 of the team of Anatoly Chubais, who was engaged in money laundering for their boss, tax evasion, etc. Ilya Suchkov, who helped build Chubais' cottage, was also invited to this meeting.

At this meeting, in addition to Ilya Suchkov, there were characters known from previous numerous publications: Dmitry Mints, Ilya Gulin (financial director of Mintsev companies), Elena Orlova (legal officer of Mintsev companies), Sergey Krychenko (Adjutant Anatoly Chubais) and Olga Butkova ( Financial Director of SFO CONCEPT CONSULTING LLC).

Recall that by this time the "LC Peredelki" Odintsovo district, Moscow region was built and handed over on January 1, 2016 to the customer who financed the construction of the "RC Peredelki" - the Swiss company JSC "SFO Concept AG". As indicated in previous publications, the estimated cost of "LCD Alterations" was in the region of 47,000,000 US dollars, and the market value was determined according to 3 (Three) independent assessments, including a judicial one in the amount of: from 34,000,000 to 36,500,000 US dollars .

At the meeting, essentially one issue was discussed - the establishment of an optimal mechanism for the sale of ZhK Peredelka to Anatoly Chubais at the lowest possible price.

Dmitry Mints Ilya Suchkov, if I may say so, was “offered”, and in fact imposed on a peremptory basis, the option to transfer ZhK Alterations, owned by the Swiss company JSC SFO Concept AG, to a person identified by them - Boris Mints at a symbolic cost with for the purpose of the subsequent sale of ZhK Peredelki at the same symbolic cost to Anatoly Chubais.



According to Dmitry Mints, after the implementation of the scheme “proposed” by him to liquidate the large debt formed by Anatoly Chubais, the Swiss company should have been deliberately bankrupted, and the remaining difference in the amount of about 17,000,000 US dollars of debt obligations recovered from the shareholder and the general director A Swiss company, that is, from entrepreneur Ilya Suchkov and Andre Odermatt, respectively.

Considering that earlier Anatoly Chubais "recommended" Ilya Suchkov to agree on the mechanism for the sale of ZhK Peredelka with Dmitry Mints, Dmitry Mints' "proposal" sounded like an instruction agreed with Anatoly Chubais.

Ignoring the actual costs incurred by the Swiss company JSC "SFO Concept AG" for the construction of the "ZhK Alterations" and its actual market value, to establish an estimate of the ZhK Alterations, adjusted to the desired, necessary and meeting the wishes of Anatoly Chubais and Mr. Mintsev, is significantly less than actually spent on construction of funds, as well as its actual market value, in the region of 8,000,000 US dollars.



Rucriminal.info recalls that, as we indicated in previous publications, such an underestimated cost of "LCD Alterations" in the region of 7,000,000 - 8,000,000 US dollars met the wishes of Anatoly Chubais and Mr. Mintsev. This fact is confirmed by the statements of Dmitry Mints at the meeting, since this would allow Anatoly Chubais, Boris and Dmitry Mints to hide the passage of such large amounts through the accounts of the Cypriot company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED in the form of loans.

In addition, this, such an underestimate, was necessary due to the lack of declared income from Anatoly Chubais, which would allow him to purchase ZhK Peredelki at market value.

An associate of Anatoly Chubais, including Sergey Krychenko and the financial director of the Anatoly Chubais family office headed by him (Sergey Krychenko) in the Russian Federation, Olga Butkova, at the meeting it was reported that the amount of the budget laid by them for the purchase by Anatoly Chubais of ZhK Peredelki should not have been exceed 8,000,000 US dollars or 520,000,000 rubles.

Thus, it should be assumed that the scheme “proposed” by Dmitry Mints for the purchase of ZhK Peredelka was planned by Anatoly Chubais and the company in advance and was not disclosed to Ilya Suchkov until the last moment by him (Anatoly Chubais) and the company.

Moreover, according to the statements of Dmitry Mints at this meeting, the scheme proposed by him to Ilya Suchkov was completely feigned and, if Ilya Suchkov agreed, would consist, in violation of the current legislation, solely in the transfer of funds between the above participants in the contractual relationship.

