Hotel function
Reception, services, access, pools and accommodation work together. Restricted standalone marketability does not mean the facilities are unimportant.
POR DERECHO · SUN PARK · DOCUMENTARY JOURNEY
From ACTUA to acquisition
One hotel. Two transfer mechanisms. A contested route from valuation to title.
Follow the document, its use and the resulting act. Chronological links do not prove coordination, intent or criminal liability. Recorded steps, attributed allegations and open tests remain distinct.
Document / recorded stepAttributed allegation or inferenceOpen evidential test
Owner-selected placeholder — provisional, not evidence
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
01 / 06
One hotel; a limited transfer perimeter
Start with the integrated hotel, then identify the properties included in the proposal. Creditor status is not ownership of the whole mixed-ownership complex.
Transaction perimeter
The proposed LPB transaction comprised 159 mortgaged apartments and a separate 31-finca service/locales/pool group. The wider register contains 262 fincas and 220 accommodation units.
Functional dependence is not ownership or authority to operate.
02 / 06
One report; two apartment allocations
This arithmetic reproduces the two figures from source amounts. It is a reconstruction, not CAM’s recovered original worksheet or proof of missing money.
CAM allocation: €7,065,384.42
€9,776,003.13 ÷ 220, rounded to €44,436.38 per accommodation unit, × 159 = €7,065,384.42.
AC allocation: €6,607,551.87
ACTUA’s individual apartment figure of €41,556.93 × 159 = €6,607,551.87. Difference between allocations: €457,832.55.
Different allocation bases—not an unexplained cash disappearance.
03 / 06
Two arguments become two transfer mechanisms
The plan records CAM supplying ACTUA for its acquisition proposal. It uses both a debt/value argument and an argument about the facilities’ dependence on hotel operation.
159 apartments → dación
The AC compares its apartment value with stated debt of €12,251,446.21, predicts little prospect of auction surplus and recommends dación en pago.
31 service fincas → €400,000 sale
Restricted independent use becomes the AC’s inference that CAM is the only likely buyer. CAM invokes approximately €5,186,061.79 of proposed condonation to justify €400,000 against a €489,361.96 service reference.
The offer uses claimed forgiveness on the apartment branch to justify the price on the service branch.
04 / 06
Objections were raised; approval had conditions
The April 2018 decision recorded LPB/Aweswell objections and a higher competing valuation. Your position must not be described as silence or failure to object.
Contrary evidence and objections
The valuation reduction, service-property price and opportunity for better offers were contested. Filing, service, actual reading and deliberate disregard are different evidential questions.
16 April 2018: qualified approval
The court approved disposal with qualifications, publicity and a ten-day better-offer route. Approval of a mechanism does not certify every ACTUA premise.
Objections → response and judicial conditions → implementation to be tested.
05 / 06
Approved together; executed separately; separation rejected
The 26 June 2018 stay concerned identified apartment realization, not every asset or act. It postdates the alleged 7 June entry and was not already in force on that day.
Apartments: realization suspended
The apartment branch was stayed pending appeal. The stay and creditor recognition do not establish authority for whole-hotel possession, works or exploitation.
Facilities: separate November 2018 deed
Protocol 2150 separately executed the €400,000 service branch. The AC’s December report says the cheque became effective and reports payments including remuneration. Independent bank/ledger verification remains separate.
24 October 2019: refusal to convalidate; the court identifies departure from the approved unitary arrangement.
06 / 06
2021–2022: follow the plan into deed and ledger
Later approvals and Protocol 457 continue the documentary route. They cannot retroactively explain a prosecutor’s 2019 belief or establish authority over every hotel property in 2018.
18 May 2021: definitive proposal approval
Retain the court’s stated reasons, including the Ottawa bond/nonattendance findings and rejection of challenges. A potentially financed alternative is not automatically a completed closing.
21 February 2022: Protocol 457
€13,168,082.02 is stated debt consideration in the dación, not cash paid into the estate. Verify the deed’s reporting obligation and actual court receipt. Requested cancellations do not prove all Registry cancellations completed.
Valuation ≠ offered price ≠ proposed forgiveness ≠ debt extinguished ≠ cash received.
The same facilities: three uses of their dependence
ACTUA
Essential common infrastructure; the value of fincas 8653/8654 is included in apartment values, not a standalone zero.
AC inference
Restricted independent use becomes the inference that CAM is the only likely purchaser.
Court, October 2019
Separating the facilities undermines an integrated acquisition and the opportunity for an improved third-party bid.
