PRIMARY OFFER · 15 JAN 2018 · CAM → IA → COURT
The recovered 12-page CAM offer combines a proposed dación/payment route for 159 mortgaged LPB apartments with a separate €400,000 direct purchase of 31 fincas. CAM's own economic explanation links the second limb to an approximate €5,186,061.79 debt condonation in the first.
This generated diagram is preserved as a provisional illustration. Its claim that no criminal or EOMF action followed is too broad: proceedings and archive decisions existed. The allegation concerns inadequate investigation, protection or supervision. Later 2021–2022 decisions cannot have caused a belief in 2019. Plan approval, physical possession, definitive disposal and conveyance are different events.
Six-stage documentary journey →
SUN PARK · DOCUMENTS → REASONS → DECISIONS → EFFECTS
Follow how ACTUA entered CAM’s offer, the insolvency administrator’s recommendation, the court-approved process and its later execution. Each connection identifies what the source establishes—and what remains to be proved.
DOC = documentary statement or recorded act · INFERENCE = stated reasoning or calculation, not a finding · CONTRARY = material counter-record · OPEN = unresolved proof · HIP = attributed hypothesis.
262 / 159 + 31
DOCStart with the connected hotel, then separate the properties the plan proposes to transfer. LPB’s 159 apartments and 31 service/locales/pool titles are not all 262 hotel titles.
FUNCTIONAL DEPENDENCE → operational value, not enlarged ownership
Which exact properties, functions and rights entered each transfer?
15 JAN / ENE 2018
INFERENCEThe arithmetic below reproduces CAM’s and the AC’s figures. It narrows the numerical discrepancy; it does not establish possession of the authors’ worksheets or their reason for selecting a particular allocation.
ROUND(9,776,003.13 ÷ 220, 2) × 159
= 44,436.38 × 159 = 7,065,384.4241,556.93 × 159 = 6,607,551.87
7,065,384.42 − 6,607,551.87 = 457,832.55Calculations in euros. ROUND = round to cents before multiplication. ACTUA’s 57.14% depreciation concerns the construction-cost calculation, not the full value including land.
The two 159-unit figures can now be reproduced by different arithmetic allocations. This narrows earlier wording that their numerical difference was unexplained; the choice, purpose and institutional treatment of those allocations remain open. Earlier versions and contrary evidence are preserved below.
ALLOCATED DIFFERENTLY → trace the input used at each decision
Which accepted calculation included which components, and why?
OFFER → PLAN / OFERTA → PLAN
DOCFor the apartments, the AC predicts no surplus after the stated mortgage burden. For the facilities, he moves from dependence on the hotel to the inference that CAM is the only likely buyer. CAM links its claimed apartment-debt forgiveness to the service-property price.
SUPPLIED → INFERRED → RECOMMENDED; the two price arguments stay connected
Does dependence on the hotel justify ‘CAM is the only buyer’, or does it call for integrated competition?
16 APR / ABR 2018
CONTRARYLPB/Aweswell’s objections and a higher competing valuation were before the court. The order approved a disposal process with qualifications, publicity and an opportunity for improved bids. It was not a blanket authorization for whole-hotel possession.
OBJECTED → CONDITIONALLY APPROVED → EXECUTION MUST FOLLOW THE TERMS
What was actually notified, compared, authorized and then done?
28 NOV 2018 → 24 OCT 2019
CONTRARYThe service-property branch was executed through Protocol 2150 in November 2018. The AC later reported the €400,000 receipt and applications. In October 2019 the court refused convalidation, identifying departure from the unitary process and its own earlier error.
SEPARATED → JUDICIALLY REJECTED; practical restoration is a separate evidential step
What restored title, possession, operation and the money before the same facilities were offered again?
18 MAY 2021 → 21 FEB 2022
DOCThe 2021 decision refers back to the 2018 plan. Protocol 457 in 2022 invokes the judicial route and states €13,168,082.02 as debt consideration. The third-party bidder’s failure to meet the bond/attendance requirements and the court’s contrary findings remain visible.
REAPPROVED → CONVEYED; reconcile debt, waiver, €400,000 and Registry effects
Which act and account connect the 2018 terms to the final debt extinguished and actual property transfers?
The hotel relationship stays the same. The document, reasoning and procedural consequence change.
Facilities support the integrated hotel; the common exterior/pool value is included in apartment valuations.
Limited standalone use leads the AC to infer CAM is the only likely buyer and to recommend the €400,000 sale.
Removing the facilities impairs improved integrated bids; the separate sale departed from the approved unitary process.
ACTUA figures and allocations; not realised cash.
CAM’s price and approximate waiver; validity and conditions require reconciliation.
€400,000: the AC reported receipt and applications in December 2018. Independent accounting remains a separate test.
€13,168,082.02 in Protocol 457: stated debt consideration, not that amount paid into the estate.
The proposed Montelanza/Molina → CAM connection requires unit, condition, access, information-provider and later-use evidence for each actor. ACTUA’s mixed 13-photo record and three clear apartment interiors do not identify Blocks 4–5 or their owners. 44, 60 and 61 are different source denominators.
