Adjunct Superintendent Resolution for Prudential Supervision No. 031-2025-SMV/10

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendency
Electronically signed document within the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 031-2025-SMV/10 Lima, May 20, 2025 Subject: Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. is sanctioned with a fine of one (1) UIT, for having committed six (6) infractions: four (4) serious infractions typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation and two (2) minor infractions typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subsection 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation for not timely attending to the complaint filed by the member, for not sending the payment receipts to the member, for not sending the general conditions of their contract to the member, for not complying with what is stipulated in the contract regarding the auction proposal by the member; and for not sending the member the assembly calendars, nor the account statements; respectively.

Administered by: Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A.
Subject: Administrative sanctioning procedure
File No.: 2024036343

The Adjunct Superintendent for Prudential Supervision

SEEN:
The administrative file No. 2024036343 and Report No. 559-2025-SMV/10.3, issued by the General Superintendentship of Prudential Compliance; and,

CONSIDERING:

Pursuant to Article 1 of Law No. 29782, Law for the Strengthening of Securities Market Supervision, the name of the National Commission for the Supervision of Companies and Securities (CONASEV) is replaced by that of the Securities Market Superintendency (SMV), so that any reference to CONASEV in legal norms shall be understood as referring to the SMV;

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

I. FACTS

On September 9, 2021, COMPLAINANT 1 signed with AUTOPLAN EAFC the “Collective Fund Administration Contract – Purchase Certificate Modality”, of the Autoplan-002 program, with contract No. 033394, with the value of the purchase certificate of US$ 12,000.00 (twelve thousand with 00/100 American dollars) (hereinafter, CONTRACT);
By the document received on April 21, 2022, the COMPLAINANT filed a complaint with the Securities Market Superintendency (SMV) against AUTOPLAN EAFC 2, in which he refers, among other things, that he was not formally informed about the date of his first assembly (September 22, 2021), nor was he sent or delivered the schedule for the realization of the first three assemblies in which he was entitled to participate;
On the other hand, the COMPLAINANT states that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not send him the payment receipts corresponding to all the payments he made. Additionally, the COMPLAINANT points out that he was never delivered the monthly account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT;
Likewise, the COMPLAINANT indicates that he was never sent the general conditions of the CONTRACT printed and with the specification of the group to which he belonged and his vacancy number, among other data. The complainant also points out that on November 23, 2021, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent him an email informing him that they had received his request for an auction proposal, when according to the complainant, he never presented any request, either physical or virtual;
For his part, the COMPLAINANT mentions that he sent an email to AUTOPLAN EAFC on December 15, 2021, complaining about the lack of delivery of the car and requesting the return of his contributions; however, without obtaining a response, the complainant reiterated his request via another email sent on February 7, 2022, which was answered according to the COMPLAINANT on February 9, 2022 and indicates that they did not give him a response or solution to his case, mentioning that AUTOPLAN EAFC only limited itself to stating that his complaint had been forwarded to the corresponding area;
With the aforementioned complaint, the COMPLAINANT, among other evidence, presented the following:

a. Copy of the document titled “Results of Allocation Assembly Program – 002” of September 22, 2021. b. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0083346 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 24.21 (Twenty-four with 21/100 American dollars), with an issue date of September 9, 2021.
c. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0083376 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 250.10 (Two hundred fifty with 10/100 American dollars), with an issue date of September 11, 2021.

1 In the annex attached to this resolution, the complete data of the natural persons to whom the denominations used in this resolution belong are detailed, and likewise, if applicable, the email addresses.
2 With File No. 2022016847.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

d. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0083380 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 566.40 (Five hundred sixty-six with 40/100 American dollars), with an issue date of September 11, 2021. e. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0083387 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 0.15 (zero with 15/100 American dollars), with an issue date of September 11, 2021. f. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0084426 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 274.16 (Two hundred seventy-four with 16/100 American dollars), with an issue date of October 21, 2021. g. Copy of electronic invoice No. F001-0084984 issued to the COMPLAINANT for the amount of USD 274.31 (Two hundred seventy-four with 31/100 American dollars), with an issue date of November 18, 2021. h. Copy of the payment receipt made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of S/ 3,103.27 (three thousand one hundred three with 27/100 soles), under operation No. 28686562.
i. Copy of the payment receipt made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of S/ 92.00 (ninety-two with 00/100 soles), under operation No. 95475709.
j. Copy of the payment receipt made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 274.16 (two hundred seventy-four with 16/100 American dollars) made via bank transfer from BCP, on October 21, 2021, under operation No. 36600571. k. Copy of the payment receipt made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 274.31 (two hundred seventy-four with 31/100 American dollars) made via bank transfer from BCP, on November 18, 2021, under operation No. 85689569.
l. Copy of the payment receipt made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 274.31 (two hundred seventy-four with 31/100 American dollars) made via bank transfer from BCP, on December 21, 2021, under operation No. 69598580.
m. Copy of the email sent by the representative of the complainant to AUTOPLAN EAFC from COMPLAINANT1EMAIL to atc1@autoplan.pe, dated December 15, 2021, where the COMPLAINANT requests the return of the money. n. Copy of the email sent by the representative of the complainant to AUTOPLAN EAFC from COMPLAINANT1EMAIL to atc1@autoplan.pe, atc2@autoplan.pe, contacto@autoplan.pe, kcontreras@autoplan.pe, dated February 7, 2022, where the COMPLAINANT reiterates the email sent on December 15, 2021, in which he requested the return of his contributions. o. Copy of the email sent by the member attention area (contacto@autoplan.pe) of AUTOPLAN EAFC to the representative of the COMPLAINANT (COMPLAINANT1EMAIL), among others, dated February 9, 2022, through which the receipt of the complaint filed is acknowledged and the deadline for its attention is indicated. p. Copy of the email sent by Autoplan EAFC (remantes@autoplan.pe) to the COMPLAINANT (COMPLAINANT1EMAIL), dated November 23, 2021, communicating the receipt of the “auction proposal request” with request No. 202105521.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

With Letter No. 2158-2022-SMV/10.3, notified on May 6, 2022 (hereinafter, LETTER), the complaint filed by the COMPLAINANT was made known to AUTOPLAN EAFC so that it would send the corresponding comments and it was required among other things, the following documentation and/or information:

“(…) b. Copy of the CONTRACT signed between its representative and the COMPLAINANT (…) d. Copy of the notification receipt of the call to the three (3) first Assemblies in which the COMPLAINANT was entitled to participate, as well as the respective Calendar of Members’ Assemblies, for the CONTRACT signed. f. Receipt of sending of the account statements sent to the COMPLAINANT, since his entry into the CONTRACT signed. (…) h. Copy of the payment receipts issued by AUTOPLAN EAFC to the COMPLAINANT, as well as the copy of the receipt of sending thereof. Furthermore, specify the reasons why only invoices for the amount of US$ 1389.33 were issued, considering that the COMPLAINANT refers to having paid a sum greater than that.
i. Copy of the response provided to the COMPLAINANT regarding the email of December 15, 2021, through which he requested the return of the contributions.
j. Comment and substantiate the reason why the email of November 23, 2021 was sent to the COMPLAINANT, referring to the Proposal for Auction Request, Request No. 202105521, considering that the COMPLAINANT states that he has not presented any request.
(…)”.

