2012 · ONE DEBTOR · SEVERAL PERIMETERS
Luchy Playa Blanca, S.L.U. entered Insolvency 36/2012. Sun Park as a mixed-ownership complex; CEXP; Monterecco/Pink; Matkator; Aweswell; and the other owners did not thereby become one insolvency estate.
The primary 15 May 2012 mortgage-auction diligence schedules 158 properties, not 166. The figure 159 appears in other moments/perimeters and 166 belongs to an earlier secondary layer. They must not be used interchangeably.
Contemporaneous material places mortgage enforcement and an auction scheduled for 22 June 2012 as the immediate timing trigger for the defensive insolvency filing. That does not by itself decide who caused the crisis or whether every banking act was correct.
The filing was prepared in early June; the controlled record places court entry on 4 June and the declaration order on 6 June 2012. The declaration concerned LPB, not the whole hotel.
The order recorded approximately €21.603 million of assets and €10.186 million of liabilities. Assets exceeding liabilities do not automatically exclude insolvency under the historical test of regular ability to meet due obligations.
Insolvency powers had to be read in relation to LPB and the procedural phase. They did not, by themselves, create title or universal authority over non-LPB units, CEXP, hotel operation, Matkator or third parties.
Spain’s Insolvency Act 22/2003, in the historical wording applicable at the time, centred actual insolvency on inability regularly to meet due obligations. Accordingly, an asset surplus and a cash-flow crisis can coexist.
This page does not say the declaration order was legally wrong merely because assets exceeded liabilities. Nor does the order itself prove that the entire hotel business was economically unviable. Those are different questions.
The evidence still needed includes the complete filing and annexes, dated maturities, unrestricted cash and pledges, cash forecasts, collectible income, available bridge finance, default documents and the complete enforcement file.
The 28 February 2012 viability plan, before the insolvency filing, already records a commercial platform involving Summers Villages, Sun Park Living and a proposed tour-operator lane. Direct distribution should therefore not be presented as something invented only after insolvency began.
The current record also keeps these perimeters separate:
The insolvency debtor and owner of a majority property/right perimeter, but not 100% of Sun Park.
A contractual and collective layer requiring its own evidence of authority, scope, income and continuity.
Extra-estate ownership and rights that did not automatically enter LPB’s estate.
A foreign shareholder/investment vehicle with patrimonial and cross-border consequences distinct from the insolvency estate.
The mortgage credit moved from the original banking perimeter through Bankia, SAREB, Promontoria Holding 122 B.V. and later Construcciones Acosta Matos, S.A. That sequence answers who claimed the credit at each stage.
The dispute about the swap/hedge, pledge, second mortgage, settlements, notices, acceleration and causation belongs to a different lane. The Valencia litigation and the insolvency accounting must not be collapsed into one figure or conclusion.
Open Banking Origin and Lender of Record → PH122 → CAM assignment / Article 1535 →
Use: LPB and its estate were in Insolvency 36/2012, identifying date, phase and exact power.
Use: the asset surplus matters, but the historical test concerned regular payment of due obligations.
Use: enforcement/auction is the documented immediate trigger; wider causation remains split across separate evidential lanes.
Use: any control over other property, operation, access, customers, works or income requires its own legal and factual basis.
The complete 2012 filing; Mortgage Enforcement 90/2012; property-by-property 158/159/166 reconciliation; arrears/default notices and ledgers; complete record of attempted conclusion/exit; direct-operation dataset; public-safe Valencia record; and an act-by-act matrix of duty, knowledge, corrective capacity, causation and harm.
Evidence-led publication. The existence of the insolvency proceeding and adverse decisions are published with their limits. No fraud, professional negligence, judicial error, bank bad faith or personal responsibility by association is declared.