Ultimately, Anatoly Chubais would have solved the task he set back in 2016, but due to the refusal of Ilya Suchkov to participate in his (Anatoly Chubais), Boris and Dmitry Mintsev illegal scheme, expressed in the alleged money laundering, he did it only after 3 (Three) years in February 2019!



In connection with the unforeseen circumstances that have arisen, we believe that it was Anatoly Chubais or his associates in his and initiative had to perform a number of illegal actions related to the legally dubious purchase of ZhK Alterations, namely:



- to initiate, on far-fetched grounds, the initiation of criminal case No. 123632 against the intractable businessman Ilya Suchkov. The basis of which is the senior investigator of the SU UMVD of Russia for the Odintsovo urban district Egorova Zh.A. was put, made by Mr. Mintsev or on their behalf, adjusted to the desired by Mr. Mintsev and Anatoly Chubais, an assessment of the "friendly" company KnightFrank, as well as false testimony, we believe dummy, acting by proxy, the so-called, having nothing to do with the Cyprus company O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED, representatives of the injured party - Rim Kuks and Dmitry Mosin. This circumstance is confirmed by the materials of the case and the audio recording of the so-called working meeting;

- to initiate, on far-fetched grounds, by artificially changing jurisdiction, the consideration of a civil dispute between foreign legal entities by the Cypriot company KRIZNA HOLDINGS LTD, affiliated with Boris Mints and the Swiss company SFO Concept AG JSC, not in the London International Arbitration Court, but in the Arbitration Court of the Bryansk Region, according to the reason, as we believe, is his pliability and obtaining the decision necessary for Anatoly Chubais.

Recall that the artificial change of jurisdiction became possible due to the fact that the Russian family office of Anatoly Chubais turned out to be the second defendant before the Cyprus company KRIZNA HOLDINGS LTD according to the surety agreement of June 2015, in violation of the current legislation, without notifying the debtor - the Swiss company - SFO CONCEPT CONSULTING LLC, with an authorized capital of 100,000 rubles.

- initiate with the participation of the investigator Egorova Zh.A. organization and holding of auctions for the sale of ZhK Peredelka, which is under arrest and is material evidence in criminal case No. 123632 for 600,000,000 million rubles, that is, for the amount originally planned by the "accomplices" associates of Anatoly Chubais, as part of the so-called working meeting in the spring 2016;

(This scheme of the “raider capture of the ZhK Peredelka” is described in more detail in a publication on the website: rucriminal.info dated April 25, 2022 - “Chubais’s giant “pod” was found”)

- to initiate in June 2017 the illegal arrest of Ilya Suchkov;

- contribute to the systematic violation of the law by the investigator Egorova Zh.A. and the investigator of the same department Mogilevskaya A.G. and as a result of bringing Ilya Suchkov to disability.



We believe that the criminal case No. 123632 is certainly custom-made and we recall that it was initiated by the investigator Egorova Zh.A. October 16, 2016 contrary to the actual circumstances:



- loans were taken for the purpose of replenishing the working capital of the Swiss company SFO Concept AG JSC, owned at that time by 100% shareholder Anatoly Chubais, on his behalf by the Managing Director of the Swiss company Andre Odermatt. Loans were taken for a long period, at an insignificant percentage, without any security, under the guarantee of Anatoly Chubais of their return to his friend, colleague and business partner Boris Mints, and were spent by Anatoly Chubais during his 100% shareholding of the Swiss company, that is, until May 2013 of the year;

- the paradox of the prosecution in this criminal case lies in the fact that it was initiated 6 (six) years before the right to claim under loan agreements by the concluded managers of the Swiss company SFO Concept AG JSC - Andre Odermatt on behalf of Anatoly Chubais;

- in December 2014, Ilya Suchkov, under the loan agreements concluded earlier by Anatoly Chubais, from the profit of the Swiss company, in fact from his own money, partially repaid the obligations to the Cyprus Company of Boris Mints for Anatoly Chubais ahead of schedule. In the hope that, based on an earlier agreement with Anatoly Chubais, these amounts will be compensated to them after the purchase of the Peredelki residential complex at the market value;