Separate the financial categories
| Amount | Category | What it does not establish |
|---|---|---|
| €9,776,003.13 | ACTUA whole-complex valuation | Not LPB-only sale proceeds |
| €7,065,384.42 / €6,607,551.87 | Two apartment allocations | Not a proved €457,832.55 cash loss |
| €5,186,061.79 | Approximate condonation claimed in offer | Not independently reconciled final forgiveness |
| €400,000 | Service-price branch; AC reports receipt | Not independent bank reconciliation or subsequent restitution |
| €13,168,082.02 | 2022 deed’s debt consideration | Not cash received by the estate |
2018 → 2019 → 2021 → 2022
offer
CAM-TRX-02
CAM-TRX-02
plan
CAM-TRX-03
CAM-TRX-03
approval
CAM-TRX-05
CAM-TRX-05
reported control
PROJECT-ALLEGATION
PROJECT-ALLEGATION
stay
CAM-TRX-09
CAM-TRX-09
service deed
CAM-TRX-11
CAM-TRX-11
reported cash
CAM-TRX-13
CAM-TRX-13
fiscalia archive
DI-248-2018-ARCHIVE
DI-248-2018-ARCHIVE
non convalidation
CAM-TRX-16
CAM-TRX-16
definitive approval
CAM-TRX-24
CAM-TRX-24
deed 457
CAM-TRX-29
CAM-TRX-29
DI 248/2018 · 07 MAY 2019
2019 Fiscalía reasoning — a parallel, dated strand
Gil Marer alleges that judicial supervision and an asserted dación supplied apparent legitimacy and displaced examination of abusive control. The reported comparison concerns the 7 May 2019 DI 248/2018 archive: it invoked supervision and assignment, while describing the 26 June 2018 order as plan approval. The source register identifies that order as a stay of specified apartment realization. This is a premise-versus-source issue, not proof prosecutors knowingly joined a corrupt agreement.
Selected original-Spanish excerpts have been visually checked against the available copy and are compared below. The full native facsimile, complete transcription and received-document index are not supplied here. Examine every later archive individually; do not replace its reasons with a generic no-action claim.
Read the premise beside the source
Selected original-Spanish passages, visually checked against the available copy; English text is editorial explanation, not a certified translation. No complete transcription, original public facsimile, complete dossier index, actual prosecutorial knowledge, intentional omission or corrupt agreement is certified. The private notification cover and provider locators are excluded.
Approval or suspension? Compare the actual decisions
What the 2019 decree says
aprobado por auto judicial de 26 de junio de 2018
Original Spanish excerpt
What the 26 June order does
ACUERDO la suspensión del proceso de realización
Original Spanish excerpt
The decree describes 26 June as the approval date. The order itself suspends realization of the specified apartments and records the earlier approval of 16 April, clarified on 4 June. It leaves the other pronouncements unchanged and allows realization of the remaining estate assets to continue.
Decisive testIdentify which order, version and property-level authority Fiscalía actually examined. A mistaken date is a possible explanation; the text discrepancy alone does not prove knowing deception.
General supervision is not proof of authority for every act
Judicial supervision invoked
homologa la actuación del administrador concursal.
Original Spanish excerpt
Later judicial scrutiny of separate execution
este tribunal, de forma errónea y contraviniendo lo aprobado en el Auto de fecha 16 de abril de 2018, permitió la venta separada
Original Spanish excerpt
The archive invokes judicial supervision. The later October order identifies an erroneous allowance of separate sale and refuses convalidation. The October ruling is a later comparator: it cannot be represented as information already available to the May prosecutor.
Decisive testSeparate each act, competent decision-maker, property, date and notice. The later refusal does not itself prove practical restitution, unlawful intent, or that prosecutors received the later order.
Assigned assets are not automatically the entire hotel
CAM's status and assignment invoked
ha sido reconocido como acreedor privilegiado y en consecuencia se le han asignado bienes en dación en pago. Huelga hacer cualquier manifestación al respecto.
Original Spanish excerpt
The decree refers to assets, without identifying an entire-hotel conveyance in this passage. The alleged problem is using creditor status and asserted assignment as an answer to complaints about the manner, scope and effects of control. The 2021 and 2022 acts belong later in the chronology.
Decisive testObtain the received-document index and the actual instruments relied upon. Match title, possession, works and exploitation authority to each property and date. Do not turn this passage into a finding of ownership of the whole mixed-ownership complex.
Other stated reasons and contrary context
The 2019 decree acknowledges the plan appeal was pending; it does not describe every decision as final.
It preserves the possibility of civil responsibility under the then Article 36 of the insolvency statute and says Fiscalía is not a superior appeal channel for judicial decisions.
It gives specific insufficiency reasons for the commission allegation, including absence of a reply and no identification of the AC as a recipient. The reviewed material does not prove a bribe.
The decree itself orders archive under Article 773.2 LECrim and Article 5 EOMF. The placeholder's categorical 'no action' wording is therefore not adopted.
Source-copy date caution
The available decree's first page prints 17 October 2019 as a receipt date, although its final page is dated 7 May 2019. Preserve the apparent internal date error and seek the native record; do not silently correct it or infer motive.
Upstream condition and knowledge: test the missing bridge
For the Montelanza/Molina-to-CAM allegation, bind each condition to a unit, controller, date, access/informant record, valuation treatment and later use. ACTUA’s photographs are mixed; the three apartment interiors do not visibly identify unit/finca/block. The 60/61/44 figures have different denominators.
ACTUA / GESVALT →Existing public primary: AC report, 20 December 2018
Reported receipt and applications of €400,000. The AC’s account is not independent bank verification. Existing redacted PDF reused without changing its bytes.