Physical control in June 2018, a disposal approval, a 2019 prosecutorial statement and a 2022 conveyance are different events. A later decision cannot cause an earlier belief or retrospectively authorize every earlier act. The separate Fiscalía analysis must identify its actual received documents and stated reasons.
The calculation workbook and accepted price formula; original transfer and payment records; exact post-2019 restitution/Registry acts; bidder disclosures; and the debt, interest, waiver and cash reconciliation. Those are existing case-evidence obligations, not invented proof.
ACTUA-2018-PRIMARY
Original report, service-property explanation and individual valuation schedule; printed pp. 2, 45–46.
The individual schedule gives €41,556.93 per apartment. Fincas 8653/8654 carry asterisks because their value is included in the apartments, not a zero independent value. The photographic/access and purpose limitations remain material.
Open the existing documentary recordCAM-OFFER-C04-C08-C10
CAM’s 12-page offer, pp. 5 and 7–10; inspect the conditions with the figures.
Construcciones Acosta Matos, S.A. proposed a €7,065,384.42 apartment limb and approximate €5,186,061.79 forgiveness against stated debt. It invoked that forgiveness when justifying €400,000 for the 31-property limb. Legal-form and finca-list discrepancies are not silently corrected.
Open the existing documentary recordAC-PLAN-5.5
Plan §5.5, printed pp. 9–12 (physical pp. 11–14 of the reviewed 16-page manifestation).
lo que hace suponer a la AC que el único comprador potencial de las mismas es la entidad Construcciones Acosta Matos, S.A.The AC says CAM supplied ACTUA for a purchase/dación proposal, attaching the valuation as Annex I and offer as Annex II. He compares €6,607,551.87 to €12,251,446.21, predicts no auction surplus, and infers CAM is the only likely purchaser of the service properties. The plan states that the whole-complex value includes property outside LPB’s estate.
Open the existing documentary recordC36-E008
Approval order: objections, qualifications and operative disposal provisions.
The order records the lower-valuation objection and a higher competing valuation, and approves the disposal with publicity and an opportunity for improved bids. It records presentation of the plan on 18 January; the recovered filename/earlier page uses 9 February, which remains a version/date distinction, not a silent correction.
Open the existing documentary recordS05-C36-STAY
Operative stay affecting the specified apartment realisation.
The June stay is a real contrary/protective act. It follows the alleged 7 June material-control shift and must not be drawn as an already-existing order breached on that day.
Open the existing documentary recordAC-QUARTERLY-20181220
AC quarterly report: 28 November deed, €400,000 cheque and applications.
The AC reported receipt and collection of the €400,000 cheque and payment of specified AC fees, with other creditor-payment steps. This is an AC-authored account, not independent bank reconciliation. Do not label the sum ‘never paid’.
Open the existing documentary recordS07-C36-NONCONVALIDATION
Reasoning on unitary disposal, third-party competition, prior judicial error and refusal to convalidate Protocol 2150.
The order states that the separate sale departed from the approved unitary process, acknowledges the court’s earlier error and explains why the facilities matter to improved integrated bids. It refuses convalidation and sets aside the December 2018 direction. Complete contractual, Registry, cash and possession reversal is not proved by that refusal alone.
Open the existing documentary recordC36-E044
Definitive proposal approval; competition, publicity and bidder/bond findings.
The later order approves CAM’s proposal by reference to the 2018 plan. The competing bidder’s bond/nonattendance and the court’s rejection of objections remain material adverse evidence. They are not omitted merely because the project challenges the process.
Open the existing documentary recordPROTOCOL-457-2022
Protocol 457, operative dación provisions, pp. 28–29 of the controlled 76-page copy.
The deed invokes the judicial approvals and execution of the liquidation plan. Its €13,168,082.02 is stated debt consideration, not a cash receipt of that amount. Mortgage-cancellation requests and the five-day court-reporting provision require their own execution evidence.
Open the existing documentary recordThe complete earlier record continues below
At 20-Oct-2017 before later interest. Not automatically the final allowed insolvency credit, set-off amount or price.
A wider physical/economic perimeter than the LPB real-estate estate.
€7,065,384.42 attributed to the dación/payment limb.
≈€5,186,061.79, expressly used by CAM in the economics of the second limb.
Appraisal reference for locales/pools-solaria and operating-support assets.
Separate cash price whose economic justification CAM linked to the first-limb condonation.
Legal control: IBI generally addresses the holder of the taxable property right, while Spanish local-finance law preserves private-law pass-through. For local service charges benefiting occupiers, the owner may be a substitute taxpayer with possible pass-through to the beneficiary. The applicable contract and municipal ordinance still matter period by period. Evidence rule: “statutory taxpayer”, “economic bearer”, “actual payer” and “CAM consideration” are four different fields.