- Ilya Suchkov, after the so-called working meeting, in the summer of 2016, repeatedly offered the Cypriot company of Boris Mints and Anatoly Chubais, in accordance with the current legislation of the Russian Federation and Switzerland, to buy "ZhK Peredelki" at the actual market value, according to 3 (Three) independent assessments, including 1 (One) litigation, with a possible discount for 33,000,000 US dollars allowed by the current legislation. It is especially worth noting that this circumstance in itself excluded any intent on the part of Ilya Suchkov for fraud;

- The property (AITI - equipment) that Ilya Suchkov is charged with as allegedly stolen from Anatoly Chubais is still installed and located in the ZhK Peredelki and as of 2017-2018 did not belong to Anatoly Chubais, which is confirmed by the case materials.

Despite the fact that all the above arguments are indisputably documented by the materials of criminal case No. 123632, investigator YegOrova Zh.A. and the investigator of the same department, Mogilevskaya A.G., were completely ignored, and instead of bringing the above investigators to justice for their illegal actions during the entire 6 (Six) years of the so-called investigation, they were retired and fired voluntarily accordingly. Phenomenal, isn't it?!

For almost 3 (Three) years now, criminal case No. 123632 has been in various courts in Moscow and the Moscow Region, twice returned to the prosecutor for additional investigation.

In turn, Anatoly Chubais' henchmen are extremely active, trying at all costs to drag the insolvent criminal case No. 123632 through the court.

I really want to, I hope that according to the obvious facts of falsification, distortion and manipulation of materials that do not require, in our opinion, lasting 6 (Six) years, we believe that the custom-made criminal case No. grade.



PRINT VERSION

meetings in 2016



(Ilya Suchkova with Dmitry Mints, Ilya Gulin (Mintsev's CFO), Elena Orlova (Mintsev's office employee), Sergey Krychenko (Adjutant Anatoly Chubais) and his CFO Olga Butkova)



Sergey Krychenko: How much do you owe? Let's start with this (meaning how much is the amount of debt received in 2010-2012 by Anatoly Chubais for the Swiss company JSC "SFO Concept AG" "loans" from the Cyprus company of his friend, colleague and business partner Boris Mints - O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED is now reorganized as TILSOKA LIMITED).

Ilya Suchkov: 24, well, 23 with a penny (assuming millions of US dollars)

Dmitry Mints: bankrupt a Swiss company and that's it

Elena Orlova: as planned (implied by Chubais's confidants)

Sergei Krychenko: to bankrupt a Swiss company?

Dmitry Mints: he (meaning Anatoly Chubais) will buy it (meaning the residential complex "Alterations"), I don't know how much for 7 (meaning 7,000,000 US dollars)

Sergey Krychenko: for 8 (implies USD 8,000,000), for 9 (implies USD 9,000,000)

Dmitry Mints: he (Boris Mints) will have to buy debts for 7 (implies 7,000,000 US dollars), O1 T (implies O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) will remain with debt, there for how much 24 (implies 24,000,000 US dollars) minus 7 (implies 7,000,000 US dollars), for 7 (implies 7,000,000 US dollars) he (Boris Mints) will take this house (“LCD Alterations”), then O1 T (implies O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) will go bankrupt, well, wait for bankruptcy slowly Swiss company

Elena Orlova: well, is bankruptcy in 7 (assuming 7,000,000 US dollars)? There, your director (meaning the director of the Swiss company Andre Odermatt) will not suffer on this subject?

Ilya Suchkov: will

Elena Orlova: there the director (it means the director of the Swiss company Andre Odermatt) is already so twitchy and ...

Ilya Suchkov: but there he is not only twitchy

Dmitry Mints: why is he twitchy, got up, left, it's surprising why there is no director who can survive the bankruptcy of the company?

Elena Orlova: Why don’t we just want to buy and sell a house without bankruptcy

Dmitry Mints: well, you have a deal for 24 and give it back for 24 (it means millions of US dollars)?

