The 1949 Instruction Court of Madrid investigates the existence of a supposed double accounting at the Portobello investment fund.
One of the partners of the Compendium of Dental Clinics Vivanta, participated by the Risk Capital Society, has made available to the Judge an email that was sent by an employee and in which it is supposedly reflected by the false accountability with which it is
Decreased income to avoid payments.
In this way, Portobello would have simulated to dental centers sellers to be in losses or record minimum benefits to escape the payment of successive quantities linked to the progress of the business.
According to the complainant, one of the sellers of clinics to Portobello, received on December 16, 2019 an email sent by an employee of the Vivanta Group, under the control of the investment fund.
In this documentation, it emerges that dental clinics registered real revenues of 492,884 euros compared to 320,000 declared against third parties.
Next to this mail has been contributed another in which the sender calls for the document in question because his job and the future of his family was at stake.
The court maintains an investigation by scamper by the acquisition by Portobello of the Health Grupo Management, paying half of its market price through a “deceptive operative”.
In view of the complaint filed by the seller, the Provincial Prosecutor’s Office of Madrid has indicated that the supposed “manipulation of balance sheets with the object of not paying” the complainant must be investigated.
In this line, the Public Ministry highlights an expert contributed by the complainant in which mechanisms such as “increasing spending” are outlined to “move the benefits in different accounting exercises”.
But also a counter report provided by Portobello and prepared by KPMG in which the real “increment” of costs and “developing evolution of clinics business” is referred to.
But, in no case, to the “manipulation of the information”.
In view of two opinions, the Prosecutor’s Office has requested the ratification of the expert reports at the headquarters to submit them to “contradiction” to be able to determine if a “manipulation” has actually been produced as the complainant or a simple “interpretation of the
Accounting or a justified increase in expenses “.
However, the judge who instructs the case has opened proceedings against those responsible for Portobello and cites the legal representative of the Portobello Capital and Portfolio vivanta societies on January 13.
At the same time, she demands a copy of the sale contract of dental clinics.
Portobello has reacted on his defense denying the veracity of the email with the supposed double accounting and tiling the story of the complainant of “manipulated and fallacious”.
Likewise, he accuses him to urge a “blackmail” against the company and attributes an extortion crime by ensuring that he demanded 80,000 euros in exchange for withdrawing his demands.