Notice revoking authorization for Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V. to operate as a Savings and Loan Cooperative

DOF: 02/10/2020

OFFICE through which authorization granted to Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S

At the margin a seal with the National Coat of Arms, which says: United Mexican States.- TREASURY.- Ministry of

Public Finance and Public Credit.- National Banking and Securities Commission.- Legal Vice Presidency.- General

Litigation Directorate.- General Adjunct Legal Directorate of Procedures B.- Office No.: P410/2020.-

CNBV.2C.9Revocation212(8116) " 04/22/2019-04/22/2019 " REV/155/EF/01.

SUBJECT: Authorization to operate as is revoked

Savings and Loan Cooperative.

LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF

SAVINGS AND LOAN COOPERATIVE RENAISSANCE COAST

OF OR, S.C. DE A.P. DE R.L. DE C.V.

Nicolás Bravo No. 64 East Col.

Santiago Ixcuintla Center C.P. 63300,

Santiago Ixcuintla, Nayarit, Mexico.

At ' n.: María Antonia Marín Ruíz

Legal Representative.

This National Banking and Securities Commission, based on the provisions of articles 2, 4,

sections I, XI, and XXXVIII, 12 sections V and XV, 16, sections VI and XVII, of the National Commission Law

Banking and Securities (hereinafter LCNBV), in relation to the fourth paragraph of article 5 of the same Law;

84, first paragraph, and 99, section I, of the Law for Regulating the Activities of Cooperatives of

Savings and Loans (hereinafter LRASCAP), in order to comply with said legal

orders, issues this resolution revoking the authorization to operate as a society

savings and loan cooperative, at the time granted to the company called COOPERATIVE

OF SAVINGS AND LOAN RENAISSANCE COAST OF OR, S.C. DE A.P. DE R.L. DE C.V. at the tenor of

the following:

BACKGROUND

I. By office number P012/2016, of February 15, 2016, the National Banking and Securities Commission

granted authorization to continue carrying out operations as a Savings and Loan Cooperative,

to the Company called Savings and Loan Cooperative Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P.

of R.L. de C.V. (hereinafter CAPRECO, Society, Entity or SOCAP, interchangeably).

II. By office number 134-7532/2018 of August 8, 2018, this Commission communicated to CAPRECO

its classification in category 4, as established in articles 76, 77, section IV and 78 of the

LRASCAP.

III. By office number 212-1/64708/2019 of August 28, 2019 (hereinafter office of

summons) this Commission summoned the Entity to the administrative procedure for revocation of its

authorization to continue carrying out operations as a Savings and Loan Cooperative,

presumably located in the cause provided for in article 84, section III of the LRASCAP, that is, for not

complying with the requirements of credit and market capitalization required according to the

applicable regulations in the matter, for which a period of ten business days was granted to use

its right to be heard, to manifest what was convenient for its interests, to offer evidence and formulate

allegations, in relation to the specified cause.

IV. By office number 212-1/64715/2019 of August 30, 2019, in terms of what is provided in the first

paragraph of the aforementioned article 84 of the LRASCAP, this Commission requested an opinion from the Auxiliary Supervision Committee of the Auxiliary Supervision Fund of Savings and Loan Cooperatives and Protection

to its Savers (hereinafter FOCOOP), regarding the referred cause of revocation in which

CAPRECO possibly located itself.

V. By writing dated September 18, 2019, received in the Deeds Office of this Commission on October 1

of 2019, the Entity exercised its right to be heard making various manifestations in

relation to the cause of revocation contained in the summons office.

VI. By writing of September 17, 2019, received in the Deeds Office of this Commission on the same

day, FOCOOP issued an opinion regarding the cause of revocation attributed to the Society, which will be

transcribed in the consideration part of this resolution.

VII. On September 15, 2020, it was submitted to the consideration of the Board of Directors of the Commission

National Banking and Securities, the revocation of the authorization of COOPERATIVE OF SAVINGS AND

LOAN RENAISSANCE COAST OF OR, S.C. DE A.P. DE R.L. DE C.V., based on the facts

mentioned in the previous numbers, which adopted the Eighth Agreement in the ordinary session held on

said date, a certified copy of which is attached to this resolution and, for quick reference, is

transcribed:

" EIGHTH.- The members of the Board of Directors, based on the provisions of

articles 12, section V of the National Banking and Securities Commission Law, in

relation to article 84, section III of the Law for Regulating the Activities of the Law

Cooperatives of Savings and Loans, agreed unanimously to revoke the authorization

to continue carrying out savings and loan operations, in terms in which it was

granted by the National Banking and Securities Commission, by office number P012/ 2016 of date of February 15, 2016, to Savings and Loan Cooperative

Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V. " .