Elena Orlova: anyway, at the level of companies and debt collectors, the situation will be better or through the bankruptcy of some company there

Dmitry Mints: so that no one would say that in fact it costs 24 (it means the cost of the residential complex "Peredelki" 24 million US dollars) and it was necessary to take away the house (RC "Peredelki") for 24 (million US dollars), so that later someone then I didn’t start to figure it out, it turns out there was a debt of 24 million (it means US dollars)

Elena Orlova: someone will still figure it out, if someone wants to figure it out, there will be bankruptcy of the company and publications, a house, and so on, it’s better to do it all quietly (phone call - alo)

Sergei Krychenko: so, what?

Dmitry Mints: and here it’s not because of the bankruptcy of the company that there were so many assets, but there was so much debt, well, what can you do. They took it for so much, well, plus or minus there, with a plus there, they sold 100 rubles. Forgive the debt, take 8 (it means 8,000,000 US dollars) and look for the rest of the debt from Suchkov

Elena Orlova: how will they find and whose assets they will look for, a shareholder?

Ilya Suchkov: me

Dmitry Mints: why a shareholder?

Elena Orlova: No, well, then what are we going to look for, what assets?

Dmitry Mints: no, we will not look for anything, we will close the topic in such a way that we took something that was 24 and sold it to a comrade in chief (Anatoly Chubais is implied) for 8 (8,000,000 US dollars are implied)

Elena Orlova: well, that's exactly what they didn't sell

Dmitry Mints: in the end they sold it! finally sold it!

Elena Orlova: do you have an estimate of what you took

Dmitry Mints: there is a correct assessment of what I took

Elena Orlova: they took everything that was

Dmitry Mints: a gave it for 24 (it means 24,000,000 US dollars), I’ll say you took it first for 24 (it means 24,000,000 US dollars) and then estimated it somehow and then gave it to Chubais for 8 (it means 8,000,000 US dollars) of which then here...

Elena Orlova: well, the one who will tell you, if suddenly there is such a person, will tell you this in any situation, with or without bankruptcy

Dmitry Mints: why did I buy back debts from O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) for 8 (8,000,000 US dollars are implied), came to the company. Do you want a company to pay you a debt for 8? You have a house for 8. I forgave the debt for 8. The remaining debt remained on O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED), O1 T came and went to sue there. At the level of physicists, he paid 8 (assuming Boris Mints), received 8, gave me a gift, I sold it, earned money if someone warms their ears there

Elena Orlova: about the fact that you came and took away everything that was the rest, they bankrupted the same

Dmitry Mints: why not? O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) is a completely different story, it’s not the same, I don’t feel any difference

Elena Orlova: I don't know this difference, how do you feel, I'm not ready

Dmitry Mints: well, not ready, and then I'm not ready

Elena Orlova: how can I feel the difference without knowing your situation

Dmitry Mints: what is our situation?

Elena Orlova: I don’t even know what it is about O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED)

Dmitry Mints: I am not worried about the fate of O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) in this case. I am infuriated by the situation with two physicists (meaning Anatoly Chubais and Boris Mints)

Elena Orlova: To what extent is it possible?

Dmitry Mints: You don’t want to tell me that…

Elena Orlova: I don't want to say anything now. We're just talking about a path that will be minimally public and troublesome.

Dmitry Mints: this is not troublesome (the above illegal scheme proposed by Mints is implied) and there is no publicity in this, a million companies are going bankrupt in the country, I think the Swiss also have more than one or two, they decided to give away the house

Elena Orlova: well, bankruptcy usually goes through the court

Ilya Suchkov: of course

Sergey Krychenko: well, through the court, through the court, the bankruptcy went through the court. Give me at least approximately the point at which at least Dmitry will be the owner (Dmitry Mints is implied)

Dmitry Mints: this deal with the house (meaning the residential complex "Alterations") does not delay at all

