Recently, the Inner Mongolia Securities Regulatory Bureau issued penalties for three personnel, all pointing to Hengtai Securities’ Qinghui Leasing Phase I asset-backed special plan.
In addition, a reporter from the "Daily Economic News" found that in early July, the Beijing Court Trial Information Network published the second-instance judgment of Bank of Nanjing, Jinyuan Shun'an Fund, Galaxy Jinhui and Hengtai Securities. The second-instance court upheld the original judgment, that is, Hengtai Securities wanted to A total of 296 million yuan was paid to the three institutions.
The court of second instance emphasized that Hengtai Securities was at fault in its due diligence work.Although Hengtai Securities submitted relevant evidence in the second instance lawsuit to prove that it had performed due diligence, most of the evidence it submitted came from Qinghui Leasing Company and Hongyuan Petrochemical Company, which were closely related to the defendants in relevant criminal cases. Another part of the evidence comes from relevant intermediaries or unilaterally produced by Hengtai Securities Company. None of the evidence was issued by PetroChina Lanzhou Branch, Sinopec Tianjin Branch or directly recognized by PetroChina Lanzhou Branch and Sinopec Tianjin Branch. Therefore, Hengtai The securities have so far been unable to submit sufficient evidence to prove the fact that Hengtai Securities has conducted due diligence on PetroChina Lanzhou Branch and Sinopec Tianjin Branch.
Poor internal quality control
According to the information disclosed by the Inner Mongolia Securities Regulatory Bureau, after investigation, Hengtai Securities, as the plan manager of the Qinghui Leasing Phase I Asset-backed Special Plan (hereinafter referred to as Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS), has not conducted a comprehensive due diligence on the underlying assets of the special plan. The quality control is not strict and the implementation of the internal control mechanism is not in place.
As the person in charge of the asset securitization business of Hengtai Securities at the time, Deng Hao was responsible for the above-mentioned violations. The Inner Mongolia Securities Regulatory Bureau decided to take administrative supervision measures against Deng Hao.As the specific manager of the project, Lv Haochen was responsible for the above-mentioned violations, and was taken administrative supervision measures by issuing a warning letter.In addition, Zhang Jinhua, as the person in charge of project quality control, is responsible for the above-mentioned violations, and has been taken administrative supervision measures by issuing a warning letter.
This time, the Inner Mongolia Securities Regulatory Bureau did not impose corresponding penalties on Hengtai Securities, but in fact, as early as April 2019, Hengtai Securities had received a warning letter from the Liaoning Securities Regulatory Bureau for Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS.In April 2019, the Liaoning Securities Regulatory Bureau stated that Hengtai Securities, as the plan manager of the Qinghui Leasing Phase I asset-backed special plan, did not conduct comprehensive due diligence on the underlying assets of the special plan, that is, there were some due diligence processes that were not strictly implemented. , Some interviews did not make interview records, the due diligence draft interview records were incomplete, and some interviews were only recorded and not signed by the interviewees.
In addition, in addition to Hengtai Securities, Liaoning Securities Regulatory Bureau also issued warning letters to other responsible parties of Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS at that time, including the original owner Qinghui Leasing Co., Ltd., Beijing King & Wood Mallesons Law Firm China Chengxin Securities Appraisal Co., Ltd.
The court of second instance upheld the original judgment
In early July, the Beijing Court Trial Information Network announced the second-instance judgments of Bank of Nanjing, Jinyuan Shun'an Fund, Galaxy Jinhui and Hengtai Securities. Hengtai Securities all lost the case, which was related to Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS.
In October 2015, the "Financial Leasing Contract (Leaseback)" between Qinghui Leasing Company and Hongyuan Petrochemical Company showed that Hongyuan Petrochemical Company transferred its legally owned leased property to Qinghui Leasing Company, which was then leased by Qinghui. The company leased to Hongyuan Petrochemical Company; the lease term is 36 months, the lease principal is 500 million yuan, and the annual lease rate is 8.5%.
Hongyuan Petrochemical Company provided pledge guarantee for its accounts payable under the purchase agreement with PetroChina Lanzhou Branch.Qinghui Leasing Company transferred the above-mentioned rental claim rights and other rights and its subsidiary security interests to Hengtai Securities, and Hengtai Securities established the “Qinghui Leasing Phase I Asset-backed Special Plan” to issue Qinghui Leasing Phase I asset-backed securities. .
In December 2015, Hengtai Securities, as the manager and sales agency, issued the "Plan Prospectus".In January 2016, Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS was filed with the Fund Industry Association.Later, due to the risk event of the lessee Hongyuan Petrochemical Company, Qinghui Leasing Phase I ABS priority principal and interest were not paid in full on time, the project was terminated early, and a lawsuit occurred.
According to the court of first instance, Bank of Nanjing lost 100 million yuan in investment principal and 2.2048 million yuan in income; Yinhe Jinhui lost 60 million yuan in principal and 1.3229 million yuan in income; Jinyuan Shun'an Fund lost 130 million yuan in investment principal and lost income Loss of 2.8662 million yuan.Hengtai Securities needs to compensate the above-mentioned institutions for the loss of subscription principal and income, totaling 296 million yuan. Hengtai Securities refused to accept the judgment of the first-instance court and filed an appeal, but the second-instance court finally upheld the original judgment.
