# Article 75 insolvency-administrator report — controlled digital digest

**Stable ID:** `C36-AC-2013-01-15-ART75`  
**Document date:** 15 January 2013  
**Located extent:** 37 searchable pages  
**Custody source:** Drive `15X-qFJIvM78oDE9CdsGjrvVKU5dv6iGc`  
**Status:** complete body located and digested; certified/filed copy, annexes and a page-by-page public transcript remain open.

## Evidential function

This is the insolvency administrator's Article 75 report. It proves what the administrator stated, calculated or proposed in January 2013; it does not by itself turn those statements, valuations or allegations into judicial findings.

## Controlled content

1. **Opening and initial custody.** The report recites the 4-Jun-2012 insolvency application, 6-Jun opening order, the administrator's acceptance on 12-Jun and BOE publication on 26-Jun. Its internal apparent reference to Mercantile Court No. 2 must be reconciled with its general identification of the proceeding before Court No. 1; the conflict is not silently corrected.
2. **Cooperation: a mixed record, not total refusal.** The administrator called cooperation “not acceptable” because documents were late or missing. The same report says the representative attended every requested meeting, relations were “cordial and fluid” and there was a cooperative disposition. The source-faithful reading is delayed/incomplete documentary delivery alongside personal attendance and engagement, not total refusal to cooperate.
3. **Asset perimeter.** The report describes an initial acquisition of 171 apartments, 29 premises and four pools/solarium, followed by the disposal of 12 apartments. Its inventory therefore addresses 159 apartments, 29 premises and four pools. It does not establish LPB ownership of all 262 properties in the mixed complex.
4. **2013 value and liabilities.** The administrator provisionally estimated assets at **EUR 16,752,575.32** and insolvency liabilities at **EUR 9,469,157.93**. Real estate was put at **EUR 15,375,462.70**, after a 24% reduction from a 2008 TINSA valuation. These are not an adjudicated solvency finding: they contain realization assumptions and entries the administrator said were not fully verified.
5. **Causes advanced by the administrator.** Against LPB's tourism-crisis/liquidity account, the report highlighted an unreceived **EUR 737,338.85** Community dividend recorded in the accounts and a February-2012 rent considered insufficient to meet obligations. These remain administrator conclusions subject to contradiction and proof.
6. **Operating contract.** The report describes the 6-Feb-2012 Monterecco Sun Park, S.L. contract, EUR 24,575 monthly rent and EUR 33,915.29 monthly Community charges. The administrator said payment and commencement of operation were not known to him. Lack of recorded knowledge in this report is not, by itself, proof that payment or operation did not occur.
7. **Accounting and support.** The administrator listed missing documents and deficiencies in the accounts' notes and distinguished book values from recoverability. Several entries—intangibles, related-company credit, customers, dividend and deposit—were described as lacking adequate support for full verification.
8. **Future actions, not outcomes.** The administrator stated an intention to review rescission claims, seek recovery from debtors and obtain authority for possible criminal action concerning the operating transfer. The report does not establish that those steps were authorized, filed or successful.

## Relevance to criticism and contradiction

The strongest criticism this report supports is documentary, not result-driven. It requires an explanation of three internal tensions:

- how a provisional asset estimate materially above liabilities led into the later liquidation trajectory;
- how “not acceptable” documentary delay should be read with “cordial and fluid” relations, attendance at every meeting and cooperative disposition; and
- what concrete steps followed the administrator's stated intentions to protect income, investigate transactions and recover claims.

Those questions require annexes, later filings, orders and accounts. The report supports preservation and causation questions, but also contains significant adverse material and cannot be published as standalone proof of crime or judicial impropriety.

## Exact open gaps

- filed/stamped copy and certified hierarchy;
- Annex I and the complete included/excluded creditor list;
- inventory, title, Registry and valuation annexes;
- bank, accounting and payment support for rent, charges and dividend;
- disposition of the requested extension and possible criminal authorization;
- rescission/recovery action chain and outcomes; and
- complete public edition with page-by-page redaction and visual review.

Until those gaps close, this digest is the public-safe edition of the located content, not a substitute for the certified report and annexes.