As a result of the above, the reasons and legal grounds supporting the

revocation of the authorization granted to the referred Entity.

CONSIDERATIONS

FIRST.-

COMPETENCE. Based on the provisions of articles 84, first paragraph, and 99,

section I, of the LRASCAP, 2, 4, sections I, XI, and XXXVIII, 12 sections V and XV, 16, sections VI and XVII,

of

the LCNBV, the National Banking and Securities Commission, as a Decentralized Body of the Ministry of

Public Finance and Public Credit, is authorized to authorize the constitution and operation of Societies

Cooperatives of Savings and Loans and, if applicable, to agree to the revocation of said authorizations.

SECOND.-

CAUSE OF REVOCATION. By office number 212-1/64708/2019, of August 28, 2019,

this Commission summoned the Entity to the administrative procedure for revocation of its authorization to

continue carrying out operations as a savings and loan cooperative, for presumably

located in the cause of revocation established in article 84 section III of the LRASCAP (1) , by not complying

with the capitalization requirements for credit and market established in the applicable regulations, such

as it was made known to it in the aforementioned office.

THIRD.-

ANALYSIS OF THE MANIFESTATIONS FORMULATED BY THE ENTITY. In the writing

presented before this Commission on October 1, 2019, the Society exercised its right of

hearing in terms of what is established in the first paragraph of the cited article 84 of the LRASCAP; in the

document, the Entity raises various issues, which are transcribed below in the

parts that interest:

" ...

I. The procedure for revocation of the authorization is inappropriate based on

the right to progressivity of cooperatives within the framework of the rights

economic, social and cultural for the following reason:

The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights provides in

article 2, section 1 and 2 as follows:

...

Likewise, it is established in article 5, section 2 of the aforementioned Pact as follows:

...

For its part, article 6, section 2 of the aforementioned pact as follows (sic):

...

In that context, cooperative societies fall within the scope of the rights

economic, social and cultural, due to their characteristics and the legislation that supports them

in the country, virtue of their characteristics of social organization whose objective is the

overcoming of economic problems ... that have the characteristics of rights

human because they are universal, indivisible and interdependent and of progressive character.

...

II. Inappropriateness of the procedure for revocation of the authorization, because the

office that answers does not comply with what is established in article 3 of the Law

Federal Administrative Procedure that provides (sic):

The office in question does not comply with what article 3 section II provides,

that provides (sic):

...

In effect, it is stated in the office that it is attended that the net capital of the Entity that

representative presents a shortage that makes it lower than the requirements of capital

established in article 31, section VI of the LRASCAP, in relation to articles

49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions, which probably could

locate it in the hypothesis of revocation of its authorization to operate, provided for in

article 84 section III of the cited Law, however, the circumstance of

time and place in which the cause or hypothesis of revocation of the

authorization of my represented according to what is provided in the first paragraph of article

84 of the LRASCAP, in relation to section II of article 3° of the Federal Law of

Administrative Procedure, before cited, in addition to the cited office states that

my represented began its deterioration in its book capital in the month of July 2017 to

finally locate its net capital on February 28, 2019 at a negative balance of

$21,154 thousand lower by $24,014 thousand to the total capital requirements for risks

of credit and market established in article 49 of the Provisions of General Character

General, but no current information is presented, that is, from the months prior to the

issuance of the office, according to the Provisions, to determine if the situation

accounting and financial persists or has changed, facts that in relation to the office do not

comply with what section II of article 3 of the Federal Law of

Administrative Procedure, since the act invoked as violative of the

LRASCAP and the Provisions, cannot be determined or determinable and does not establish

the circumstances of mode and place in which such facts occurred and also do not

imprint on the office that is attended, in addition to the scarce information being

contradictory, because it exposes a deterioration in the capital of the society between July

2017 and February 2019, however it does not agree with the classification that

supposedly places my represented in category 4, which was issued in office

134- 7532/2018, dated August 8, 2018, to which the authority refers in the referred

office.

