Another "treading on thunder" incident occurred in Jinyuan Shun'an Fund, which was its 130 million yuan purchase asset support plan, but it could not be recovered on schedule.As a result, it took Hengtai Securities, the manager of the special plan and the sales agency, to court.
Every reporter Huang Xiaocong Every editor Xiao Ruidong
Jinyuan Shun'an Fund, which has repeatedly "stepped on thunder" in bonds, has another "step on thunder" incident.
Recently, two civil judgments issued by the Beijing court showed that two asset management plans established by Jinyuan Shun'an Fund purchased a total of 130 million yuan of senior asset-backed securities.However, in the end, the special plan was terminated, and the Jinyuan Shun'an Fund could not recover the income and principal as agreed.
Jinyuan Shun'an Fund also sued Hengtai Securities in court. After the first-instance judgment of Jinyuan Shun'an Fund won the case, Hengtai Securities refused to accept it and filed an appeal.However, after being heard by the Beijing Higher People's Court, Hengtai Securities' appeal was rejected.
"Treading thunder" 130 million yuan
On October 9, 2015, Qinghui Leasing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Qinghui Leasing), as the lessor and buyer, signed the Financial Leasing Contract with Xianyang Hongyuan Petrochemical Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as Hongyuan Petrochemical), which stipulated that Qinghui Leasing purchased the equipment of Hongyuan Petrochemical at a price of 500 million yuan, and then leased the equipment to Hongyuan Petrochemical for 36 months and a rent of 500 million yuan.
Qinghui Leasing 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 of the special plan, introduced the special plan to the market, and produced the "Qinghui Leasing Phase I Asset-backed Special Plan Specification" (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan Specification"), "Qinghui Leasing Phase I Asset-backed Special Program Specification" Hui Leasing Phase I Asset-backed Special Plan Standard Terms (hereinafter referred to as "Standard Terms").
The special plan was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange on December 25, 2015, and was filed on January 25, 2016 with the China Association for Fundraising.
On February 10, 2017, February 16, 2017, and March 1, 2017, Jinyuan Shun'an Changjiang No. 1 Asset Management Plan established by Jinyuan Shun'an Fund purchased senior asset-backed securities of 30 million yuan and 30 million yuan respectively through the Shanghai Stock Exchange and 60 million yuan; on April 10, 2017, Jinyuanshun An Donghai No. 2 asset management plan purchased 30 million yuan, and on June 9, 2017, after selling 20 million yuan, the balance was 10 million yuan.As of the time of the lawsuit, Jinyuan Shun'an Fund still held a total of 130 million yuan in senior asset-backed securities.
On December 25, 2017, Hengtai Securities announced that the actual controller of Hongyuan Petrochemical had lost contact, and Hongyuan Petrochemical had stopped production for rectification.As Hongyuan Petrochemical's assets are under seal, the special plan rating was downgraded from AAA to B.
On September 17, 2018, the special plan was terminated. Jinyuan Shun'an Fund could not recover the income and principal as agreed, so Hengtai Securities was brought to court, requesting that Hengtai Securities be ordered to compensate Jinyuan Shun'an Fund for the 130 million yuan subscription principal of asset-backed securities. and interest.
After the trial, the court of first instance also ruled that Hengtai Securities should compensate Jinyuan Shun'an Fund for 130 million yuan in subscription losses and income losses.
The second instance dismissed the appeal
However, after the first-instance judgment, Hengtai Securities refused to accept the civil judgment of the Beijing Second Intermediate People's Court and appealed to the Beijing Higher People's Court.
After the trial, the court of second instance held that Hengtai Securities, as the manager of the special plan, sold senior asset-backed securities with a face value of 150 million yuan to Jinyuan Shun'an Fund by issuing the "Plan Prospectus" and "Standard Clauses", and promised that if it fails to perform Agreement, it constitutes a breach of contract and will be liable for breach of contract in accordance with the law.In the process of performing the above agreement, Hengtai Securities failed to provide Jinyuan Shun'an Fund with asset-backed securities with underlying assets including real accounts receivable pledged as agreed. For the loss of the subscription principal of the special plan and the loss of income before the expiration of the special plan, Hengtai Securities shall be liable for compensation to Jinyuan Shun'an Fund.
It is worth mentioning that, as to whether there was a rigid payment in the first-instance judgment, the second-instance court held that although Hengtai Securities did not guarantee a certain profit of the special plan in the "planning statement", nor did it guarantee the minimum return, but the "planning statement" did not guarantee asset-backed funds. The underlying assets and credit enhancement measures, cash flow and risks of the securities have been comprehensively analyzed and stated. If the analysis is comprehensive and true, investors have reason to believe and expect that the principal will be recovered and certain returns will be obtained.And Hengtai Securities stated in a separate case that the expected rate of return of the asset-backed securities involved in the case was 6.3%.
Therefore, Hengtai Securities did not conduct necessary verification of the underlying assets during the due diligence process, resulting in losses to investors such as Jinyuan Shun'an Fund. Hengtai Securities said that it could not foresee and lack factual basis for this.Although the loss that Hengtai Securities should compensate Jinyuan Shun'an Fund as determined by the first-instance judgment includes the principal and reasonable income, the expected loss is caused by Hengtai Securities' failure to perform the due diligence obligations of the manager, false statements and other serious breaches of contract, and it does not belong to the Rigid payment situation.
In the end, the court of second instance stated that the first-instance judgment found that Hengtai Securities’ behavior constituted a breach of contract, and it should bear the liability for breach of contract damages to Jinyuan Shun’an Fund, and legally and reasonably determine the scope of the loss, which is correct and should be maintained.The appeal request and reasons of Hengtai Securities shall not be supported.