In response to the LETTER, on June 16, 2022, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent its comments regarding the complaint, as well as the information requested by the SMV;
Furthermore, it stated that on May 24, 2022, it signed with the COMPLAINANT an Extrajudicial Transaction (hereinafter, TRANSACTION). According to which, AUTOPLAN EAFC recognizes in favor of the complainant the sums of US$ 822.48 (Eight hundred twenty-two with 48/100 American dollars) and S/ 3,195.27 (Three thousand one hundred ninety-five with 27/100 soles), for the concept of total return of contributions corresponding to the CONTRACT. On the other hand, the COMPLAINANT recognizes that this agreement puts an end definitively to any controversy linked to his complaint;
Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC presents a copy of a document dated May 24, 2022, through which the COMPLAINANT addresses the General Superintendentship of Prudential Compliance (hereinafter, IGCP), in order to withdraw his claims and the procedure; as well as to request the filing of the complaint 3 ;

3 Without prejudice to the foregoing and by virtue of article 200, numeral 200.7 3 of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, the General Superintendentship of Prudential Compliance continued with the analysis of the facts contained in the complaint to the extent that these could violate the general interest, within which is included verifying the compliance with the regulations governing the collective fund system by AUTOPLAN EAFC.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

With this defense, AUTOPLAN EAFC, among other evidence, presented the following:

a. Copy of the “Collective Fund Administration Contract of Purchase Certificate Modality of the AUTOPLAN-002 Program” No. 033394, Program Autoplan-002 for the allocation of a purchase certificate of US$ 12,000.00 (Twelve thousand and 00/100 American dollars) signed by the representative of the Complainant, on September 9, 2021. b. Copy of the TRANSACTION dated May 24, 2022 signed by the representatives of AUTOPLAN EAFC and COMPLAINANT.
c. Copy of the document titled “Withdrawal” signed by the representative of the COMPLAINANT on May 24, 2022, through which the complainant withdraws from the claims contained in his complaint and requests the definitive filing of his complaint.

Through Letter No. 2591-2024-SMV/10.3 notified on June 18, 2024 (hereinafter LETTER 1), the IGCP reiterated what was requested through the LETTER and requested additional information;

a) Present sufficient evidentiary means, in order to prove the delivery of a copy of the Contract signed to the Complainant and its general conditions, (…).

With Letter No. 3716-2024-SMV/10.3, notified on August 28, 2024 (hereinafter, LETTER OF CHARGES), an administrative sanctioning procedure was initiated against AUTOPLAN EAFC;
AUTOPLAN EAFC has not presented its defenses to the administrative sanctioning procedure initiated through the LETTER OF CHARGES, up to the date of issuance of this resolution;
The charges formulated have been the subject of evaluation by the IGCP in Report No. 559-2025-SMV/10.3, which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Adjunct Superintendency;
In observance of the Principle of Due Process contemplated in Article IV, subsection 1, numeral 1.2 of the Preliminary Title, as well as in Article 248°, numeral 2, of the Single Text of Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG), through Letter No. 2479-2025-SMV/10, the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to AUTOPLAN EAFC for its review;

II. MATTERS TO BE DETERMINED

In the present administrative procedure, in the opinion of this Adjunct Superintendency, it corresponds to determine the following:

a) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subsection 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), for not having sent the member his assembly calendars held from September 2021 until May 2022 in accordance with what is established in clause 10, numeral 10.4, subsection I) of the contract and in Article 70° of the REGULATION;

b) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subsection 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having sent the member the account statements corresponding to the collective fund administration contract signed in accordance with what is established in clause 10, numeral 10.4, subsection I) of the contract and in Article 70° of the REGULATION;

c) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not complying with the collective fund administration contract, since it did not comply with the legal deadline to respond to the complaints filed by the complainant;

d) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not complying with sending the member all the payment receipts in accordance with what is established in clause 7, numeral 7.6 of the contract;

e) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having sent the complainant the General Conditions of the contract where the group and number of vacancy of the same are recorded, failing to comply with what is stipulated in clause third, numeral 3.2 and clause fifth, numeral 5.2 subsection 5.2.1 of the CONTRACT;

f) Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having carried out the procedure for presenting an auction proposal, in accordance with what is stipulated in clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT;

g) Whether it corresponds or not to impose a sanction on AUTOPLAN EAFC;

III. ANALYSIS

3.1. Of the Applicable Normative

Regarding the CONTRACT, Article 21, first paragraph of the REGULATION provides:

“Article 21.- Contract
The Contract is of a private nature and has a collective character, it regulates the relations between the Members and the Administrator, and in it the rights and obligations of both parties are established; its content is governed by what is established in Article 95 of the Regulation.
(…)”. (Underline added).

A. ON THE DELIVERY OF ACCOUNT STATEMENTS TO THE MEMBER AND CORRESPONDING ASSEMBLY CALENDAR

Clause 10, numeral 10.4, subsection l) of the CONTRACT establishes that the following are the functions and obligations of AUTOPLAN EAFC:

“10.4 FUNCTIONS AND OBLIGATIONS OF AUTOPLAN:
The following are the functions and obligations of the Administrator:
(…) l) Others provided for in the Regulation.
(…)”

Article 70 of the REGULATION provides as follows:

“Article 70.- Obligation to provide periodic information to Members The Administrator has the obligation to provide information to its Members about their account statements and the Assembly calendar. When applicable, it will send information about the price variation of the goods under specific Goods Programs and other services they contract. Account statements must be sent at least with the periodicity in which the Assemblies are held. The Assembly calendar must be sent with a minimum periodicity of three (03) months. The price variation of the goods under specific Goods Programs may be included in the account statement that the Administrator sends to the Member. The Member’s account statement must contain at least the information contained in Annex 8. The modality to be used to provide the aforementioned information must be agreed upon in the Contracts. Additionally, the Administrator may use different electronic communication means that allow the Member to be able to take adequate and timely knowledge of the respective information. In the event that email is used, this medium must guarantee non-repudiation and allow the traceability of the communication”. (Underline added).

