Adjunct Superintendent Resolution on Prudential Supervision No. 014-2025-SMV/10

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under 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. 014-2025-SMV/10 Lima, March 11, 2025 Subject: Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. is sanctioned with three (3) UIT, for having committed three (03) infractions: two (2) serious infractions typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation and one (1) infraction of a minor nature typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.5 of the Sanctions Regulation: for not complying with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate related to i) not complying with the deadline to return contributions in favor of the associate at the end of its group in the liquidation stage, ii) not complying with the legal deadline established to respond to complaints; and, iii) for not complying with the deadline to communicate to the associate the date of return of their contributions; respectively. Administered by: Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. Subject: Administrative sanctioning procedure File No.: 2024026060 The Adjunct Superintendent of Prudential Supervision SEEN:
The administrative file No. 2024026060, and Report No. 1243-2024-SMV/10.3, issued by the General Superintendent of Prudential Compliance; and, CONSIDERING:

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

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
I. FACTS
2. By the document received on February 21, 2022, the COMPLAINANT 1, who was an associate of Group No. 6 of the Autoplan-001 Program under the Collective Fund Administration Contract of Autoplan EAFC S.A. Purchase Certificate Modality No. 001517 and No. 009707, signed on April 15, 2016 and September 27, 2019, respectively (hereinafter, CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2), filed a complaint 2 before the Securities Market Superintendence (SMV) against Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. (hereinafter, AUTOPLAN EAFC), stating, among others, that AUTOPLAN EAFC had failed to communicate the date of the return of contributions within the ten (10) days following the last assembly of the group to which it belonged and to return the contributions within the sixty (60) days following the completion of the corresponding group, and that the administrator company had not responded to its complaints;
3. With Letter No. 768-2022-SMV/10.3 notified on February 22, 2022, AUTOPLAN EAFC was made aware of the complaint filed by the COMPLAINANT, in order to send the corresponding comments as well as documentation and/or information for the evaluation of the complaint;
4. By the documents of March 14, July 8 and 15, 2022, AUTOPLAN EAFC presented its comments regarding the complaint, as well as the following information and/or documentation:
a. Incomplete copy of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of Autoplan EAFC S.A. Purchase Certificate Modality No. 009707, with signature and digital fingerprint of the COMPLAINANT, signed on September 27, 2019. b. Document with the detail of payments made by the COMPLAINANT and the calculation of the amount to be returned for the contributions made.
c. Copy of the Autoplan EAFC S.A. Return Act, with signature and digital fingerprint of the COMPLAINANT, for the sum of US$ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 American Dollars), signed on January 14, 2022
d. Copy of the bank transfer receipt in favor of the COMPLAINANT for the sum of US$ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 American Dollars), dated January 14, 2022. e. Copy of the Extrajudicial Transaction (hereinafter, TRANSACTION) signed by the representative of AUTOPLAN EAFC and by the COMPLAINANT with their signature and digital fingerprint, dated July 12, 2022. f. Copy of the Autoplan EAFC S.A. Return Act, with signature and digital fingerprint of the COMPLAINANT, for the sum of US$ 1,450.00 (One thousand four hundred fifty and 00/100 American Dollars), signed on July 12, 2022. g. Copy of the bank transfer receipt in favor of the COMPLAINANT for the sum of US$ 1,453.32 (One thousand four hundred fifty-three and 32/100 American Dollars), dated July 12, 2022. h. Copy of the withdrawal document signed by the COMPLAINANT, dated July 12, 2022;

