[Cai Zhi Toutiao] "Bloodlessness"!Millions of buying financial management "stepping on the thunder", customer advice broker!The court was sentenced

Recently, the Shanghai Financial Court made such a judgment. According to the judgment released by the China Magistrates Document Network, the funder Ms. Yan spent a million yuan in the "Jicheng No. 15" asset management plan under the Federal Securities in February 2017. However, after the early expires in July 2018, the investment was delayed and filed a lawsuit in the court.

Photo source: China Magistrate Document Network

It is worth noting that the recent judgment related to the Federal Securities Default Asset Management Program has been announced one after another. The investment amount of investors ranges from 1 million to 3 million.

Earlier, Fed Securities had multiple asset management products stepped on Lei Dongfang Jinyu, Kaidi Ecology and other delisting companies. The company was also suspended for six months. The recently announced judgment is still the "sequelae" brought about by the rapid expansion of the asset management business.

"Solid collection of financial management" or "non -standard"?

Solid collection of wealth management refers to wealth management products for fixed income plus other elastic income. The solid income is mainly based on stable bonds, and the elastic income of "financial management" is determined according to the direction of the trader who manages the wealth management product. Compared to bonds with ordinary stable income, a fixed financial management has an uncertainty, which is more stable than the risk -based financial investment that is completely uncertain. Exposures. However, the financial products of solid income are mainly stable. The main part is still in the solid harvest part. The income obtained is mainly based on the income generated by the solid income. The income generated by the wealth management part is very small.

Non -standard wealth management products are non -standard assets, referring to non -standardized financial management. Non -standard assets are debt assets that have not traded in the interbank market and the securities exchange market. Taking P2P online loans, private equity funds and other products as an example, these products bypass the bank or bond approval department, and directly connect the investment and financing parties through a non -standardized carrier.

What kind of product does investor Ms. Yan buy?

In the judgment, Ms. Yan said that the products she subscribed for was the "Fed Securities Gongcheng No. 15 Collection Asset Management Plan", and the performance measurement was 8.2%/year.

The funding plan for the asset management plan is used to invest in the "Kunlun Trust · Fed Oriental Jinyu Collection Fund Trust Program", and the trust plan is used to transfer 100%equity of the subsidiaries held by Oriental Jinyu. The asset management plan and the trust plan were established in January 2017, and the period of the asset management plan was 24 months. The total scale of trust funds was 300 million yuan, and Dongfang Jinyu promised to repurchase after its expiration.

In terms of guarantee measures, the guarantee measures of the financing party Dongfang Jinyu include: the controlling shareholder Yunnan Xinglong Industrial Co., Ltd. provides unlimited connection liability guarantee for this financing; Dongfang Jinyu actual controller Zhao Ning and Wang Yingzhen provide unlimited connection to the trust plan for the trust plan Liability guarantee guarantee; 100%equity income rights of the financing party's subsidiary Jinyu Jewelery transfer.

In February 2017, Ms. Yan plans to pay an investment of 1 million yuan from the asset management plan. Although the period of asset management plan is 24 months, due to the termination of the trust plan on July 20, 2018, the asset management plan is also terminated in advance on the same day. However, in the long waiting and communication, the asset management plan was delayed. Ms. Yan filed a lawsuit in April 2020, and she received a final trial judgment at the end of July 2022, which took a long time.

In the lawsuit, Ms. Yan believes that Fed Securities has not fulfilled the appropriate obligation and informing the explanation obligations, nor did she guide herself to make a prudent investment decision. Before signed the "Asset Management Contract", Fed of Securities had urged her to pay investment funds. Under the deception of Fed Securities, she paid the investment funds herself.

In this regard, Fed Securities stated that the company established an asset management plan in accordance with the law and established a risk assessment and corresponding management system and recorded it. Entrusted institutions with sales qualifications to sell them. Knowledge, risk preferences, and risk tolerance have been tested, and there is no deceptive behavior described by Ms. Yan.

After investigation, Ms. Yan once purchased two asset management products, one of which is a fixed income type, and the other investment type is non -standard products. Ms. Yan said that when she bought the above two products, she was informed that she was a fixed income product and had paid the principal and income.

During the trial of the case, Ms. Yan applied for whether to identify whether the signed trace of the "Investor Signature" at the "Investor Signature" of the "Federal Securities Collection Asset Management Plan Customer Risk tolerance (Personal Version)" was appraised. After being identified by the Judicial Appraisal Institute of the Shanghai Anti -counterfeit Technology Product Evaluation Center, the signature trace was not written by Ms. Yan himself.

Do you fulfill your diligence and responsibility management obligations?

Compared with improper behaviors during the sales process, as the manager of the asset management plan, whether you can do his diligence and obligations in investment management activities and protect the client's property rights and interests is a question that investors are more concerned about.

In the lawsuit, Ms. Yan believes that after the establishment of the asset management plan, Dongfang Jinyu continued to violate the contract. Fed of the Fed of Securities has not taken measures to maintain the legitimate rights and interests of investors in the asset management plan. It has not required Dongfang Jinyu to provide more guarantee measures.

