30/07/2016 02:32
Baltic temperature
Winners and losers
Turnover TOP
Exchange rates
Leedu litt3.4528 +0.00%
USD1.1113 +0.21%
SEK9.5673 +0.18%
LVL0.7028 +0.04%
Databases of Estonian companies
Text size AAA Print

Rosimannus family faces a 500,000 euro lawsuit

According to the Official Announcements portal "Ametlikud teadaanded", AutoHills OÜ merged with Rekka Veli OÜ to Rekka Veli OÜ on 2/22/2012 and the merged firms creditors have had the opportunity to present their claims to the acquiring company guarantee for six months from the date of publication of the notice (that was on 2/27/2012).

If it's true that Autohills OÜ was the legal owner of Autorollo OÜ, then the legal term of claims against the legal person Autohills OÜ expired already and what creditors then usually try to do is to go desperately after the individuals by claiming criminal related content (which may or may not be connected to the actual claim).

What makes me a bit confident on this is the fact that according to Kreedix, the basic capital of Autorollo has been 136770.91 EUR only meanwhile they claim back 500,000 EUR.

Obviously, if such loans in the millions were allegedly made, they could not be executed or were forged indeed. The other question is how this would help the creditors to re-claim non-existent capital or if its about a smear campaign indeed to pay back the creditor in a "special" way, because if they just want some money back, they just could file a claim against the directors and officers for liabilities upon violation of due care and late filing of bankruptcy petition any time and try it this way.

what I found also remarkable is that according to Kreedix the debt collection company Krediidikorraldus OÜ who is representing the largest creditor is making losses and that the company did not submit annual report for 2009 and 2010 in time and the email registered belongs to the non-existent domain name "justitia.ee."

I sometimes wonder in Estonia what are the requirements to be a debt collector over here, but such requirements seems to be non-existent. Reply to the comment answer
~knut albers [27.11.2012, 15:39]
rate it
Reply to the comment
I guess they did not have enough euros to bribe the judge, eh. Reply to the comment answer
~so how it goes [27.11.2012, 16:11]
The whole claim is laughable as no one lends 130,000 EUR in cash to someone as it is impossible to cash out these amounts from the bank without the authorities getting notified and transport companies do not get any cash from their customers as transactions for trade of goods are done through Letter of Credit only against Bill of Lading.
~knut albers [28.11.2012, 10:00]
Not so laughable given the new information about the scam. I wondered why the lawyer was named as a defendent, but given the laywer was made CEO of the company before the assets were sold as non-cash contributions, it makes sense.

Funny how the funny accounting is tied to so many people with EAS ties. It is a tangled web we weave here.
~@ Knut [29.11.2012, 14:06]
So, what's the latest information on this? I just do not trust debt collectors the same way with such a dubious background and adventurous statements. Yeah, they are doing just their job (sometimes more, sometimes less in compliance with the law), but why the original creditor, Swedbank (a reputated organization compared to most of the players in the banking sector over here), is unable to control who is ending up with the factoring at the end of the day? After all, it doesn't look good on them as well if they are contracting with semi-professionals.

however, funny indeed, where EAS was all involved when things messed up with more than a handful of their clients.
~knut albers [29.11.2012, 14:46]
rate it
Reply to the comment
Main news