The trial against a lawyer and his son in Valladolid for defrauding 700,000 euros to a destitute old man in July

The Audiencia of Valladolid will sit on the bench next month of July to lawyer ASVQ and his son AVG who is accused of having cheated 700,000 euros between 2003 and 2008 to an old man, almost blind and deprived of his mental faculties, through various operations of refinancing of this debt, through the signing of up to 18 exchange mortgages, which made them its main creditors.

The trial will be held on July 10, 11 and 12 in the Fourth Criminal Section of the Audiencia of Valladolid, where father and son face possible sentences of eight and six and a half years in prison, respectively, as reported to Europa Press legal sources.

The public accusation typifies the facts as a continued crime of fraud and, in addition to the aforementioned prison sentences for father and son, requests fines, in the same order, of 8,640 and 7,200 euros, in addition to the declaration of nullity of the totality of the bills of exchange and mortgages subscribed.

For its part, the private prosecution, exercised by the lawyer Ignacio Vegas Nieto, on behalf of the alleged victim, raises the prison requests for both defendants to 17 years for crimes of continued fraud, forgery in public and private documents and accounting offense, along with the cancellation of mortgages and the payment of 50,000 euros of civil liability.

In his letter, the prosecutor maintains that ASVQ has been acting for years against third parties through the instrumental companies Inversiones Multiformes SL and Gestores de Hipotecas Cambioias SL, by means of which he contacts with people with debts of considerable amount and negotiates with them his refinancing, becoming in this way a creditor of the same helped, “with full knowledge of the way of acting”, of his son.

In addition, there is no regulated activity of the aforementioned companies nor regularity in their tax returns. They appear as administrators of the same “interposed” people without any capacity for decision, since father and son are the ones who make all the decisions related to the activity of those societies.

In the present case, the alleged victim of the accused is JLGB, already septuagenarian when the facts began and with an important real estate patrimony – he owned 50 percent of the building located at number 21 of Gamazo Street, manager of another 33% of the same as tutor of one of his daughters and owner of another floor in the Paseo de Zorrilla–, although he suffered an illness that ended in his incapacitation by court order in 2010.

The contact of the latter with his alleged swindlers occurred as a result of the old man endorsing a friend in a credit of 35,000 euros for the purchase of a car that was unpaid by the second, so that the bank ended up executing both.

It was from there when ASVQ and his son, aware of auctions and executions, knew the problem of the old man and his friend and took advantage of this situation to always, according to the accusers, cheat the septuagenarian making him believe that they were going to solve the setback giving him a loan, when what they really did was subrogate in the position of the bank to continue executing the deceived and force him to renew one after another more exchange mortgages, and so up to a total of 18, very short term and with an average APR of 75%

The transactions were subscribed through the instrumental companies of the two defendants and on the Gamazo 21 street property, so that the companies are the main creditors of the victim for a total amount of 700,000 euros, including mortgages, interests and costs. .


It is not the first time that ASVQ has problems with Justice. In fact, in 2011 he was disqualified by the Audiencia de Valladolid for a period of two and a half years for the practice of law for an offense of professional disloyalty committed between 2002 and 2004 for the advice given to a client, owner of a transport agency, which required its services to know how to convert into liquid the real estate that was available to deal with certain debts.

The judgment of the Fourth Section of the Criminal Court of the Audiencia vallisoletana was, however, revoked in 2012 by the Supreme Court, which thus estimated the appeal of the convicted against the ruling that also imposed a fine of 5,760 euros for disloyalty professional but who acquitted him of the continued crime of fraud that the Public Prosecutor also accused him and for which he requested five years in jail.

The Supreme justified the acquittal in the conviction that “the activity finally developed by the defendant through his company and that was entrusted to him by his client has nothing to do with the specific functions of the legal profession”, hence, such and As the ruling adds, an extralegal activity and outside of that profession can not become criminal by the mere condition of lawyer of the person who performs it “, since this would be betraying the meaning of article 467.2 of the Penal Code.

In that case, the Provincial Court understood that what happened is that the victim went to the attorney’s office, with 28 years of practice in the Valladolid Bar Association, and what he did was to refer him to his company for loans in the market secondary financial, Multiform Investments, damaging it economically with practices more typical of usury.

The facts investigated at that time go back to 2007 and have their origin in the complaint filed by the transporter Miguel GM, who had hired the services of the lawyer so that he intervened with respect to debts that fell on his estate. Specifically, the employer weighed four unpaid bills for an amount of 103,468 euros and in respect of them a mortgage had been built on the house of the client’s mother and some farms located in Navabuena.

The public prosecution argued that the complainant, faced with the anguished situation he was going through, followed the lawyer’s instructions at all times, believing that he intervened to paralyze the proceedings opened against him. Thus, it constituted an exchange mortgage on the house that the client owned in the La Vega urbanization, in Arroyo de la Encomienda.

Later, the lawyer implicated the debtor’s mother, who figured as a guarantor with a flat located at number 5 on Cerrada Street in Valladolid.

Although the prosecutor understood it proved that the lawyer seized for his own benefit a total of 61,389 euros, amount left over from the liquidation of a house on Avenida José Luis Lasa de Arroyo (29,490 euros) and the one on Calle Cerrada (38,898 euros) ), property of the mother, the vallisoletano court did not give as proven this fact because, as it pointed out, “although there is no evidence that the defendant delivered such amounts to the client and his mother does not appear to be left.”