Elena Orlova: it is possible that even a deal with a house (LCD "Peredelki") will speed up. The bankruptcy process does not depend on this topic. Do you want to make an assignment of this debt exactly for the amount of buying a house (LCD "Peredelki")? No delta, no nothing

Dmitry Mints: well, yeah, there ... some kind of delta

Elena Orlova: some kind of delta, no matter what, not fundamental. Part of the debt is assigned to an individual (implies to Boris Mints), an individual comes to the company (implies SFO Concept AG JSC Switzerland) says, make a purchase and sale transaction as part of the offset of the right of claim, and after some time a company appears ... (implies O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED))

Ilya Gulin: well, she appears or does not appear

Elena Orlova: no, she appears (meaning O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED)) because our task is to liquidate this company (meaning SFO Concept AG JSC Switzerland) to hell with Swiss, so she (meaning O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) should appear and go bankrupt and find out that some physicist has already taken everything

Dmitry Mints: no, well, you just need to make an option there, you just need to apparently meet a certain deadline, so observe half a year ...

Ilya Gulin: so that it was impossible to return

Dmitry Mints: and six months later, O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) comes and demands a debt. You have appointed the one who liquidates

Elena Orlova: in general, you need to find out how the bankruptcy procedure takes place in Switzerland

Olga Butkova: our client (Anatoly Chubais) plans to move in on June 01 (2016 is assumed) and already live there (LC "Peredelki")

Elena Orlova: don’t wait Ol, everyone has already understood that we have already made a deal for the sale of physicists and the physicist is already further disposing of his thing (LC "Peredelki")

Dmitry Mints: not then, at least among the physicists (Boris Mints and Anatoly Chubais), there is Boris Iosifovich. Phone call. The physicist comes there, says that's why I bought a house, well, I bought a house, I sold it with a profit, he says my son gave it, instead of 7 (it means 7,000,000 US dollars), well, I sold it, plus or minus, well, it kind of beats there. Our biggest problem is that Mintz sold something conditionally to Chubais there for 3 (Three) kopecks.

Elena Orlova: and if he buys debts, all debts for 8 million (US dollars are implied), let's assume, just so that we don't go bankrupt, but just close

Dmitry Mints: that is, with a discount, I know this, they can formally contact the boss (meaning Anatoly Chubais) "fuck" the investigators for how much he paid (meaning Anatoly Chubais), he exchanged a debt of 24 million (meaning US dollars) for house (LCD "Alterations") there which costs, how much is there 8 (it means 8,000,000 US dollars) in this is the topic on which he (Anatoly Chubais) decided, well, to do so, and then this house (LCD "Alterations") which nominally costs 24 million

Olga Butkova: we have 24 million investments in construction

Ilya Suchkov: 30! (implies US dollars, investment in construction at that time in the residential complex "Alterations")

Elena Orlova: Dim, well, in this design, it’s just docking a house for 8 (it means millions of US dollars), drive away the money, and then go into bankruptcy and generally don’t get involved with debts, then no investigators will have any questions, but as soon as you get hooked through debt, and then some kind of incomprehensible story with debts, well, if you follow this logic, then it should be completely broken.

Dmitry Mints: yes, maybe it makes more sense

Elena Orlova: because as soon as you hook even a part of the debt in general, you will screw up the whole story

Ilya Gulin: in this logic, even if we are chasing money for a part, for 8 (US dollars are implied)

Elena Orlova: no, as soon as you talk about investigators, you must break these 2 (Two) stories (assuming loans issued with the purchase of the residential complex "Alterations")

Dmitry Mints: not for 8 no

Elena Orlova: as soon as you talk about investigators, you should break these 2 (Two) stories

Dmitry Mints: we give Boris Iochifrvich 8 million (US dollars) he buys this house (RC "Peredelki")

Ilya Gulin: I’m saying everything correctly and these 8 (million US dollars) remain there in partial payment of the debt of O1 T (O1 TRUST SERVICES LIMITED) and remain there 24 minus 8 (million US dollars) roughly speaking, that is, the company (meaning JSC SFO Concept AG (Switzerland) remains in debt

Elena Orlova: and then the company (JSC SFO Concept AG, Switzerland) is already resolving the issue either going into bankruptcy or signing an amicable debt forgiveness and fixing this profit against losses when selling the house, as we actually originally planned and there is no need for any bankruptcy and hemorrhoids with this house

Dmitry Mints: no, it seems cleaner to me

Elena Orlova: if you want to break his story with someone, it's just a sale and then no one will pull you up

Dmitry Mints: no, no, no, there’s no bargaining, at least, here they are, they live in formal categories very much

Sergei Krychenko: Do ​​you mean the investigators?