1 In the annex attached to this resolution, the complete data of the natural persons to whom the designations used in this resolution belong are detailed, and likewise, if applicable, the email addresses.
2 With file No. 2022007141.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
5. By Letter No. 2564-2024-SMV/10.3 notified on June 18, 2024 (hereinafter, LETTER OF CHARGES), an administrative sanctioning procedure was initiated against AUTOPLAN EAFC, imputing charges for some facts related to the complaint of the COMPLAINANT;
6. AUTOPLAN EAFC has not presented its defenses to the administrative sanctioning procedure initiated by the LETTER OF CHARGES, up to the date of issuance of this Resolution;
7. The charges formulated against AUTOPLAN EAFC have been the subject of evaluation by the General Superintendent of Prudential Compliance in Report No. 1243-2024-SMV/10.3, which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Adjunct Superintendence;
8. In observance of the Principle of Due Process contemplated both in article IV, item 1, numeral 1.2 of the Preliminary Title, as well as in article 248°, numeral 2, of the Single Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, published on January 25, 2019 (hereinafter, TUO OF THE LPAG), by Letter No. 4225-2024-SMV/10, the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to AUTOPLAN EAFC for its review;
II. MATTERS TO BE DETERMINED
9. In the present administrative procedure, in the opinion of this Adjunct Superintendence, it corresponds to determine the following:
a. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction provided for in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), for not complying with the collective fund administration contract, since it did not comply with the legal deadline to return contributions in favor of the COMPLAINANT at the end of its group, in the liquidation stage; b. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction provided for in Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.5 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, since it did not comply with communicating to the COMPLAINANT within the deadline established by the SMV, the date of the return of their contributions;
c. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or did not incur an infraction provided for in Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 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 it corresponds or not to impose sanctions on AUTOPLAN EAFC;
III. ANALYSIS
3.1. On the Applicable Normative
A. ON THE DEADLINE FOR THE RETURN OF CONTRIBUTIONS AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE GROUP
10. Regarding the collective fund administration contracts signed, article 21 of the REGULATION provides:
“Article 21.- Contract
The Contract is of a private nature and has a collective character, it regulates the relationships between the Associates 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. (…)”. (Underlining added);
11. Regarding this, clause 11, numeral 11.2 of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, establishes the following:
“11. ON CONTRACTUAL RESOLUTION AND RETURN OF CONTRIBUTIONS (…)
11.2 NON-ALLOCATED ASSOCIATE: The Associate with an unallocated contract resolved after the deadline established in Clause 11.1, will only have the right to the return of the Capital Quotas contributed minus a penalty equivalent to two (2) of them.
(…)
For the case of those non-allocated Associates with resolved contract who do not result benefited with the return of their contributions, the return will be made at the end of the Group in the liquidation stage, prior to the deduction of the penalty and what is owed for Registration Fee.”;
12. Furthermore, clauses 12, numeral 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3 of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2 provide:
“12. ON THE LIQUIDATION OF THE GROUP
12.1 A Group will be considered finished when the duration deadline of the Group established in the Contract 3 has expired.
12.2 When three (3) months have passed after the completion of the group.
12.3 When the Group formally ends, the liquidation and the return of the amounts corresponding to the Associates will be carried out within a maximum period of sixty (60) days 4. Likewise, once the Group has ended, Autoplan will proceed to its liquidation and, within the (10) days following the last assembly of the group, it will communicate in writing to the Associates with creditor balances, the date of return of their contributions, prior to the deduction of the amounts that correspond.
(…)”.;
13. Regarding the return of contributions, article 122 of the REGULATION establishes the following:
“Article 122.- Return of contributions
(…)
In other cases, when it concerns Associates with some unallocated Contract, the return of their contributions may be carried out through draws in Assembly according to what is established in literal a) of article 99 of the Regulation, deducting the penalties established in the Contract.

3 According to clause 10.5 of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, regarding the completion of the group, a group will be considered finished when the duration deadline of the group established in the contract has expired. In the present case, the duration deadline of Group No. 6 of the Autoplan-001 Program is sixty (60) months. 4 According to what is established in the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, the days referred to correspond to business days unless otherwise indicated.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship To Associates with resolved contract who were not benefited by the draw, their contributions will be returned at the end of the Group. (…)”;
14. Likewise, article 123 of the REGULATION provides the following:
“Article 123.- Completion of the Group
A Group will be considered finished when the duration deadline of the Group established in the Contract has expired”; B. ON THE COMMUNICATION OF THE DATE FOR THE RETURN OF CONTRIBUTIONS
15. Regarding the collective fund administration contracts signed, article 21 of the REGULATION provides:
“Article 21.- Contract
The Contract is of a private nature and has a collective character, it regulates the relationships between the Associates 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. (…)”;
16. Clauses 12, numeral 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3 of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2 provide:
12. ON THE LIQUIDATION OF THE GROUP
12.1 A Group will be considered finished when the duration deadline of the Group established in the Contract 5 has expired.
12.2 When three (3) months have passed after the completion of the group.
12.3 When the Group formally ends, the liquidation and the return of the amounts corresponding to the Associates will be carried out within a maximum period of sixty (60) days 6. Likewise, once the Group has ended, Autoplan will proceed to its liquidation and, within the (10) days following the last assembly of the group, it will communicate in writing to the Associates with creditor balances, the date of return of their contributions, prior to the deduction of the amounts that correspond.
(…)”;
C. ON THE DEADLINE FOR ATTENDING COMPLAINTS
17. Regarding the resolution of complaints, article 68 of the REGULATION provides the following:
“Article 68.- Resolution of complaints
The Administrator must have responsible personnel to attend to the complaints of the Associates, subject to what is established in the Norms applicable to complaints and claims against entities supervised by the Securities Market Superintendence - SMV, approved by SMV Resolution No. 006-2012-SMV-01, or the norm that replaces it.”;

