Enrique Dami, manager of the legal affairs area of the Banco Nacional de Fomento (BNF), analyzes the lawsuit received by the DNCP from Patria SA de Seguros y Reaseguros. This situation makes it impossible for the financial entity to meet the obligations assumed in the different insurance contracts: comprehensive bank insurance; vehicle insurance; fire insurance, among others.
What happens to the BNF now that you don’t have insurance?
At this very moment the judicial process is still in process, this judicial process we as BNF have already requested a clarification of the scope of the precautionary resolution issued by the Court of Auditors, as well as a revocation in what affects the National Development Bank. In this process we already have a signed contract, with an issued policy and with coverage of all our assets. We still do not have any resolution from the Court of Auditors.
How does this situation affect BNF clients?
It is important to make it clear that today we have insurance. We have coverage, a contract signed with the awarded companies. We have an adjudication already finalized and some policies issued to the satisfaction of the BNF. The process itself continues and within a period established in the PBC, which is 30 days, the BNF must comply with its obligation, that is, pay the policy premium. The term expires approximately on July 15 and from then on we could have some inconvenience. But today we have full coverage of all our assets, if we urgently need to solve this problem to be able to meet our obligations and not be discovered in terms of the different risks covered by the policies.
What will happen on July 15 if this is not resolved?
It is very clear, all insurance, whether comprehensive or vehicle insurance, from the day it is in arrears, from that day it has no coverage. That is very clear.
Was Patria SA de Seguros excluded because it was linked to Banco Continental?
The substance of the matter was never analyzed. We launched a Specification of Bases and Conditions where all the requirements and obligations that potential clients and bidders had to comply with were established. A consultation period and a challenge period are established where the bidder who feels that he is aggrieved can make his protest and it is resolved by the DNCP. The firm Patria SA made its protest, but it was rejected as extemporaneous, therefore, due to a matter of form, the matter was no longer studied. I do not want to go into details regarding the substantive issue because the protest was rejected because it was submitted after the deadline.
CONTEXT
The problem arose around the so-called 403,919 called “Various Insurance Hiring”. A total of six insurance companies managed to meet the requirements of the Bidding Terms and Conditions (PBC) and submitted to the call. But, a firm also interested, which did not present an offer, it was Patria SA de Seguros, was the one that claimed before the Justice.
As the process progressed, Patria SA de Seguros filed a protest with the National Directorate of Public Procurement (DNCP), asking this public entity to order the BNF to modify its PBC at the point where Patria SA could not comply. The DNCP decided to reject the protest as time-barred.
In May, the BNF awarded three insurers the contract. The winners were; the Insurance Company Yacyretá SA the Producer and Rumbos SA
However, Patria SA files a lawsuit before the Justice, being benefited with a precautionary measure on June 14. With this, the call is suspended until it is resolved.