Dmitry Mints: Yes, investigators.

Sergey Krychenko: the devil knows

Elena Orlova: in formal categories, just buying and selling

Dmitry Mints: no, listen, if I buy a house there for 8, sold for 8,100 (million US dollars), valuation 8,100 or 8, there is 7,500 (million US dollars) Here you go

Ilya Gulin: well, in the end, the main question that remains is left to the SFO (meaning JSC SFO Concept AG Switzerland) with debts of 17 (meaning millions of US dollars), what will be the timing procedure for liquidating this company (meaning JSC SFO Concept AG" Switzerland)

Dmitry Mints: going bankrupt is always cleaner than forgiving a debt there

Ilya Gulin: I agree, let's find out the details then

Elena Orlova: no, well, in order to make a decision on bankruptcy, we really need to find out the details and the exact process, because if so, some independent dude should appear

Ilya Gulin: well, then, by the end of the week, let's have a detailed scenario of what we all want, so good

Elena Orlova: we are talking about debt, but actually about the transfer of ownership of the house

Dmitry Mints: so what will the documents be for the sale

Elena Orlova: that is, a contract of sale for money?

Dmitry Mints: Well, yes. Have you determined this number?

Elena Orlova: we must have a fresh assessment

Ilya Suchkov: we initially had a figure for debts, now it is again offered in the red

Elena Orlova: How much did you budget?

Olga Butkova: I pawned...

Sergey Krychenko: to buy?

Ilya Suchkov: 7 (million US dollars), in my opinion, you pawned

Sergey Krychenko: 8 (US$ million)

Olga Butkova: 520,000,000 (rubles implied)

Ilya Suchkov: 8 or 7 (million US dollars)?

Sergey Krychenko: 8 (Eight), 8 (Eight) (US$ million)

Olga Butkova: I budgeted 520,000,000 rubles

Sergei Krychenko: in rubles?

Olga Butkova: yes

Elena Orlova: no, well, it’s not really the less the better, because from all this amount he (meaning Anatoly Chubais) will then pay tax

Sergey Krychenko: we will buy it from your account

Elena Orlova: because you are according to the old plan, maybe something has changed, will you buy or will you be given as a gift?

Sergey Krychenko: we will eventually buy

Dmitry Mints: question. Old plan, do you need an old plan?

Elena Orlova: the old plan is bad, because if they ate this donation, then this is a tax on the entire amount of the transaction

Dmitry Mints: no, but just tell me a simple question. And if he (Boris Mints is implied) bought and sold, why am I in this scheme then? Boris Iosifovich bought, sold to Chubais, no difference to a resident / non-resident, if the difference there is not big, no difference

Elena Orlova: but he (Boris Mints is implied) will pay 30% of this difference, no, no, we will discussed what he (Boris Mints) would take for debts, since the price is incomprehensible and we will not have a sale and purchase, as we have just discussed, he can only have a donation further, if we have a sale and purchase there, then in principle ...

Ilya Gulin: if there is an incoming one, he (Boris Mints is meant) does not sell much cheaper than he (Boris Mints) bought

Elena Orlova: that's why they wanted it, there was a donation, that's right Ilya (Ilya Gulin is implied) says that's why they wanted to give

Dmitry Mints: then we may have to pay 100, 200 thousand dollars

Ilya Gulin: without donation

Elena Orlova: but it's much tastier, because to pay a million (implying US dollars) for nothing

Dmitry Mints: there is another limitation, the amount, he has no official cash on his account

Elena Orlova: who?