5 According to clause 10.5 of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, regarding the completion of the group, a group will be considered finished when the duration deadline of the group established in the contract has expired. In the present case, the duration deadline of Group No. 6 of the Autoplan-001 Program is sixty (60) months. 6 According to what is established in the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of signing of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, the days referred to correspond to business days unless otherwise indicated.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and authorship
18. In that sense, article 3 of the “Norms applicable to complaints and claims against entities supervised by the Securities Market Superintendence - 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 could be filed by final consumers and the obligation to have a Complaints Book, within the framework of what is established 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 brought to the knowledge of the claimant before the end of the initial deadline. If the claimant requires it, the response must be made in writing. (…).” (Underlining added);
19. Likewise, clause 9, numeral 9.1, of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, corresponding to CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2 signed, provides:
“9. ON THE RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
9.1 The rights of the Associates are:
(…) c) (…)
On the other hand, in case complaints are filed by the Associate, these complaints will be derived to the corresponding area of Autoplan, which will have a deadline of thirty (30) calendar days to resolve the indicated complaint, counted from its receipt. This deadline may be prorogued according to its nature. The formulation of a complaint according to this clause does not constitute a prior path nor implies any limitation for the Associate to use another mechanism for dispute resolution.”;
3.2. On the Charges Formulated
A. On the deadline for the return of contributions after the completion of the group
20. Regarding this, CONTRACT 2, in clause 11, numeral 11.2 establishes that to the non-allocated associate who resolves their contract after the deadline established in clause 11.1 (one day before the holding of the first assembly in which they are entitled to participate), their contributions will be returned through quarterly draws, and in case of not being benefited, the return will be made at the end of the group in the liquidation stage, prior to the deduction of the penalty and what is owed for registration fee;
21. In that context, clause 12, numeral 12.3 of CONTRACT 2 establishes that when the group formally ends, the maximum deadline for the return of the amounts corresponding to the associates is 60 business days;
22. According to what is established in the contract of the COMPLAINANT, the duration deadline of Group No. 6 is 60 months. In that sense, it must be mentioned that Group No. 6 of the Autoplan-001 Program, to which the COMPLAINANT belonged, had its last assembly (No. 60) on May 19, 2021 7, which corresponds to the date of completion of the group;
23. In that sense, AUTOPLAN EAFC had a deadline until August 16, 2021 (60 business days after) to effect the return of contributions in favor of the COMPLAINANT, which did not occur, since the return of the monthly quotas paid with respect to the Autoplan-001 Program minus the corresponding penalties and deductions was carried out on January 14, 2022, as recorded in the Autoplan EAFC S.A. Return Act, for the sum of US$ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 American Dollars) signed by the COMPLAINANT;
24. Thus, it can be observed that between August 16, 2021 and January 14, 2022, approximately five months passed, during which time, the COMPLAINANT could not dispose of the money respective to the return of their contributions that corresponded to them by right, according to the applicable normative and the contract signed with AUTOPLAN EAFC;
25. Consequently, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is established by clause 11, numeral 11.2 and clause 12, numeral 12.3 of CONTRACT 2, insofar as it would not have complied with the deadline to return contributions in favor of the associate, in concordance with what is established by article 122 of the REGULATION;
26. Therefore, it was imputed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it had incurred one (1) infraction classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Not complying with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”; since it would not have complied with the deadline to return contributions in favor of the COMPLAINANT at the end of its group, in the liquidation stage;
B. On the communication of the date for the return of contributions
27. Clause 12, numeral 12.3 of CONTRACT 2 establishes that once the group is finished, AUTOPLAN EAFC, within the 10 business days following the last assembly of the group, will communicate in writing to the associates with creditor balances, the date of return of their contributions. Considering that the completion of Group No. 6 was on May 19, 2021, AUTOPLAN EAFC had a deadline until June 2, 2021 (10 business days after) to communicate to the COMPLAINANT the date of return of their contributions;
28. Nevertheless, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is established by clause 12, numeral 12.3, of CONTRACT 2, since it did not follow the procedure to return contributions, referred to communicating to the associate with a creditor balance the date of return of their contributions, within the 10 useful days following the last assembly of the Group;
29. Therefore, it was imputed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it had incurred one (1) infraction classified as minor, according to Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.5 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which it constitutes