B. ON THE DEADLINE FOR ATTENDING TO COMPLAINTS

Regarding the resolution of complaints, Article 68° of the REGULATION provides as follows:

“Article 68.- Resolution of complaints
The Administrator must have responsible personnel to attend to the complaints of the Members, subject to what is established in the Norms applicable to complaints and claims against entities supervised by the Securities Market Superintendency - SMV, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006- 2012-SMV-01, or the norm that replaces it.”

In that sense, Article 3 of the “Norms applicable to complaints and claims against entities supervised by the Securities Market Superintendency - SMV” approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV-01 (hereinafter, NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND CLAIMS) establishes the procedure for attending to complaints:

“Article 3.- Attention of complaints by legal entities authorized by the SMV Without prejudice to the compliance with the norms that determine the direct attention of complaints that final consumers could formulate and the obligation to have a Complaints Book, within the framework of what is provided by articles 24 and 150 of the Consumer Protection and Defense Code, Law No. 29571, the legal entities to which the SMV has granted operating authorization are obliged to directly attend any complaint by their clients regarding the services they provide, within a maximum deadline of thirty (30) calendar days from the date of presentation of the respective complaint. This deadline may be extended by another equal one when the nature of the complaint justifies it, a situation that is made known to the claimant before the end of the initial deadline. If the claimant requires it, the response must be made in writing. (…).” (Underline added).

Likewise, clause tenth, numeral 10.1, subsection c) of the CONTRACT establishes:

“TENTH CLAUSE: OF THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría
10. D. RIGHTS OF THE ASSOCIATES
(…) c). (…)
For its part, in the event that claims are filed by the Associate, these claims will be forwarded to the corresponding area of AUTOPLAN, which will have a period of thirty (30) calendar days to resolve the stated claim, counted from the receipt thereof. This period may be extended depending on its nature. (…)”.
C. REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF PAYMENT RECEIPTS
25. With respect to the obligation of AUTOPLAN EAFC to submit the respective payment receipts to the associate, clause 7, numeral 7.6, of the CONTRACT establishes the following:
“SEVENTH CLAUSE: OF THE PAYMENTS
(…)
7.6 Autoplan will issue the respective payment receipts in the name of the Associate, which will be sent to the address indicated by the Associate in the General Conditions of this Contract. Prior to the aforementioned, Autoplan must validate the payment made in the Collection Accounts and identify that it has been made, which is done for the obtaining of the Purchase Certificate.
(…)” (Underlining added).
D. REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT
26. In relation to the obligation of AUTOPLAN EAFC to submit the general conditions of the contract to the associate, clause third, numeral 3.2 and clause fifth, numeral 5.2, subsection 5.2.1, and clause eighteenth of the CONTRACT states the following:
“THIRD CLAUSE: OBJECT
(…)
3.2 The General Conditions of the Contract will contain, among other things, the data of the Associate and the Group, as well as the duration of the latter and of the Contract. Likewise, the value of the Purchase Certificate, the details of the awards, the amount of the installments to be paid, their due date, and other information required by the SMV will be recorded.
(…)
FIFTH CLAUSE: ENTRY OF THE ASSOCIATE, DURATION AND TERMINATION OF THE GROUP (…)
5.2 ACCEPTANCE OF THE ASSOCIATE
5.2.1 Once the registration of the applicant is approved, he will enter the Group as an Associate, for which AUTOPLAN will send him the General Conditions of the Contract duly signed, which will contain the Associate code with the identification of the Program to which he belongs, the Group, the position in the Group and its sequence within the position”.
(…)