Dmitry Mints: at Chubais

Elena Orlova: of course

Dmitry Mints: therefore, you don’t need much, and so there is not much there (assuming declared profitability)

Elena Orlova: absolutely because of this there will be additional experiences

Ilya Guli: that is, we remove the link then

Elena Orlova: if we have a purchase and sale of it (it means ZhK Peredelki) from that company (it means JSC SFO Concept AG Switzerland), then we remove the link and, in principle, we can already start this story after the assessment is ready. The evaluation can then be done at a minimum

Sergey Krychenko: will the seller be in this case?

Elena Orlova: Boris Iosifovich. We have now gone into the design when Boris Iosifovich buys then we don’t need Dmitry (Dmitry Mints is meant) in general. Excellent Dmitry

Sergey Krychenko: just the very fact of the sale of the object by Boris Iosifovich to Anatoly Borisovich

Dmitry Mints: so what

Sergey Krychenko: what’s in the forehead, what’s spelled, right?

Dmitry Mints: yes

Elena Orlova: even less than any pretense

Ilya Gulin: a more direct story

Sergey Krychenko: we ourselves admit, it turns out like this

Elena Orlova: in what? We didn't do anything

Dmitry Mints: no, why Boris Iosifovich, as a real estate figure, took a house there (meaning "LCD Alterations"), looked there to sell not to sell, well, he found someone to sell

Elena Orlova: earned

Sergey Krychenko: Do ​​you know what's the matter? Unfortunately, everyone who needs to assume they know the history of the AG company (meaning SFO Concept AG) and know that at one time he (meaning Anatoly Chubais) was its shareholder. Is there any relationship here?

Dmitry Mints: who?

Sergey Krychenko: Anatoly Borisovovich

Elena Orlova: everyone who needs to know everything is why our conspiracy

Sergey Krychenko: you want to say no to the need

Elena Orlova: our task is to meet the limit

Ilya Gulin: there is a need, it’s just that this link (meaning Dmitry Mints) has no added value in the current design that was discussed today, it doesn’t give anything, it raises more questions, it seems to me

Elena Orlova: and yet I think we need to do without bankruptcy, that's why too

Dmitry Mints - Ilya Gulin: on the contrary, everything is real, everything is fine

Ilya Gulin: there are debts, the company is interested in returning its debts

Elena Orlova: we don’t have any connection between the real estate buyer (Boris Mints) and this company (JSC SFO Concept AG Switzerland), and our director is not afraid that he sold it cheaply and then they came to him to sue him for bankruptcy, that’s where I’m just I saw the letters of this director (Andre Odermatt is implied) I think he will have a tantrum.

Dmitry Mints: appoint another director well

Elena Orlova: They won't survive another director

Sergey Krychenko: you know it's not so easy

Elena Orlova: well, there's just a story

Dmitry Mints: everything has a story

Elena Orlova: everything has different stories, but they have such a story here

Dmitry Mints: I don’t know, it seems to me that going bankrupt is cleaner

Elena Orlova: for whom?

Dmitry Mints, Ilya Gulin: for everyone

Elena Orlova: You don't care in principle

Dmitry Mints: probably, well, for us, for everyone, it seems strange to me to take and forgive a debt, I think that this is generally a very strange topic when you take and simply forgive a debt

Elena Orlova: why don't you spend money on lawyers

Ilya Gulin: if it's worth it

Dmitry Mints: yes

Elena Orlova: well, it's worth it if it's worth it, and if you still don't get anything, then it's not clear what it's worth

Dmitry Mints: I’m telling you again, go to any bank and tell me what you are going bankrupt if there are no assets, they will bankrupt everyone anyway because the procedure is correct

Elena Orlova: well, right, because they have a procedure, but we are not dealing with a bank now

Dmitry Mints: no, but what if someone comes to us and says what did you do

Elena Orlova: who will come to you? Tell us who will come to you so that we are ready

Ilya Gulin: wait, the director who is appointed there to perform certain functions may not agree

Dmitry Mints: what is his way out?