7 According to the document “Communication on Results of Subsequent Assemblies” informed by AUTOPLAN EAFC to the SMV.

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Securities Market
Superintendence

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

infringement: “Not to communicate to associates with resolved contracts, within the deadline established by the SMV, the date of the return of their contributions”; given that it would not have fulfilled contacting the COMPLAINANT to communicate the date of the return of their contributions;
C. Regarding the non-attention of complaints

30. Through the emails of September 5, 16, and 21, 2021 addressed to the email contacto@autoplan.com, the COMPLAINANT requested AUTOPLAN EAFC to pay their contributions, providing their bank account number, due to the expiration of the duration term of the group to which they belonged.
    Likewise, on October 2, 2021, the associate generated Complaint Ticket No. 1738, through which they requested the administrator company to return their contributions;

31. According to Article 68 of the REGULATIONS, Article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES, as well as Clause 9, numeral 9.1, literal c) of the Collective Fund Administration Contract of the Autoplan-001 Program, valid at the date of subscription of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, the deadline for the resolution of complaints by associates by AUTOPLAN EAFC is thirty (30) calendar days from their receipt;

32. In this sense, the complaints filed by the COMPLAINANT should have been resolved within thirty (30) days from their receipt; however, AUTOPLAN EAFC attended to them only on December 20, 2021, through the email whose content is the following:
    “Dear Complainant Rivera,
    Receive a cordial greeting, through this we fulfill providing response to the Communication of the Investor Defense of the SMV, through which it requests the return of contributions due to the termination of your group.
    Regarding this, it is worth clarifying that the attached response contains the calculation and deduction of penalties in order to obtain the amount to be returned.
    Finally, we kindly request that you send us an account in dollars where the respective return would be paid and a simple copy of your ID. We will contact you shortly to finalize the return of contributions.
    (…)”;

33. It should be added that the response to the complaints of the COMPLAINANT, cited above, was made after the associate sent an email to the Investor Defense of the SMV on December 2, 2021;

34. Considering the above, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing what is established by Article 68 of the REGULATIONS, Article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES and Clause 9, numeral 9.1, literal c) of CONTRACT 1 and CONTRACT 2, that is, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with the legal deadline established to provide a response to the complaints filed by the COMPLAINANT;

35. Therefore, it was attributed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infringement classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, according to which it constitutes an infringement: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”;

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

3.3. Of the defenses

36. Regarding this, it must be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC to the date of issuance of this resolution, has not presented defenses to the charges formulated through the CHARGE OFFICE;

3.4 Of the analysis of the charges

37. Without prejudice to the above, it is necessary to point out that AUTOPLAN EAFC is a company supervised by the SMV, with authorization of operation granted by 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 administrator company; however, this did not occur, given that the administrator company incurred in the commission of three infractions that are the subject of charges;

38. What is stated in the previous consideration impacts the fulfillment of its functions and obligations as a collective fund administrator company;

39. Additionally, 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 administrator company and whose model is authorized by the SMV, at the request of the administrator company;

A. Regarding the deadline for the return of contributions after the termination of the group

40. Indeed, in the present case, according to the documents in the file, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with observing the deadline to make the return of contributions in favor of the COMPLAINANT corresponding to CONTRACT 2, after the termination of the group, in the liquidation stage, failing to comply with what is established in Clause 11, numeral 11.2 and Clause 12, numeral 12.3 of CONTRACT 2, which is in concordance with what is established by Article 122 of the REGULATIONS. It is worth indicating that the return of contributions was made with 151 days of delay with respect to the maximum date to fulfill said obligation;

41. Without prejudice to what is stated, it must be mentioned that through bank transfers on January 14, 2022 and July 12, 2022, AUTOPLAN EAFC returned to the COMPLAINANT the entirety of their contributions without deducting deductions or penalties, aspect that will be considered when determining the sanction to be imposed;

42. In this sense, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred in one (1) infringement classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, according to which it constitutes an infringement: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”;

B. Regarding the communication of the date for the return of contributions

43. In the present case it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with communicating to the COMPLAINANT the date of return of their contributions corresponding to CONTRACT 2, within ten (10) business days following

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

the last assembly of Group No. 6 (until June 2, 2021), failing to comply with what is established by Clause 12, numeral 12.3 of CONTRACT 2;