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría EIGHTEENTH CLAUSE: CORRELATION OF DOCUMENTS The General Conditions of the Contract form an integral part of the latter, so in both documents the same identification number will be recorded in the upper right margin. In this sense, the signing of the General Conditions of the Contract will imply the Associate's agreement with respect to the terms and conditions contained in the Contract, which the Associate declares to have received, read and understood, as established in Clause Third and Seventeenth of this document”. E. REGARDING THE PRESENTATION OF THE AUCTION PROPOSAL FORM
27. Clause first and eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT establishes the following:
“FIRST CLAUSE: DEFINITIONS
Auction Proposal Form: Document that is filled out by the associate to present his Auction at the monthly Assembly (…).
(…)
Eighth Clause: Of the assemblies and the modalities of award (…)
8.5. Awards by auction: The proposals will be presented, through the Auction Proposal Form, which will be provided by AUTOPLAN and must be correctly filled out and signed, otherwise it will lack value and be annulled…(…)”
3.2. Of the Charges Formulated
A. REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSEMBLY CALENDARS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT
28. According to what is established in the regulations exposed, the administrator company has the obligation to provide information to the associate, regarding the assembly calendar, which must be informed with a minimum periodicity of three (3) months, through the modality established in the CONTRACT;
29. In that sense, AUTOPLAN EAFC had to deliver to the COMPLAINANT, in his capacity as an associate of the “Autoplan-002” Program, Group 45, his assembly calendars in which he was entitled to participate as an associate, from the first assembly 4 in which he was entitled to participate;
30. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT has stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not formally inform him of the date of his first associate assembly, nor did he send him the schedule for the realization of his first three (3) associate assemblies. Likewise, the COMPLAINANT states that the administrator company failed to comply with what is established in the last paragraph of point 4 5 of the Associates' Guide, saying that AUTOPLAN EAFC also would not have delivered the calendar of the subsequent assemblies to his first assembly;
31. Based on what was stated by the COMPLAINANT, through the OFFICE the administrator company was requested “Copy of the notification charge of the call to the (3) first Assemblies in which the complainant was entitled to participate, as well as the respective Calendar of the Associate Assemblies, by the CONTRACT signed”, said request for information was reiterated by the SMV, through the OFFICE 1;
32. However, AUTOPLAN EAFC did not present probative means that accredited the notification charges of the calls to the (3) first assemblies, nor for the subsequent assemblies in which the complainant was entitled to participate, corresponding to the CONTRACT;
33. In that sense, AUTOPLAN EAFC would have failed to comply with clause 10, numeral 10.4, letter l) of the CONTRACT and article 70° of the REGULATION, in that it was not accredited that it sent the COMPLAINANT the calendar of the assemblies in which he was entitled to participate;
34. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC THAT it would have incurred in one (1) minor infraction typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not to timely send to the associates the information on the account statements or assembly calendar”;
B. REGARDING THE DELIVERY OF ACCOUNT STATEMENTS TO THE ASSOCIATE
35. Administrator companies have the obligation to provide information to their associates, regarding their account statements, which must be sent at least with the same periodicity in which the assemblies are held and, through the modality established in the CONTRACT. In that sense, AUTOPLAN EAFC had to send to the COMPLAINANT his monthly account statements during the validity of the CONTRACT, that is to say for the present case, they had to be sent monthly;
36. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT manifested that AUTOPLAN EAFC never complied with sending him his account statements, for which, through the OFFICE the administrator company was requested “charge of submission of the account statements sent to the complainant, since his entry by the CONTRACT signed”, said request for information was reiterated, through OFFICE 1;
37. Nevertheless, AUTOPLAN EAFC did not present probative means that accredited the submission to the COMPLAINANT of the account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT;
38. In that sense, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC would have failed to comply with clause 10, numeral 10.4, letter l) of the CONTRACT and article 70° of the REGULATION, in that it would not have complied with sending the monthly account statements to Complainant corresponding to the CONTRACT;
39. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) minor infraction typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not to timely send to the associates the information on the account statements or assembly calendar”;
C. REGARDING THE CLAIM RESPONSE PERIOD
40. The period for the resolution of claims of the associates by AUTOPLAN EAFC is thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt thereof, which may be extended by an equal period if warranted, prior communication to the associate;
41. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT states that he sent an email to AUTOPLAN EAFC on December 15, 2021, complaining about the lack of delivery of the car and requesting the return of his contributions. However, he states that upon not obtaining a response, he reiterated his request through another email sent on February 7, 2022, regarding which, through an email of February 9, 2022, AUTOPLAN EAFC merely indicated that his claim had been forwarded to the corresponding area;
42. The COMPLAINANT presented a copy of an email sent on December 15, 2021 by the representative of the complainant (COMPLAINANTEMAIL1)
6 to the email atc1@autoplan.pe through which the COMPLAINANT requests the return of the money due because to date they have not received the vehicle, which states that it was required urgently the first days of September;
43. Likewise, there is in the file a copy of an email sent on February 7, 2022 by the representative of the COMPLAINANT to atc1@autoplan.pe, atc2@autoplan.pe, contacto@autoplan.pe and (kcontretras@autoplan.pe) through which the COMPLAINANT, among other complaints, reiterates what was indicated in the email of December 15, 2021;
44. Additionally, there is in the file a copy of an email sent on February 9, 2022 by Associate Attention (contacto@autoplan.pe) to the COMPLAINANT, indicating that his claim has been forwarded to the corresponding area for attention; and stating that the response period for the resolution of the claim is thirty (30) calendar days from the receipt thereof;
45. In view of the foregoing, through the OFFICE and OFFICE 1, AUTOPLAN EAFC was requested “Copy of the response provided to the complainant in attention to the email of December 15, 2021, through which he requested the return of the contributions (which was reiterated through email of February 07, 2021)”, as well as any other information and/or documentation that he considers pertinent to the case or that allows clarifying the denounced facts;
46. Nevertheless, AUTOPLAN EAFC did not present the information requested in the previous consideration. Furthermore, of not presenting any comment or proof linked to the response to the claim made by the COMPLAINANT;
47. Considering the above, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is provided by article 68 of the REGULATION, article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND CLAIMS and the
tenth clause, numeral 10.1, letter c) of the CONTRACT; in that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with the legal period established to provide a response to the claim filed by Complainant;
48. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”;
D. REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF PAYMENT RECEIPTS
49. AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to issue the respective payment receipts in the name of the associate, which must be sent to the address indicated by the latter;
50. The COMPLAINANT mentions that taking as a reference a reference exchange rate, he would have paid for the CONTRACT in total the sum of S/ 6,157.27 (six thousand one hundred fifty-seven with 27/100 soles); however, the COMPLAINANT refers that AUTOPLAN EAFC only invoiced him a total of US$ 1,389.33 (one thousand three hundred eighty-nine with 33/100 US dollars); that is, S/ 5,001.58 (five thousand and one and 58/100 soles). On this particular, the COMPLAINANT affirms that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not send him the payment receipts corresponding to all his payments made, alleging a breach of clause 7.6 of the CONTRACT;
51. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT presented copies of the payment records that he made through the Banco de Crédito del Perú in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC, for the amounts of S/ 3,103.27 (three thousand one hundred three with 27/100 soles); S/ 92.00 (ninety-two with 00/100 soles); US$ 274.16 (two hundred seventy-four with 16/100 US dollars) made on October 21, 2021; US$ 274.31 (two hundred seventy-four with 31/100 US dollars) made on November 18, 2021, and US$ 274.31 (two hundred seventy-four with 31/100 US dollars) made on December 21, 2021;
52. Thus, the COMPLAINANT presented six (6) electronic invoices that were sent to him by AUTOPLAN EAFC;
53. Based on the payments and invoices presented by the complainant, it is observed that for the payment made for the total in soles of S/ 3,195.27, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent him the following invoices: No. F001-0083346 (issued on September 9, 2021), No. F001-0083376, No. F001-0083380, No. F001-0083387 (issued on September 11, 2021) for a total of US$ 840.86, which include the initial payment of US$ 840.71 composed of the registration fee of US$ 566.40 and the first monthly installment of September 2021 of US$ 274.31;
54. Likewise, for the payments made by the COMPLAINANT in the months of October and November 2021 for US$ 274.16 and US$ 274.31, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent him the invoices: No. F001-0084426 (issued on October 21, 2021) and No. F001-0084984 (issued on November 18, 2021) respectively, corresponding to the monthly installments of said months;
55. Consequently, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have sent him the payment receipt corresponding to the payment that the COMPLAINANT made on December 21, 2021 for the amount of US$ 274.31;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría
56. In attention to the denounced facts, through the OFFICE he was requested to AUTOPLAN EAFC, the “Copy of the payment receipts issued by AUTOPLAN EAFC to the complainant, as well as the copy of the charge of submission thereof. (…);
57. Nevertheless, at the date of issuance of this office 7 the administrator company has not presented any documentation that allows accrediting that it sent to the COMPLAINANT the payment receipt for the amount paid of US$ 274.31 corresponding to the month of December 2021, indicated previously;
58. Considering the above, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is provided by clause 7, numeral 7.6 of the CONTRACT, in that it would not have complied with sending all the payment receipts to Complainant within the framework of the CONTRACT;
59. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”; in that it would not have complied with sending all the payment receipts to the complainant;
E. REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT
60. AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to send the General Conditions of the contract duly signed, which form an integral part of the CONTRACT;
61. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT has stated that they never sent him the printed general conditions and with the specification of the group to which he belonged and his vacancy number among other data;
62. Therefore, through the OFFICE the SMV requested AUTOPLAN EAFC to present his comments; as well as any information and/or documentation that allows clarifying the denounced facts. Furthermore, through OFFICE 1 (letter a 8 ) the IGCP requested AUTOPLAN EAFC to accredit the delivery to the COMPLAINANT of the general conditions of the CONTRACT;
63. Regarding this, it should be noted that although AUTOPLAN EAFC sent a copy of the CONTRACT signed by the COMPLAINANT, it is observed that he did not comply with presenting a copy of the General Conditions of the CONTRACT, nor any probative means that accredited that he sent to the complainant said General Conditions where the group and vacancy number, among other data of the complainant's contract, are recorded;
64. Considering the above, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is provided by clause third, numeral 3.2 and clause fifth, numeral 5.2 subsection 5.2.1 of the CONTRACT, in that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with sending the General Conditions of the CONTRACT to the associate;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría
65. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”;
F. REGARDING THE PRESENTATION OF THE AUCTION REQUEST FORM
66. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT refers that on November 23, 2021, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent him an email, in which they informed him that they had received his auction request proposal. However, according to the COMPLAINANT, he never presented any request, physical or virtual, making reference to what is provided in clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT. In view of the above, he requests that AUTOPLAN EAFC present the email or the auction presentation form, through which he made the supposed proposal;
67. Regarding this, the COMPLAINANT attaches to his complaint, a copy of an email sent by remates@autoplan.pe to COMPLAINANTEMAIL1 on November 23, 2021, through which the COMPLAINANT is confirmed the receipt of his auction request proposal No. 202105521 of date November 23, 2021, for twenty-two (22) installments;
68. In view of the above, the SMV requested AUTOPLAN EAFC through the OFFICE (letter j) and in a reiterative manner through OFFICE 1, to present his comments and substantiate the reason why he sent the email indicated in the previous considerations, taking into account that the COMPLAINANT states that he did not present said request, as well as any other information and/or documentation that he considers pertinent to the case and that allows clarifying the denounced facts. Nevertheless, AUTOPLAN EAFC did not present any information and/or documentation regarding this;
69. It should be noted that, from the review of the document called “results of the award assembly of the program-002 9 ”, of date November 25, 2021, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC informs that the COMPLAINANT in the assembly of November 24, 2021 was awarded as a substitute, having presented an auction for twenty-two (22) installments within the framework of his CONTRACT. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC communicated said results to the SMV 10, through the document called “Communication on Results of Subsequent Assemblies” corresponding to the Autoplan-002 Program, Group No.45, Assembly No.11 of date November 24, 2021, in whose numeral 4 “Results of Substitute Associates” it is recorded as “First” the CONTRACT (No.033394); that is to say, the contract of the COMPLAINANT;
70. Likewise, from the review of the information sent by AUTOPLAN EAFC to the SMV in the “Award Delivery File (ADJ)”11, and registered in the information systems of collective funds of the SMV, the COMPLAINANT was supposedly awarded as a substitute on November 24, 2021 by auctioning 22 installments. Likewise, no annulment of said award was found on a subsequent date;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

