The former president of the Cabildo, Pedro San Ginés, has responded to the accusations of the current government group and has denied that he "hid" the contract on which the lawyer Ignacio Calatayud is based to claim another 82,000 euros from Inalsa. In the first budget accepted in its day by San Ginés, fees were established that included all phases of the bankruptcy procedure, but later he signed another leaving aside the bankruptcy incidents. Now, he insists that the first document was only "a draft" that had no "validity".
To support this, he refers to a statement sent 11 years ago by the bankruptcy administrators of Inalsa -when the PSOE denounced that hiring from the opposition-, and to another report signed by one of them, Pedro Martín, on May 9, in which he points out that the budget was "supervised and accepted" by them. “Now, that they are back again with the same false accusations and accusations, I am the one who attaches the recent report made by the judicial administrator, adding that it is all a lie,” says Pedro San Ginés.
What was denied a decade ago is that Calatayud had been hired for 186,000 euros plus IGIC to carry out the entire bankruptcy procedure, stating that the contract was for 86,000 and that it only covered the common phase of the procedure. However, the lawyer ended up carrying out the entire bankruptcy and has already collected 156,400 euros from Inalsa, and now claims another 82,000, without it being clear on the basis of what contracts the subsequent awards were made. And if the first budget that included the entire procedure is not considered valid, what they denounce from Inalsa is that the rest of the phases and incidents were awarded irregularly.
He denies that the second contract harmed Inalsa
In his statement, the former president also denies that this second contract and the exclusion of incidents from the budget "harmed Inalsa", which is what the current government group maintains, based on the invoices that the lawyer has ended up presenting. "With respect to the fees for bankruptcy incidents, the agreement reached was that their accrual was specified upon expiration in costs (...) with which there was no cost to Inalsa or the Consortium. If the process was lost, there was no cost to Inalsa, if it was won with costs, the payment was assumed by the party condemned in costs,” he says, citing the report by Pedro Martín.
However, in the contract that he attaches along with that writing, nothing is detailed in this regard, limiting himself to pointing out that "the fees do not include the agreement phase, nor the liquidation phase, nor the bankruptcy incidents", since it was limited only to the common phase of the bankruptcy procedure.
Regarding the "concealment" of that second contract, San Ginés also denies it. In this regard, what the current government group affirms is that the entry of the document appears in the Inalsa registry, but "it did not reach the administration department.” “Unheard of, as if I also kept the Inalsa registry,” responds Pedro San Ginés, who does not clarify why Calatayud's invoices were paid from the first budget, which he claims was not valid.
Regarding the current fee that the lawyer now intends to charge for a bankruptcy incident derived from that same procedure, the former president insists that the opposing party, the UTE Edam Janubio, should have paid it, having lost the lawsuit. "In the event that justice gives the lawyer the reason in the oath of accounts for the bankruptcy incident (...), the only person responsible for paying will be the president herself, María Dolores Corujo, for not having passed on the lawyer's fees to the losing party, according to what was agreed and explained by the judicial administrator", argues San Ginés, recalling that Calatayud was removed from the procedure after the ruling was issued, in what he describes as "political vendetta". For its part, the government group explained then that it made this decision because the lawyer was withholding information about the procedure from them, and even warned that it would go to court.
“I have barely taken a couple of hours to deny with official documents from the bankruptcy administration itself, this smokescreen full of serious and false accusations, launched today Friday by the government, to try to cover up and prevent anyone from talking about the Sosa scandal (who pays him and why), which the president said two weeks ago that she would clarify in two days, nor the illegal parallel Cabildo that they intend to create in Inalsa”, concludes the nationalist councilor.