Elena Orlova: we say that we have a procedure, he has a way out ...

Ilya Suchkov: always there

Dmitry Mints: no, well, he can just as well not ask anyone to file for bankruptcy, well, he’s not going anywhere

Dmitry Mints: ok yes

enter 5 or 4 (millions of US dollars are implied) it is absolutely negligible less than 1,000 dollars per meter, and less than 1,000 dollars per meter is certainly strange

Sergey Krychenko: this is quite strange

Elena Orlova: well, after all

Sergey Krychenko: please tell us, do we have people who can come and estimate the real cost of this object (implying the residential complex "Alterations")?

Ilya Gulin: any appraisers will tell you that in the market it costs so much yes, to do it the way you want, you need to carry out such and such manipulations at the expense of this, that, that

Dmitry Mints: on the market now it can cost as much as you want

Ilya Gulin: there is no such market

Elena Orlova: there is no market for such objects, in principle, it is possible to estimate approximately the land, it is impossible to estimate the footage of a house in this size

Ilya Gulin: there will definitely not be similar proposals

Dmitry Mints: no, well, something will happen of course

Elena Orlova: will not. We have explored this area. Well, after all, in the absence of female logic, let's somehow move on. What price are we valuing? I understand that appraisers don't care at all. We had a late 2014 estimate of 5,000,000 (US Dollars implied), after which a large investment of 20 million (US Dollars) was made. The question is what assessment should we have now?

Ilya Gulin: but at the same time there was a crisis

Elena Orlova: but the crisis happened in 2014 already, it won't help

Ilya Gulin: I don’t know 7 (meaning millions of US dollars), this is above the psychological bar per meter, above the cadastral value, below 8 (meaning US dollars) which has always been heard but close to it, therefore 7 (millions of dollars USA) would be adequate

Elena Orlova: how many meters did we count? 5 with something (thousand M2 is implied). Very correct, well, because all of our below and below they are very abstract and are discussed

Ilya Gulin: I agree

Olga Butkova: I agree

Elena Orlova: and roughly speaking, it turns out that anyway it is very cheap and can be provided at any time, with anyone. Skuratov will be offended and blurt out something in an interview

Dmitry Mints: I think that he should be like this, like him, whoever, the builder of St. Basil's Cathedral.

Elena Orlova: well then we make an estimate in the region of 7 (millions of US dollars is implied), this is the first

Ilya Gulin: so there are two draft contracts, bankruptcy before the end of the week, scheme, terms and details three

Elena Orlova: and we have a run of money

Sergei Krychenko: at least give some guidance, based on all of the above, when the head (implying Anatoly Chubais) will be the owner? Well, at least to say

Dmitry Mints: in April (assuming 2016)

Sergey Krychenko: in April, yes. Just in April, he (meaning Anatoly Chubais) should have money to buy, right?

Olga Butkova: Well, after repaying the loan (implied by Boris Mints) by bank transfer, he (implying Anatoly Chubais) first gave him cash to Boris Iosifovich, so we should have a non-cash

Dmitry Mints: firstly, about the loan, as we talked in September until September, it was still reconfirmed on Thursday. Well, here is also a run, this is also a vicious circle

Olga Butkova: no, no, no, in order to have a run, the money must be returned to him (implying Anatoly Chubais)

Sergey Krychenko: that's why we touch on this topic

Dmitry Mints: wait, well, in this part

Olga Butkova: naturally in this part

Dmitry Mints: no, this is a run

Olga Butkova: loans from him (meaning Anatoly Chubais) until September (meaning 2016)

Sergey Krychenko: well, until September, until September. Please tell me how we will pay from his (meaning Anatoly Chubais) account, with what money, what will we use to buy a house (meaning the Predelki residential complex)?

Olga Butkova: we just said this, Boris Iosifovich (meaning Mints) will return 500,000,000 rubles to us, which we will give back for ...

Sergey Krychenko: part of the loan will be returned exactly in order to ensure in this way ... I heard everything.



To be continued

Timofey Grishin

Source: www.rucriminal.info