6 Email address recorded in the informative complaint of April 21, 2022 (Exp. 2022016847)

7 Refers to the date of issuance of the CHARGES OFFICE.
8 Present sufficient probative means, in order to accredit the delivery of a copy of the CONTRACT signed to the COMPLAINANT and the general conditions thereof, as well as to present said general conditions duly signed by the COMPLAINANT and his representative

9 These results can be consulted on the official page of AUTOPLAN EAFC: https://www.autoplan.pe/site/partner 10 Through file No.2021045914 presented to the SMV on December 3, 2021.
11 According to what is stated in the “Technical Specifications Manual for the submission to the SMV of information of the Collective Fund Administrator Companies” approved by Superintendent Resolution No. 102-2016-SMV/02

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría
71. In accordance with what is established in clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT, for an associate to present their bid proposal, it must be presented through a "Bid Proposal Form," which must be provided by AUTOPLAN EAFC, so that it is correctly filled out and signed by the associate; that is, to consider an associate in the adjudication procedure by auction, and that subsequently they can be adjudicated, first the managing company must receive their bid proposal form;
72. Therefore, based on the facts reported regarding the complainant's assertion that they never presented a physical or virtual bid request, and taking into account the results reported to the SMV in which the complainant was adjudicated; AUTOPLAN EAFC, had to substantiate that it received a bid proposal from the complainant in the referred "Bid Proposal Form," in order to be considered as part of the adjudication procedure by auction established in the CONTRACT; however, this was not accredited by AUTOPLAN EAFC;
73. In this sense, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC, would not have received the "Bid Proposal Form," from the COMPLAINANT with the purpose of making their bid proposal effective, for the adjudication assembly that took place on November 24, 2021, corresponding to Group 45, within the framework of the CONTRACT, since the managing company did not comply with presenting the referred form, duly filled out and signed by the COMPLAINANT, in order to prove compliance with what is established in the aforementioned clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT;
74. In this sense, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: "Not comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate";

3.3. Of the Charges Formulated
75. Regarding this, it must be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC until the date of issuance of this resolution, has not presented defenses to the charges formulated through the OFFICE OF CHARGES;

3.4. Analysis of the Defenses
76. On this matter, it is necessary to point out that AUTOPLAN EAFC is a company supervised by the SMV, with an operating authorization granted through Superintendent Resolution No. 024-2015-SMV/02 of February 17, 2015 and has knowledge of the regulations under which the collective fund system operates, as well as the rights and obligations established in the contracts it administers, for which it has the obligation to act diligently as a collective fund managing company; however, this did not occur, since the managing company committed the infractions that are the subject of charges;
77. What is stated in the previous consideration impacts the fulfillment of its functions and obligations as a collective fund managing company;
78. Additionally, AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to comply with the contract signed with its associates, which establishes the

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría rights and obligations of the associates and the managing company and whose model is authorized by the SMV, at the request of the managing company;