Ms. Yan said that before Dongfang Jinyu had a serious operation and financial crisis, Fed Securities ignored investors' demands for legal measures as soon as possible. It was not until July 2018 that the Fed that the Federal Reserve will announce that it will be repurchased in advance for a specific equity income right in July 20, 2018, but the Fed of Store Securities announced on July 20, 2018. The guarantor is no longer able to fulfill the repurchase and guarantee obligations of specific equity income. In terms of Federal Reserve Securities, after the project risk occurs, it strictly adopts measures in accordance with the relevant contracts and laws and provisions of the law, and performs measures to fulfill their diligently and responsibilities. The company not only urged the repurchase, but also instructed to announce the early repurchase, and filed a lawsuit in a timely manner. It is now working hard and has fulfilled its diligence and diligence.

Regarding the default of the asset management plan, Fed Securities believes that the direct reason for the failure to be recovered in time is that Oriental Jinyu failed to repurchase on schedule in accordance with the agreed of the repurchase contract, which was a normal business risk. Fed of the Fed of Securities is not the parties in the "Repurchase Contract", and it has no direct legal relationship with Dongfang Jinyu. It cannot change the business risks faced by Oriental Jinyu anyway.

The judgment shows that after the establishment of the asset management plan, in January 2018, Dongfang Jinyu announced that the cumulative additional borrowing in 2017 accounted for 97.02%of the net assets at the end of 2016; the announcement of the shareholders' equity pledge announcement in April; some assets and holdings were released in May Shareholders' shares are judicial frozen and other news. In May 2018, Federal Securities sent employees to participate in the Dongfang Jinyu Briefing Meeting, and sent employees to conduct on -site inspections on the listed company project projects in Dongfang Jinyu the following month, and issued a instruction letter to the Kunlun Trust to urge Dongfang Jinyu and their guarantors to perform their contracts to perform contracts Essence

In July 2018, Fed Securities filed a lawsuit with the High Court of Zhejiang Province. The court ruled that Oriental Jinyu paid the basic price of 299 million yuan in the repurchase of specific equity income rights to the Federal Reserve Securities. Responsibility, the case is in the process of execution.

Dongfang Jinyu was once known as the "Emerald First Stock" in the capital market. In July 2015, the market value of nearly 28 billion yuan was called "crazy stone". However, after Xu Xiang was fined for manipulating the market, Dongfang Jinyu also involved it.

Since 2016, Dongfang Jinyu has faced the decline in the stock price and the downturn in the emerald market, and the capital chain has gradually tense. By 2018, it officially exploded. By 2019, Dongfang Jinyu's total liabilities have been nearly 10 billion yuan, and debt claims can be imagined.

In September 2020, the CSRC announced the administrative penalty decision to Dongfang Jinyu. Due to financial fraud due to the increasing operating income of 557 million yuan and a deficient profit of 359 million yuan, Dongfang Jinyu was punished by 600,000 yuan. Nine responsible persons including Zhao Ning, chairman of the chairman, were given warning and fines, and 4 people including Zhao Ning were banned by the market.

Supervision has pointed out that Dongfang Jinyu "uses all -round Sun company as a platform, fictional jadeite original stone purchase and sales business, and achieves performance goals, subjective and maliciousness through fraud." In March 2021, Dongfang Jinyu officially retired and transferred to the national SME shares transfer system for listing.

He has been suspended for 6 months for private equity management management

Public information shows that Fed Securities was established in July 2001 and registered in Qingdao City, Shandong Province. The registered capital was 3.24 billion yuan. It was initially established by the five securities trading centers of Shandong, Henan, Hunan, Shenyang, and Xi'an.

As of the end of 2021, Fed Securities has 2 subsidiaries, 18 branches, and 59 business departments. In 2021, operating income was 1.013 billion yuan, an increase of 16.64%year -on -year; net profit of home mother was 36.7874 million yuan, a year -on -year decrease of 11.93%. It belongs to one of the small and medium -sized securities firms in the industry.

In terms of asset management business, in August 2015, the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau approved the qualifications of Fed of Securities Asset Management. In the 2016 annual report, Federal Reserve Securities said that "the company's asset management business has achieved explosive growth". As of the end of 2016, the Fed's Solid Securities Asset Management plan raised a total of 14.135 billion yuan, and the net income of asset management business management fees was 196 million.

The good times did not last long. By 2018, the news of multiple asset management products previously issued by Federal Reserve Securities successively reported the news of "stepping on mine", such as Zhonghong Co., Ltd., Kaidi Ecology, Shengyun Environmental Protection, etc., and also included "Jicheng No. 15" this time. Oriental Jinyu involved.

In regular reports, Fed Securities attributed the breach of contract for asset management products to "the environment for the economic downturn in 2018, and the real economy weak environment", and said that it will actively fulfill the diligence and obligations of the manager, do a good job of post -investment management, promote various types of various types Judicial procedures, establish a mechanism for emergency matters to soothe investors.