44. Consequently, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred in one (1) infringement classified as minor, according to Annex XIII, numeral 3, item 3.5 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, according to which it constitutes an infringement: “Not to communicate to associates with resolved contracts, within the deadline established by the SMV, the date of the return of their contributions”;

C. Regarding the non-attention of complaints

45. With regard to this charge, it is observed that the emails sent by the COMPLAINANT on September 5, 16 and 21, 2021 sent to contacto@autoplan.com and the Complaint No. 1738 filed on October 2, 2021 by the COMPLAINANT, were resolved by AUTOPLAN EAFC on December 20, 2021; that is, after thirty (30) days from their receipt and as a result of the communications made by the Investor Defense of the SMV to AUTOPLAN EAFC, failing to comply with what is established by Article 68 of the REGULATIONS, Article 3 of the NORMS APPLICABLE TO COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES and Clause ninth, numeral 9.1 literal c) of CONTRACT 2;

46. Consequently, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred in one (1) infringement classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, item 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, according to which it constitutes an infringement: “Not to comply with the provisions of the collective fund administration contract celebrated with the associate”;

IV. EVALUATION OF THE SANCTION

47. According to Article 7 of Decree Law No. 21907 on Collective Fund Companies and Article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS; in concordance with Article 248, numeral 3 8 of the Single Ordered Text of the General Administrative Procedure Law, Law No. 27444, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO OF THE LPAG) and Article 257 9

8
“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 more advantageous for the infringer than complying with the infringed norms or assuming the sanction. However, the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the non-compliance classified as an infringement, observing the following criteria that are indicated for their graduation:
a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement; b) The probability of detection of the infringement; c) The gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; d) The economic prejudice caused; e) Recidivism, for the commission of the same infringement within the term of one (1) year from when the resolution that sanctioned the first infringement became final. f) The circumstances of the commission of the infringement; and g) The existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the infringer”.

9
“Article 257°.- Exemptions and mitigating conditions of responsibility for infractions 1.- The following constitute exempting conditions of responsibility for infractions:
a) Force majeure or fortuitous event duly proven. b) Acting in compliance with a legal duty or the legitimate exercise of the right of defense. c) Mental incapacity duly proven by the competent authority, provided that this affects the aptitude to understand the infringement. d) Mandatory order of competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) Error induced by the Administration or by confusing or illegal administrative provision.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

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 REGULATIONS and the TUO LPAG;

48. Within that framework, the evaluation of the sanction must consider: a) Antecedents of the infringer; b) Recidivism; c) Circumstances of the commission of the infringement; d) Economic prejudice caused and its repercussion in the market; e) Illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infringement; f) Probability of detection of the infringement; g) Gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal good; h) Existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the infringer;

49. In this sense, in order to concord the criteria of the TUO OF THE LPAG, with those indicated in Decree Law No. 21907 and in the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, 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;

50. With regard to sanction antecedents, in accordance with what is established by Article 25, literal a) of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, antecedents constitute the final sanctions imposed by the SMV within the term of four (4) years prior to the commission of the infringement to be sanctioned. The aforementioned article specifies that the commission of the same infringement in the year prior to the infringement to be sanctioned is not considered as antecedents;

51. In such sense, from the review carried out in said period, it has been verified that AUTOPLAN EAFC registers the following final sanctions:

52. N
    º
    Resolution Resolved Finality i
    Resolution of the
    Adjunct Superintendent
    SMV No. 112-
    2017-SMV/10 10
    AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of two (02) UIT, for having incurred in one (01) infringement of a serious nature typified in Annex XIX, numeral 2, item 2.12 of the Sanctions Regulation approved by Resolution CONASEV No. 055-2001-EF/94.10 and its modifying norms (hereinafter PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATIONS), for not having complied with presenting the First Semester Report of the Compliance Officer of the 2015 exercise, within the deadline established in the Norms for the Prevention of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism. 12/12/2017 ii Resolution of the Adjunct Superintendent SMV No. 011- 2019-SMV/10 11 AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with two (02) warnings for having incurred in two (02) infringements of a serious nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.21 and Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.41 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not having adequately determined the order of preference of the substitute awardees 11/04/2019

f) Voluntary remediation by the possible sanctioned of the act or omission imputed as constitutive of an administrative infringement, prior to the notification of the charge imputation referred to in item 3) of Article 255.
2.- The following constitute mitigating conditions of responsibility for infractions:
a) If an administrative sanctioning procedure has begun and the infringer recognizes their responsibility expressly and in writing.
In cases where the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced to an amount no less than half of its value. b) Others that are established by special norm”.