A. ON THE REMITTAL OF THE CALENDARS OF ASSEMBLIES CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT
79. According to the documents in the file, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not complied with sending the assembly calendars to the COMPLAINANT, corresponding to the CONTRACT, for the assemblies held from September 2021 to May 2022 12, since it has not presented the proof of remittance to the associate of said assembly calendars. Consequently, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC failed to comply with what is established in article 70 of the REGULATION;

B. ON THE REMITTAL OF THE ACCOUNT STATEMENTS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT
80. In the present case, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with sending the account statements to the COMPLAINANT during the validity of the CONTRACT, that is, from September 09, 2021 (month of contract subscription) to May 10, 2022; since the managing company has not presented the proof of remittance of the referred account statements to the associate;
81. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC did not observe what is established in clause 10, numeral 10.4, literal l) of the CONTRACT and article 70 of the REGULATION, due to not having complied with sending the monthly account statements to the COMPLAINANT, corresponding to the CONTRACT;

C. ON THE DEADLINE FOR ATTENDING CLAIMS
82. Regarding this, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not complied with attending the claim presented by the COMPLAINANT dated December 15, 2021 (which was reiterated via email on February 07, 2022), within the thirty (30) days from its receipt. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC has failed to comply with what is established by article 68 of the REGULATION, article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND CLAIMS and clause tenth, numeral 10.1, literal c) of the CONTRACT;

D. ON THE REMITTAL OF THE PAYMENT VOUCHERS
83. With regard to this charge, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not complied with remitting to the COMPLAINANT all of the payment vouchers, since it has not presented the payment voucher for the amount of US$ 274.31 regarding the payment made by the COMPLAINANT, corresponding to the month of December 2021. Consequently, it is observed that the managing company has failed to comply with what is established in clause 7, numeral 7.6 of the CONTRACT;

E. ON THE REMITTAL OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF THE CONTRACT
84. On this point, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with remitting to the COMPLAINANT the General Conditions of the CONTRACT, since it did not present any probative means that accredits that it remitted to the complainant said General Conditions where the group and number of vacancy, among other data of the complainant's contract, are recorded. Consequently, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has failed to comply with what is established by clause third, numeral 3.2 and clause fifth, numeral 5.2 subsection 5.2.1 of the CONTRACT;

F. ON THE PRESENTATION OF THE BID REQUEST FORM
85. Regarding this, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not demonstrated having received the "Bid Proposal Form" from the COMPLAINANT, through which the complainant would have made effective the bid proposal for the adjudication assembly that took place on November 24, 2021, within the framework of the CONTRACT, since the managing company has not complied with presenting the referred form duly filled out and signed by the COMPLAINANT. Consequently, AUTOPLAN EAFC has failed to comply with what is established in clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT;
86. ACCORDING to what is exposed, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in two (2) minor infractions typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes an infraction: "Not remit timely to the associates information on the account statements or assembly calendars", since this managing company has not complied with remitting to the associate the assembly calendars nor the account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT;
87. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in four (4) serious infractions typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which, it constitutes an infraction: "Not comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate", since it did not deliver to the associate the general conditions of the CONTRACT, did not remit all the payment vouchers, nor did it timely attend the claim presented by the COMPLAINANT; as well as it did not comply with what is established in the CONTRACT regarding the presentation of the bid proposal by the associate;

IV. EVALUATION OF THE SANCTION
88. According to article 7 of Decree Law No. 21907 on Collective Fund Companies and article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION; in concordance with article 248, numeral 3 13 of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by

13
"Article 248.- Principles of the administrative sanctioning power The sanctioning power of all entities is additionally governed by the following special principles:
(...)
3. Reasonableness.- The authorities must foresee that the commission of the sanctionable conduct does not result in more advantage for the offender than complying with the infringed norms or assuming the sanction. However, the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the infraction classified as such, observing the following criteria that are indicated for their graduation:
a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; b) The probability of detection of the infraction; c) The gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; d) The economic damage caused; e) Recidivism, for the commission of the same infraction within the term of one (1) year from when the resolution sanctioning the first infraction became final. f) The circumstances of the commission of the infraction; and g) The existence or non-existence of intent in the offender's conduct".

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG) and article 257 14 of the aforementioned normative body; the administrative sanctions that are imposed must take into account the criteria established by Decree Law No. 21907, the SANCTIONS REGULATION and the TUO LPAG;
89. Within that framework, the evaluation of the sanction must consider: a) Offender's antecedents; b) Recidivism; c) Circumstances of the commission of the infraction; d) Economic damage caused and its repercussion in the market; e) Illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; f) Probability of detection of the infraction; g) Gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; h) Existence or non-existence of intent in the offender's conduct;
90. In this sense, in order to concord the criteria of the TUO LPAG, with those indicated in Decree Law No. 21907 and in the SANCTIONS REGULATION, and for these criteria to be considered adequately so that their valuation observes the principle of reasonableness and that the sanction to be imposed adapts to these, it proceeds to analyze the following criteria;
91. Regarding the antecedents, in accordance with what is established by article 25, literal a) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, antecedents constitute the final sanctions imposed by the SMV within the term of four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned. The aforementioned article specifies that the commission of the same infraction in the year prior to the infraction to be sanctioned is not considered an antecedent;
92. In this sense, from the review carried out in said period, it has been verified that AUTOPLAN EAFC registers the following final sanctions:

No. Resolution Resolved Finality Antecedent
(*)
Recidivism i
Resolution of
Adjunct Superintendent
SMV No.
112-2017-SMV/10 15
AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of two (02) UIT, for having incurred in one (01) infraction of a serious nature typified in the
Annex XIX, numeral 2, item 2.12 of the
Sanctions Regulation approved through
CONASEV Resolution No. 055-2001-EF/94.10 and its modifying norms (hereinafter PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION), for not having complied with presenting the First Report 12/12/2017 A, B, E and F No Semi-Annual of the Compliance Officer of the 2015 exercise, within the term established in the Norms for the Prevention of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism. ii Resolution of Adjunct Superintendent SMV No. 017-2018-SMV/10 16 AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with six (06) warnings and a fine of 15.48 UIT for having incurred in eleven (11) infractions of a minor nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having complied with presenting periodic information within the term established in the applicable regulation. Through Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 070-2021-SMV/10 it was declared partially founded the reconsideration appeal filed by Autoplan EAFC and in consequence the amount of the fine imposed through article 17 of the Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 017-2018-SMV/10 was graduated to 9.675 UIT. 30/12/2021 A, B, C and E No iii Resolution of Adjunct Superintendent SMV No. 011-2019-SMV/10 17 AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with two (02) warnings for having incurred in two (02) infractions of a serious nature typified in the
Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.21 and Annex XIV,
numeral 2, item 2.41 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having determined adequately the order of preference of the substitute adjudicated parties.
12/04/2019 A, B, C, D, E and F No iv
Resolution of
Adjunct Superintendent
SMV No.
004-2020-SMV/10 18
AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of three (03) UIT for having incurred in two infractions:
one (01) of a serious nature typified in the
Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.22 of the PREVIOUS
SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not complying with the conditions established in the regulation for the call or for the celebration of assemblies; and, one (01) of a minor nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, item
3.13 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION,
for not timely remitting to the associate the information on the assembly calendar.
Through RSUP No. 119-2020-SMV/02, it was declared partially founded the appeal filed by AUTOPLAN EAFC and in consequence the sanction imposed as fine in article 3° of the Adjunct Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 004-2020- SMV/10 was modified, reducing it from three (3) UIT to two (2) UIT, valid at the moment of effective payment of the fine; and, revoke the corrective measure established in article 4° of the aforementioned Adjunct Superintendent Resolution. 01/12/2020 A, B, C, D, E and F No