Patricia contemporaneously described the offer as condonation + dación + payment for locales “without charges”. That remains her then-current description; it is not converted into Registry proof that the properties were free of every encumbrance.
The team specifically rechecked whether the registered OB REM obligation appeared on title notes for fincas treated as “free of charges”. Rosa Gual then reported that four fincas were in fact burdened by the OB REM obligation and the court pleading would be corrected.
FREE_OF_MORTGAGE · OB_REM_YES/NO · OTHER_TAX/COMMUNITY/CONTRACTUAL_BURDENS. One source's “free of charges” label does not populate the other two.One commercial package used two legal techniques because the apartments were mortgaged while the other assets were not. The limbs may have been legally severable while economically linked.
If unity supported the discount, condonation and competitive comparison, what legal/economic treatment applied when one limb was later executed separately?
On 19-Dec-2017 a court admitted preliminary disclosure seeking the assignment deed, price, payment and costs. It did not decide that an Article 1535 retracto had been won. On 25-Jan-2018 the IA ended Cristo's specific formal LPB mandate; on 5-Mar the file records LPB's withdrawal and closure.
Project hypothesis: a live judicial information route capable of testing Article 1535 and other debt/negotiation options was neutralised. The exact withdrawal instruction and estate-interest analysis remain open.
Separately, Patricia/Aweswell prepared a six-month preferential acquisition option for Lagune Hospitalidad/Batipart, conditional on financing sufficient to repay LPB debt. This belongs to the contractual funded-exit lane, not the credit retracto.
| Event | Control | Open question |
|---|---|---|
| 26 Jun 2018 | Court stays the mortgage-finca realisation route. | Which part of the composite economics remained executable? |
| 28 Nov 2018 | IA executes OB REM delinking/cancellation and €400,000 direct sale of the 31-finca limb. | How did the condonation/price rationale survive separate execution? |
| Jan–Mar 2019 | Registry obstacle + IA convalidation request. | What authorising title was missing and what material effects existed meanwhile? |
| 24 Oct 2019 | Court refuses convalidation. | Was title/use/possession restored, was OB REM restored, and how was €400,000 accounted? Non-convalidation alone does not prove a completed material unwind. |
| 2021–22 | Competition/reapproval + apartment dación. | What later act replaced, cured or reincorporated the 2018 limb? |
There is no autonomous Spanish status called lender in possession. The controlled comparator is secured/mortgage creditor in de facto material possession or control. Examine administrador de hecho separately only if sustained genuine management/instruction power is proved.
Spanish mortgage law subjects collateral to the debt, but where collateral value is impaired Article 117 Ley Hipotecaria directs the creditor to judicial protective measures, potentially judicial administration. That is not a mortgage-derived right to seize the whole hotel, alter access, carry out works or destroy operations by self-help.
| Date | Act | What it establishes / does not |
|---|---|---|
| 15 Jan 2018 | CAM offer | Private economics, condonation and two mechanisms; no present title/control. |
| 17 Jan | Patricia contemporaneous note | Describes condonation+dación+locales “without charges”, a full hotel and contemplated disclosure/tanteo; evidence of contemporaneous understanding/notice, not title. |
| 25 Jan → 5 Mar | Cristo mandate / DP1041 | IA ends specific formal mandate; file later records LPB withdrawal. Exact internal instruction remains open. |
| 9 Feb | Controlled IA Plan | IA recommends CAM route and uses ACTÚA. |
| 14–22 Feb | Yaiza · IBI / waste | Patricia asks that LPB IBI and operator/CEXP waste be separated; the recovered payment letters remain headed LPB and contain IBI. Formal waste reassignment remains open, while the contemporaneous operating allocation position is documented. |
| 16 Apr | Plan approval + separate interest ruling | Judicial gates; not whole-hotel possession/operation authority. |
| 23 Apr | Cuatrecasas description | Describes CAM as assuming IBI, contingent Community and other costs; those items require taxpayer/contract/payment reconciliation before being counted as added consideration. |
| 25 May / 6 Jun | Preferential option + hotel-industry lease | Separate funded-exit components; not Article 1535. |
| 7 Jun | Material access/control change | Alleged causal threshold for operation/exit harm; not legal possession of the whole hotel by itself. |
| 20 Jun | Patricia unjust-enrichment theory | Contemporaneously attributes assumed alleged Community liabilities to Matos within the acquisition theory; party allegation, not validation of that debt. |
| 26 Jun | Realisation stay | Real protective act, adverse to a simplistic one-direction bias narrative. |
| 28 Nov 2018 → 24 Oct 2019 | Protocol 2150 → non-convalidation | IA executes 31-finca limb; court later refuses convalidation; material/accounting aftermath remains to be reconciled. |
| 2021 | Competition / Ottawa / CAM approval | A later competitive control point existed; equality of economic/legal footing still requires full reconstruction. |
| 21 Feb 2022 | Protocol 457 | LPB apartment dación with stated ≈€13.168m debt consideration; requires bridge to condonation, interest, actually paid IBI/Community items and final accounts. |