10 Notified on November 17, 2017.
11 Notified on March 21, 2019.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

52. N
    º
    Resolution Resolved Finality iii
    Resolution of the
    Adjunct Superintendent
    SMV No. 004-
    2020-SMV/10 12
    AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of three (03) UIT for having incurred in two infringements; one (01) of a serious nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, item 2.22 of the PREVIOUS SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not complying with the conditions established in the regulations for the convocation 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 REGULATIONS, for not sending timely to the associate the information on the calendar of assemblies. Through Superintendent Resolution No. 119-2020- SMV/02 the appeal filed by AUTOPLAN EAFC was declared well-founded, by which it was decided to modify the imposed sanction of three (3) UIT to two (2) UIT. 01/12/2020

53. With regard to recidivism for the commission of the same infringement, that final sanction imposed by the SMV within the term of one (1) year prior to the commission of the infringement to be sanctioned is taken into account. Within this framework, it must be stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC does not present sanctions within the aforementioned term, for the commission of the same infractions that are the subject of analysis, in the present administrative sanctioning procedure, so that recidivism is not configured;

54. 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, the regulations that oblige it to communicate and proceed with the return of contributions as established in the REGULATIONS and in the contracts it administers; likewise, it knows the regulations referred to responding to the complaints of its associates in a timely manner;

55. It is worth reiterating 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 administrator company and whose model is authorized by the SMV, at the request of the administrator company;

56. Notwithstanding the above, in the present case it has been proven that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with communicating to the COMPLAINANT the date of return of their contributions corresponding to CONTRACT 2, has not complied with observing the deadline to make the return of the contributions corresponding to CONTRACT 2 at the end of the COMPLAINANT's Group. Likewise, it is observed that it did not comply with responding timely to the complaints filed by said associate;

57. It should be noted that prior to the charge imputation, the administrator company celebrated the extrajudicial transaction of July 12, 2022 with the COMPLAINANT through which AUTOPLAN EAFC committed to granting, for the only time, the fixed, total and invariable sum of US$ 1,450.00, sum equivalent to the entirety of the deductions and penalties. On the other hand, as part of the TRANSACTION, the COMPLAINANT voluntarily and irrevocably recognizes that said

12 Notified on February 03, 2020.

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores
Electronically signed document in the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its Regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship

commitment satisfies in its entirety any economic claim that in the present or future it could have with the administrator company;

58. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC presents a copy of a writing dated July 12, 2022, through which the COMPLAINANT withdraws its claims and from the procedure; and requests the archiving of the complaint 13;

59. With regard to the economic prejudice caused and to the repercussion in the market. In the present case, it has not been evidenced that the infractions in which AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred have produced a concrete quantifiable prejudice in the market. However, these facts affect the confidence of the associates or potential associates in the collective fund system;

60. Likewise, from the facts it is evident that prejudice has been caused to the COMPLAINANT, since the same could not dispose of the amount corresponding to the return of their contributions of CONTRACT 2, from August 17, 2021 (the day following the maximum date for the administrator company to make the return of contributions after the group has ended) until January 14, 2022 (the date of the transfer of the COMPLAINANT's contributions);

61. Additionally, it must be highlighted that the associate was obliged to go to the Investor Defense area of the SMV, through an email dated December 2, 2021, with the purpose of requesting a space for dialogue with AUTOPLAN EAFC and find a solution to their request for return of contributions, among other topics, regarding the return corresponding to their contracts;

62. It should be noted that the return of contributions was made on a date subsequent to the maximum deadline established by the regulations, through the signing by the COMPLAINANT of a “Autoplan EAFC S.A. Return Act” dated January 14, 2022, through which AUTOPLAN EAFC recognized in favor of the COMPLAINANT the sum of US$ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 American dollars) for the concept of return of the contributions of CONTRACT 2. It is worth specifying that on January 14, 2022, through a bank transfer, the administrator company transferred the referred amount in favor of the complainant;

63. It is worth indicating that the return was made prior to the filing of the complaint and that this figure corresponded to the net contributions of penalties and deductions, that is, said amount was in accordance with what is established by the applicable regulations and the respective contracts. Nevertheless, on February 21, 2022, the COMPLAINANT files a complaint against the administrator indicating as the main claim that the penalties and deductions applied according to law be returned;

64. Furthermore, through the TRANSACTION signed by the COMPLAINANT and AUTOPLAN EAFC, the administrator company recognized an additional amount for the value of USD$1,450.00 (One thousand four hundred fifty and 00/100 American dollars), for the concept of the total return of contributions made, that is, said amount corresponds to the penalties and deductions. It is worth specifying that on July 12, 2022, through a bank transfer, the administrator company transferred a