16 Notified on May 11, 2018.
17 Notified on March 21, 2019.
18 The resolution was subject to appeal by AUTOPLAN EAFC. Subsequently, through Superintendent Resolution No. 119-2020-SMV/02 it was declared partially founded the appeal.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Documento electrónico firmado digitalmente en el marco de la Ley N° 27269, Ley de Firmas y Certificados Digitales, su Reglamento y modificatorias. La integridad del documento y la autoría No. Resolution Resolved Finality Antecedent () Recidivism v Resolution of Adjunct Superintendent SMV No. 013-2021-SMV/10 19 AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with three (03) warnings and a fine of 28.0045 UIT for having incurred in twenty (20) infractions of a minor nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, item 3.1 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION and in two (02) infractions of a minor nature typified in Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1, of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, at not having complied with presenting information periodic within the term established by the applicable regulation referred to this intermediate financial information and management report. 21/04/2021 A, B, C, D, E and F No vi Resolution of Adjunct Superintendent SMV No. 060-2021-SMV/10 20 AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of
18.3345 UIT for having incurred in twelve (12)
infractions of a minor nature typified in the
Annex I, numeral 3, item 3.1, of the SANCTIONS
REGULATION, at not having complied with presenting periodic information within the term established by the applicable regulation.
24/01/2022 A, B and E No vi
Resolution of
Adjunct Superintendent
SMV No.
003-2022-SMV/10 21
AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with four (04)
UIT for having incurred in one (01) infraction of a serious nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.6 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATION, for granting loans in favor of third parties exceeding the limit established by the regulation.
18/03/2022 A,B and E No
() Literals of section II "Issues to Determine".
93. With regard to recidivism for the commission of the same infraction, the final sanction imposed by the SMV within the term of one (1) year prior to the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned is taken into account. Within this framework, it must be stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC does not present sanctions within the term indicated above, for the commission of the same infractions that are the subject of analysis, in the present administrative sanctioning procedure, so recidivism is not configured;
94. With regard to the circumstances of the commission of the infractions, it must be mentioned that AUTOPLAN EAFC, in its capacity as a company supervised by the SMV, knows the regulations that regulate the collective fund system and in that sense, its obligations referred to remitting the general conditions of the contracts it administers, providing information to associates on their account statements, assembly calendars, payment vouchers, as well as attending the claims presented by associates in accordance with what is established in the REGULATION, and to the procedure for the presentation of bid proposals in accordance with what is established in its contracts;
95. Notwithstanding the above, in the present case it has been accredited that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with delivering to the COMPLAINANT the assembly calendars of the CONTRACT, corresponding to the assemblies held between September 2021 to May 2022; it also did not deliver the account statements

19 Notified on March 26, 2021.
20 Notified on December 29, 2021.
21 Notified on February 24, 2022.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

monthly during the term of the CONTRACT, nor the entirety of the payment receipts corresponding to said CONTRACT. Additionally, it also failed to send the general conditions of the CONTRACT to the associate, nor did it comply with attending the complaint filed on December 15, 2021, within the established deadline.

Likewise, it also failed to comply with what was pre-established in the CONTRACT regarding the submission of auction proposals by the associates;

Regarding this matter, it should be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC, in the development of its activities, is obliged to comply with the norms regulating the exercise of its activities and its own internal procedures established in the corresponding manuals. In this regard, the administrative company must implement the necessary procedures and controls for their proper observance. Likewise, it must be reiterated that AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to comply with the contract signed with its associates, which establishes the rights and obligations of the associates and the administrative company, and whose model is authorized by the SMV, at the request of the administrative company;
Without prejudice to the foregoing, it should be added that in the present case, the administrative company has celebrated the TRANSACTION of May 24, 2022, with the COMPLAINANT, through which AUTOPLAN EAFC recognizes in favor of the Complainant the sums of US$ 822.48 (Eight hundred twenty-two with 48/100 American dollars) and S/ 3,195.27 (Three thousand one hundred ninety-five with 27/100 soles), for the concept of total return of contributions corresponding to the CONTRACT, a sum equivalent to the total contributions made by virtue of the CONTRACT in accordance with the payment receipts presented in its complaint;
Regarding the damage caused and its repercussion on the market, it has not been evidenced that the infractions incurred by AUTOPLAN EAFC have produced a concrete, quantifiable damage in the market. However, these facts affect the confidence of the associates or potential associates in the collective fund system;
Regarding the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infractions, it must be noted that it has not been proven that Autoplan EAFC has obtained a benefit that is directly related to the infractions subject of analysis in the present administrative procedure;
Regarding the probability of detection of the infractions, it must be indicated that the facts constituting the infractions committed by AUTOPLAN EAFC were evidenced when verifying compliance with the applicable regulations for the development of its functions, based on the facts exposed by the COMPLAINANT in the complaint filed against the administrative company, so the probability of detection of the infraction was low;
Regarding the gravity of the damage to the public interest and the protected legal interest, in the present case, it has not been possible to prove that the conduct of AUTOPLAN EAFC in the commission of the infractions subject of analysis in the present sanctioning procedure has caused determinable damage to the public interest;
However, a protected legal interest has been affected, consisting of the protection of the associate, since AUTOPLAN EAFC has failed to fulfill the obligation to provide periodic information to the associate. The unfulfilled obligation aims to prevent the affectation of the interests of the associates, particularly their confidence in the collective fund system, as the sending of