Sources and public-access status
Recovered source is not a public-safe PDF. The links preserve that distinction. Earlier records may retain unresolved wording: this page’s arithmetic is a labelled reconstruction, not a silent rewrite of originals.
JSON · v1 · Existing source room / context
CAM Annex II offer to the insolvency administrator
two-branch proposal: 159 mortgaged LPB fincas by dacion/credit extinction plus 31-finca EUR400,000 sale
Existing source room / contextSHA-256 · source
6130875f968b249befd65b4678df7523ae71e380d2cb3fafe0da4f03ce1a542ePropuesta de Plan de Liquidacion de Luchy Playa Blanca SLU
AC recommendation of CAM transaction architecture and liquidation rules
Existing source room / contextSHA-256 · source
767b5966bc2d380a35633b3dcb884256e0067cc3e4be3b07e5cf5d2f947b1a78Auto approving liquidation plan
approves Plan subject to qualifications, publicity/better-offer route and asset-specific controls
Existing source room / contextSHA-256 · source
e6ac52a7fe34b84a65de3139e41a38fe9b5683ab502c8554e9133f57be2f62e6Auto clarifying Plan approval and better-bid mechanics
sets then-current better-offer figures; refuses mandatory pre-offer due diligence; reserves comparison to court
Existing source room / contextSHA-256 · source
3b236fb81fe512aa57225bf10254362204b552b55ca5c8220646dd0043213622LAJ Diligencia de ordenacion implementing publicity/better-offer period
orders publication and ten-day better-offer route; no conveyance/title effect
Existing source room / contextAuto suspending realisation of listed mortgaged apartments
protective stay of apartment realisation pending appeal; not possession/exploitation authority
Existing source room / contextProtocol 2150 — ob-rem unlinking / sale of 31 fincas to CAM
notarial execution of EUR400,000 branch; records nominative cheque/carta de pago and delivery recitals
Existing source room / contextLAJ preclusion/formalisation Diligencia
declares better-offer period closed and directs formalisation fourteen days after Protocol 2150; later set aside
Existing source room / contextAC fourth quarterly liquidation report
AC reports EUR400,000 cheque effective, LPB collection account opened, identified remuneration paid and other estate creditors contacted
Public redacted PDF availableAuto refusing convalidation of Protocol 2150
sets aside 12-Dec-2018 Diligencia and orders 'No haber lugar a convalidar'; requires renewed competitive route
Existing source room / contextAuto dismissing LPB reposicion and confirming 24-Oct-2019 non-convalidation ruling in full
procedural confirmation; does not itself reconvey fincas or refund EUR400,000
Existing source room / contextAuto republicising CAM proposal
restarts better-offer process with quantified mortgage/community/cost conditions
Existing source room / contextOttawa proposed EUR14.8m offer text
documents a concrete competing proposal; examined version contains placeholders/blank execution blocks
Existing source room / contextProvidencia convening 18-May better-offer licitation and fixing Ottawa bond
convenes licitation appearance; later clarified as not formal auction
Existing source room / contextAuto 164/2021 definitively approving CAM proposal
definitively approves enumerated 159-finca dacion plus 31-finca EUR400,000 branch after Ottawa nonappearance/nondeposit
Existing source room / contextAuto confirming 18-May approval
dismisses LPB/Aweswell challenges and confirms 18-May approval
Existing source room / contextLAJ Diligencia ordering testimony of 18-May -> 15-Oct -> 26-Jan chain
proves then-current court-office finality treatment for testimony; not conveyance
Existing source room / contextProtocol 457 — dacion of enumerated mortgaged LPB fincas to CAM
public conveyance instrument; states EUR13,168,082.02 debt consideration and five-day court-reporting obligation
Existing source room / contextSHA-256 · source
0f162c82a303489c8d522cd659a4754caec347926329a3a0d9d6614f049e9e1dRegistry note for finca 8751
sample evidence CAM title was entered through Protocol 457 while mortgage still displayed under CARGAS
Existing source room / contextCourt filing/receipt of Protocol 457 within five days
would prove compliance with express reporting obligation
Existing source room / contextCourt cancellation order/mandamiento and complete Registry entries
would prove charge cancellation and final property-level Registry implementation
Existing source room / contextIndependent bank / estate ledger / reversal or later cure package
would reconcile cheque effectiveness and AC initial application with 2019 non-convalidation and 2021 reapproval
Existing source room / contextPost-deed AC reports, rendition of accounts and conclusion order/decree
would close debt extinction, payments, residual assets/surplus and termination of insolvency
Existing source room / contextImprovement register — evidence before stronger conclusions
Bind public-safe primary pages for ACTUA, the offer, plan and 2019 ruling; retain original hashes and publication review.
Recover the calculation worksheet; separate value, debt, forgiveness, bid threshold and cash.
Reconcile all 31 service-property effects after non-convalidation: bank entries, restitution/cure and Registry changes.
Compare each Fiscalía archive and received-document index with allegations and corrections actually received.
Identify photo/unit/controller/access provenance before attributing deterioration or misleading information.
Test native PDF navigation, screen readers and more real devices; desktop-width emulation is not all-device certification.