13 Without prejudice to the above and by virtue of Article 200, numeral 200.7 13 of the Single Ordered Text of Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS, the analysis of the facts contained in the complaint continued insofar as these could violate the general interest, within which is included verifying the compliance with the regulations that govern the collective fund system by AUTOPLAN EAFC

PERÚ Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship total of US$ 1,453.32 in favor of the complainant, that is, prior to the imputation of charges; from which it follows that the administrator returned a total US$ 8,219.00, that is, the entirety of their contributions without deducting deductions and penalties;
65. Without prejudice to the foregoing, it must be indicated that the total net amount of the contributions corresponding to CONTRACT 2 that belonged to the
COMPLAINANT amounted to US$ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 US dollars) were in the possession of AUTOPLAN EAFC irregularly and illegally for approximately five (5) months, with the use and profitability of said amount at its discretion, to the detriment of the COMPLAINANT who could not use and enjoy the money that belonged to her according to law;
66. It should be noted that the COMPLAINANT could have perceived a benefit or given the corresponding utility based on her needs,
if she had had her money in time to invest it. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC obtained a benefit by having access to the COMPLAINANT'S money, as is noted in the following section;
67. Regarding the infractions recorded in literals b and b of the preamble 9 of this Resolution, it has not been evidenced that
these have caused a quantifiable economic harm to the COMPLAINANT;
68. With regard to the illicit benefit resulting from the
commission of the infractions. In this regard, it must be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC had a benefit by not returning the contributions of MRS. GARRIDO within the deadlines established in the regulations, and could use money that did not belong to her during this time; taking into account that it returned the contributions corresponding to the associate on January 14, 2022, that is, on a date very late from the established in the regulations;
69. In this sense, it must be noted that AUTOPLAN
EAFC had a benefit by not returning the contributions to the associate for USD $ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty-five and 68/100 US dollars) for five (5) months approximately with respect to CONTRACT 2;
70. As for the infractions recorded in literals B and C of the preamble 9 of this Resolution, it must be noted that it has not been proven that AUTOPLAN EAFC has obtained a benefit that is directly related to said infractions;
71. With regard to the probability of detection of
the infractions. On this matter, it must be indicated that the facts constituting the infraction 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 company administrator, so the probability of detection of the infraction was low;
72. On the gravity of the damage to the public interest and/or 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 infraction subject of analysis in the present sanctioning procedure has caused damage to the determinable public interest;
73. Nevertheless, it must be noted that according to
the applicable regulations, AUTOPLAN EAFC had a deadline of ten (10) business days following the last assembly of the group to notify the COMPLAINANT, the date

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship of return of their contributions corresponding to CONTRACT 2. Likewise, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC had a maximum deadline of sixty (60) business days to effect the return of said contributions, counted from the end of the group to which the associate belonged. Additionally, it has the obligation to respond complaints in a timely manner;
74. In this way, taking into account that
fund management companies have the obligation to act in strict compliance with the regulations applicable to them, such as the provisions established in CONTRACT 2 and the REGULATIONS, in safeguarding the collective fund system, the transgression of said regulations affects the legal interest referred to 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;
75. Regarding the existence or not of intent
in the conduct of the offender, it must be specified that no intent has been verified in the conduct of AUTOPLAN EAFC with respect to the infractions subject of analysis;
76. Nevertheless, in the present case it has been proven
that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not return the contributions corresponding to the contract of the COMPLAINANT within the deadline established in the regulations, and that it made said return on a date subsequent to the filing of the informative complaint before the SMV, through a bank transfer in favor of the COMPLAINANT;
77. In this sense, a lack of
due diligence on the part of AUTOPLAN EAFC towards its associates is demonstrated; therefore, it is not admissible that a Collective Fund Management Company such as AUTOPLAN EAFC with several years operating in the market can ignore compliance with essential norms under which the Collective Funds system operates and of the own provisions of the contracts it administers;
78. In addition to the above, it corresponds to analyze the
exempting and mitigating circumstances of liability established in article 257 of the TUO OF THE LPAG, as well as the mitigating and exempting conditions of liability established in articles 26 and 27 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS;
79. In accordance with what has been analyzed, it is not observed
that in the present case any of the circumstances that constitute mitigating conditions of liability established in article 257 of the TUO OF THE LPAG have been configured;
80. Likewise, in accordance with what is determined in
article 257, numeral 1 of the TUO OF THE LPAG and article 27 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, it is not observed that in the present case any of the
circumstances that constitute exempting conditions of liability have been configured;
81. From the foregoing, it is concluded that AUTOPLAN EAFC
has incurred the commission of one (1) infraction classified as minor in Annex XIII, numeral 3, clause 3.5 and two (2) infractions classified as serious in Annex XIII, numeral 2, clause 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS;
82. In this regard, it must be noted that due to the fact that the
infractions determined are of different nature, it corresponds to impose the sanction for the infraction of greater gravity, as stated in the second paragraph of article