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

account statements allows the former to verify the detail of their contributions based on the quotas paid, the administration fees charged by the society, and to carry out the control of their payments made on a monthly basis, as well as the other information established in Annex 8 of the REGULATION;

Likewise, according to what is provided in clause 7, numeral 7.6, of the CONTRACT, the administrative company was obliged to send the payment receipts corresponding to the payments made by the associates. Likewise, in accordance with what is established in clause eighth, numeral 8.5 of the CONTRACT, the auction proposals are presented through an “Auction Proposal Form”, which must be correctly filled out and signed by the associate. In addition to the foregoing, in accordance with what is provided in clause third, numeral 3.2 and clause fifth numeral 5.2 of the CONTRACT, AUTOPLAN EAFC must send, once the registration of the applicant is approved, the general conditions of the contract with all the corresponding data in accordance with the indicated regulation;
In this sense, and in order to avoid possible harm to its clients, AUTOPLAN EAFC should have established procedures to comply with the obligations established in the contract and the norms of the collective fund system;
Likewise, it must be noted that according to what is provided in article 68 of the REGULATION, the administrative company must have personnel responsible for attending to the complaints of the Associates, whose maximum attention deadline, according to article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES and clause tenth, numeral 10.1, literal c) second paragraph of the contracts, is 30 calendar days from the date of presentation of the respective complaint;
In this sense, and in order to avoid possible harm to its clients, the administrative company must establish procedures to verify the communications received from its associates and give them attention, in accordance with the contract and the established norms;
In this way, taking into account that collective fund administrative companies have the obligation to act in strict compliance with the regulations applicable to them, such as the provisions established in the CONTRACT and the REGULATION, in safeguarding the collective fund system, the transgression of said regulation affects the legal interest referred to as the integrity of the market, that is, of the collective fund system and especially affects the confidence of the associates or potential associates in the collective fund system;
Regarding the existence or not of intent in the conduct of the offender, intent in the conduct of AUTOPLAN EAFC regarding the infractions subject of analysis has not been verified;
In addition to the foregoing, it corresponds to analyze the exemptions and mitigating circumstances of responsibility established in article 257 of the TUO LPAG, as well as the mitigating and exempting conditions of responsibility established in articles 26 and 27 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
In accordance with what has been analyzed, in accordance with what is determined in article 257, numeral 1 of the TUO LPAG and article 27 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, it is not observed that in the present case any of the circumstances that constitute conditions exempting responsibility have been configured;

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

Regarding the voluntary declaration of the commission of the infractions (article 257, numeral 2 of the TUO LPAG) and the contribution of the offender to their clarification, established in article 26, literals a) and b) of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, it must be indicated that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not present defenses. Consequently, it has not expressly recognized the commission of the infractions subject of evaluation, nor has it contributed to the clarification of the facts imputed as charges;
From the foregoing, it is concluded that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred the commission of two (2) infractions classified as minor in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION and four (4) infractions classified as grave in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, regarding which it corresponds to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a sanction corresponding to the infractions classified as grave in accordance with article 38 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
Regarding this, it should be noted that since the determined infractions are of different nature, it corresponds to impose a sanction for the most serious infraction, as indicated in the second paragraph of article 29 22 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
However, taking into account the analyzed sanctioning criteria, and in application of the Principle of Reasonableness contemplated in article 248, numeral 3 of the TUO LPAG which states that the sanctions to be applied shall be proportional to the non-compliance classified as an infraction, it must be considered that regarding the infractions subject of charges, it has not been evidenced that these have caused economic damage or that they have had repercussion on the market. Likewise, it has not been verified that the administrative company has obtained any illicit benefit with the commission of the infractions subject of charges, nor that it has had intent in its actions regarding this. Likewise, it has been verified that AUTOPLAN EAFC is not a recidivist regarding the infractions;
In addition to the foregoing, it must be highlighted that AUTOPLAN EAFC reached a TRANSACTION with the COMPLAINANT and effected the return of its contributions, without the application of penalties, in accordance with what is recorded in the Return Act dated May 24, 2022, through which, the COMPLAINANT declares having received the sums of US$ 822.48 (Eight hundred twenty-two with 48/100 American dollars) and S/ 3,195.27 (Three thousand one hundred ninety-five with 27/100 soles);
In that sense, considering the analysis performed, this Adjunct Superintendence considers that it corresponds to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a fine sanction applicable to the minor infractions, in accordance with what is established in article 39 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION;
Being in accordance with what is provided by article 32°, numeral 16, of the Regulation of Organization and Functions of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree N° 216-2011-EF and its modifications;

22
“Article 29.- CONCURSUS OF INFRACTIONS
(...)
Likewise, when several conduct qualify as more than one infraction, the sanction corresponding to the most serious infraction is imposed.”

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

RESOLVES:
Article 1º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as grave as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having complied with the legal deadline established to provide a response to the complaint filed by the associate.

Article 2º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as grave as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having complied with sending the entirety of the payment receipts to the associate.

Article 3º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as grave as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having complied with sending the general conditions of the contract signed with the established requirements.

Article 4º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as grave as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01, for not complying with what is disposed in the contract regarding the presentation of the auction proposal by the associate.

Article 5º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as minor, typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, for not sending to the associate the assembly calendars, corresponding to the CONTRACT, for the assemblies held from September 2021 until May 2022.

Article 6º.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as minor, typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, for not having complied with sending the monthly account statements to the associate, corresponding to the contract signed during its term.

Article 7º.- Sanction Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A with a fine of 1 UIT for what is provided in articles 1° to 6° of this resolution.

Article 8º.- This resolution does not exhaust the administrative route, unless it is consented, and may be challenged before the Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision by filing a reconsideration or appeal appeal before the same, within the deadline of fifteen (15) business days counted from the day following its notification.

PERÚ Ministerio de Economía y Finanzas

Article 9º.- In the event that this resolution is not subject to challenge through reconsideration or appeal appeal within the deadline of fifteen (15) business days of being notified and becomes final, it must be published on the Institutional Page of the SMV in the Unique Digital Platform of the Peruvian State, in observance of what is provided by numeral 1, article 7° of the Policy on diffusion of normative projects, norms of general character, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV, approved by SMV Resolution Nº 014-2014-SMV/01 and its modification, and by what is provided in article 14° of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution N° 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 10º.- Transcribe this resolution to Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A.

Omar Gutiérrez Ochoa
Adjunct Superintendent
Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision

Lineage

Similar documents from other regulators