In December 2019, the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau made a decision to suspend the administrative regulatory measures of private equity management business in Federal Securities, and pointed out that the disclosure of some asset management plan information was not timely, the sales were not standardized, the share type was not proper, and the contract terms were lacking. The internal control of the asset management business has not been in place, which has caused greater risk incidents.

During the same period, the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau issued a warning letter to the then general manager of Federal Reserve Securities and the General Management Department of asset Management, and believed that the two had a management responsibility for the violations of the relevant asset management plan.

In the annual report of 2021, Fed Securities continued to say that for the existing non -bidding management insurance project, the company continued to actively fulfill the manager's diligence and obligations during the reporting period, and strived to do the property preservation of the previous insurance projects, the trial of the case, and the enforcement of the enforcement implementation. Management work promotes smooth progress in the disposal of risk projects. In the lawsuit, investigations and reply from regulatory were also used by investors to prove the "unsuccessful responsibility" of Fed Securities.

In September 2021, the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau replied to the SMS to investors: "The report on John 15, which you mentioned in the reporting materials, did not reflect the actual controller of Oriental Jinyu Zhao Xinglong, and the second second. The major shareholders involved Xu Xiang's manipulation case, and the shares of the financier shares held by Ruili Jinze were frozen.

In addition, in March 2021, the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau issued a reply letter to Fed Securities investors. After verification, Fed Securities has problems during the operation of relevant asset management products (Jicheng No. 1, 5, 9, 15, 16, and No. 20).

Among them, the "Jicheng No. 15" includes: Individual investors have not signed the "Questions on Risk tolerance Capability", which is not standardized; the due diligence of Jicheng 15 is inadequate, and the internal control of the asset management business is not in place. The Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau said that the company has required the company to effectively fulfill the responsibility of manager, properly handle the risks of relevant asset management products, and protect investors' legitimate rights and interests.

Court: Fed Securities bear 50%responsibility

After a comprehensive trial of the first and second trials, the court finally determined that Federal Securities should bear 50%of the responsibility.

After excluding the issuance of asset management products and confirming the loss of investors, the court's review focus is mainly on whether the appropriate obligations of the Fed Securities have fulfilled the appropriate obligations of investors and whether they have fulfilled their diligence.

In terms of the appropriateness of investors, in this case, Ms. Yan applied for judicial appraisal of the signature of the "Risk tolerance Capability Questionnaire", clarifying that the questionnaire of the investigation was not signed by himself, and Fed of Securities did not prove that the risk awareness and risk were performed in other ways to conduct risk awareness and risks. Ability evaluation. The response letter of the Shenzhen Securities Regulatory Bureau also made it clear that the existence of individual investors in Jicheng No. 15 did not sign the "Questionnaire of Risk tolerance Capability" and irregular sales.

In addition, Fed Securities has not proved to prove that Ms. Yan has rich investment experience or has experience in buying high -risk wealth management products in the past. Based on this, the court believes that the Fed of Securities has the problem of not knowing customers and selling appropriate products to suitable financial consumers when selling products involved in the case, and failed to fully fulfill the appropriate obligation of investors.

As a manager, is the Fed of Securities fulfilled the management obligations of diligence? Is there any default?

The court pointed out that, as a professional financial institution, Federal Securities should fulfill the professional obligations of professional prudential attention in the risk control of the capital -related management plan. Oriental Jinyu and its guarantors have violated the agreed on the "repurchase contract" many times, but Fed of Securities did not disclose and control the corresponding risks in time, nor did they take positive and effective measures to promote the obligations of the "repurchase contract" item.

On the other hand, the regulatory authorities also pointed out that Fed Securities has problems such as irregular sales and inadequate control in the process of operating and management cases in operation and management cases. In terms of maintaining investors' legal interests under the "Asset Management Contract", Fed of the Fed of Securities has certain defaults and shall bear corresponding responsibilities.

For investor Ms. Yan, the court of first instance stated that as investors, they should fully understand the transaction content and transaction risks of their own products. When investing in the products involved in the case, the plaintiff did not fully understand the relevant information of the products involved. When I conducted a large investment, I did not sign the contract text. It had certain faults. It should also bear the corresponding unfavorable legal consequences.

Although the funding management plan has not yet ended, considering the fact that investors have caused losses and the degree of fault of Federal Securities, the court of first instance determined that the scope of compensation for the Fed of Securities was 50%of Ms. Yan's capital. The court confirmed this.

It is worth noting that there have been many judgments related to "Jicheng 5" and "Jucheng 15" recently announced. The amount of investors ranges from 1 million-3 million. Due to the different circumstances of the case, the court mostly judged that Fed of Securities bears 30%-50%of compensation liability.

(WeChat public account "Cai Zhi Headline" comprehensive self -consuming: surging news, upstream news, securities Times, etc.)

Edit: Yuan Kai

School pair: Fenghua

Review: Gong Zimo

- END -