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship 29 14 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, so it would correspond to apply to AUTOPLAN EAFC a fine of more than 25 UIT and up to 50 UIT or the prohibition of formation of new groups, as provided in article 38 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS;
83. However, taking into account the sanctioning criteria
analyzed, and in application of the Principle of Reasonableness contemplated in the
article 248, numeral 3 of the TUO OF THE LPAG which states that the sanctions to be
applied must be proportional to the non-compliance classified as an infraction, it must be considered that with respect to the infractions subject of charges, it has not been evidenced that these have had repercussions in the market. Likewise, it has not been verified that the management company has had intent in its actions regarding this or has obtained any illicit benefit. Likewise, it has been verified that AUTOPLAN EAFC is not a repeat offender with respect to the infractions;
84. Additionally, with respect to the infractions
recorded in literals b and c of the preamble 9 of this Resolution, it has not been evidenced that these have caused a quantifiable economic harm to the COMPLAINANT;
85. In addition to the above, it must be highlighted that
AUTOPLAN EAFC did effect the return of the COMPLAINANT'S contributions, through a bank transfer of USD $ 6,765.68 (Six thousand seven hundred sixty- five and 68/100 US dollars) dated January 14, 2022, which is in the file, even through the TRANSACTION, AUTOPLAN EAFC returned the additional amount of USD $1,450.00 (One thousand four hundred fifty and 00/100 US dollars), for the concept of the total return of the credits made by the COMPLAINANT;
86. In that sense, in accordance with what is provided in the last
paragraph of article 25 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, this Adjunct Superintendency considers that it corresponds to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a sanction of fine applicable to minor infractions, in accordance with what is established in article 39 of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS;
87. Being in accordance with what is provided by articles 32°, numeral
16, of the Regulation of Organization and Functions of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF and its amendments; RESOLVES:
Article 1º.- Declare that Autoplan Collective Fund Management Company S.A. has incurred one (01) infraction of
serious nature typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, clause 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, since it did not comply with the deadline to make the return of contributions in favor of the COMPLAINANT corresponding to CONTRACT 2, after the end of the group, in the stage of liquidation.
Article 2º.- Declare that Autoplan Collective Fund Management Company S.A. has incurred one (01) infraction of

14
“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.”

PERU Ministry of Economy and Finance

SMV
Superintendency of the Securities Market
Electronically signed document under the framework of Law No. 27269, Law of Digital Signatures and Certificates, its regulations and amendments. The integrity of the document and the authorship serious nature typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, clause 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having complied with the collective fund management contract regarding the legal deadline established to respond to complaints.
Article 3º.- Declare that Autoplan Collective Fund Management Company S.A. has incurred one (01) infraction of
minor nature typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, clause 3.5 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for not having complied with observing the deadline established to contact the COMPLAINANT in order to communicate the date of return of their contributions.
Article 4º.- Sanction Autoplan Collective Fund Management Company S.A. with a fine of three (3) UIT, valid at the
moment of effective payment of the fine for the commission of the infractions referred to in articles 1°, 2° and 3° of this resolution.
Article 5º.- This resolution does not exhaust the administrative
path, unless it is consented, being able to be challenged before the Adjunct Superintendency of Prudential Supervision by filing the reconsideration or appeal resource, presented before the same, within the deadline of fifteen (15) business days counted from the day following its notification.
Article 6º.- In the event that this resolution is not
object of challenge through reconsideration or appeal resource within the deadline of fifteen (15) business days of being notified and remains consented, it must be published in 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 7º of the Policy on diffusion of normative projects, laws of general character, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV, approved by SMV Resolution No. 014-2014-SMV/01 and by what is provided in article 14° of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01.
Article 7º.- Transcribe this resolution to
Autoplan Collective Fund Management Company S.A.
Register, communicate and publish.
Omar Gutiérrez Ochoa
Adjunct Superintendent
Adjunct Superintendency of Prudential Supervision