III. Inappropriateness of the Procedure for Revocation of the Authorization, because the

office that answers does not comply with what is established in article 3°, section V,

of the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure, which provides:

The office in question is also violative of what articles 14 and 16 establish

of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States, in relation to what is provided by

section V, of article 3° of the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure, which

provides that every act must be founded and motivated, this because the office in which

summons my represented to the procedure for revocation of the authorization to

operate as a savings and loan cooperative society, lacks foundation and

motivation, because it establishes that my represented began its deterioration in its capital

book capital in the month of July 2017, to finally locate its net capital on February 28

2019 in a negative balance of $21,154 thousand lower by $24,014 thousand to the total

of capital requirements for credit and market risks established in article

49 of the Provisions, however, it does not establish in the aforementioned office how

obtained the information that gave as a result the figures mentioned above, what was the

method or study that was carried out to obtain said figures and when they were carried out

came about, situation that leaves my represented in a state of defenselessness since at not giving to know the start of the administrative procedure such elements, my

represented is unable to give a punctual and objective response to the office

in question, as well as to offer the pertinent evidence to its right of defense that

it assists in accordance with the human rights that safeguard our Fundamental Charter

Fundamental. " .

IV. Inappropriateness of the procedure for revocation of the authorization, because the

office that answers does not comply with what is established in article 32 of the Law

Federal Administrative Procedure, which provides:

...

In effect, the office in question states that in office 134-7532/2018 of date August 8

of 2018, the National Banking and Securities Commission classified my represented in the

category 4 and in accordance with what article 32 of the Federal Law of

Administrative Procedure, the Regulatory Body had a period of 10 days to

issue the summons to the procedure for revocation of the authorization to operate

as a Cooperative Society, in which conditions and in accordance with what is provided by the

cited precept to the National Banking and Securities Commission it prescribed the right

to summon my represented and of course initiate the procedure ...

...

What is expressed above about the period contained in article 32 of the Federal Law

of Administrative Procedure, is strengthened with what is provided in article

231 (sic) of the General Provisions Applicable to the Activities of the

Savings and Loan Cooperatives

V. Inappropriateness of the procedure for revocation of the authorization, because the

office that answers does not comply with what is established in article 3 section VII of

the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure that provides:

...

...

the office by which my represented is summoned to the procedure

administrative of revocation ... is not adjusted to the applicable provisions and

therefore does not comply with ... the guarantee of foundation and motivation ... .

VI. Inappropriateness of the procedure for revocation of the authorization, because

prior to said procedure, what is provided in articles

55, 85, 87 and 89 of the LRASCAP have not been complied with.

...

the aforementioned articles of the LRASCAP establish the support that must receive

savings and loan cooperative societies ... with liquidity problems, however, to my represented to date has not been instrumented the procedure

administrative in which an opportunity is given to hear the opinion of my represented and in

which it qualifies to what type of support my represented can be a candidate ...

VII. Inappropriateness of the Procedure for Dissolution and Liquidation attending to the

current situation of the Savings and Loan Cooperative Renacimiento

Coast of Or, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V.

As is known to this regulatory body, the society that I represent has

been facing a difficult economic situation when facing several phenomena

fortuitous and force majeure, because a significant amount of loans have

placed in the primary sector of agriculture, because most of the partners are

dedicated to that activity and the society since its founding was its purpose and vocation, and the

region has faced various phenomena that have caused losses in its

plantings and harvests, which has prevented them from complying with their payment obligations, for this

reason the society has been working, among others, in a restructuring program of

resources destined to that sector and coming from the National Financial Institution for Agricultural, Rural, Forestry and Fisheries Development,

called " Attention Scheme for the economic reactivation of accredited of the FND " , which would have an impact on the net capital of the society and for this the impact study is offered where the financial information is projected, through the restructuring of credit to July 2019,

derived from the restructuring of the credits that are funded through a

bank loan from the FND financial institution.

Going further into the matter, the society faces a difficult situation derived not from the

inefficiency in administration, but derived from the delinquency due to the non-payment of the

credits destined for agriculture whose recovery cycles are different from those of

other economic activities and subject to various eventualities such as plagues or

climatological phenomena.

EVIDENCE

DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE. CONSISTING OF THE IMPACT STUDY THAT WOULD BE

PRESENTED IN THE FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF SAVINGS AND LOAN COOPERATIVE RENAISSANCE

COAST OF OR, S.C. DE A.P. DE R.L. DE C.V.,

BY CREDIT RESTRUCTURING JULY 2019 DERIVED FROM THE

RESTRUCTURING OF THE CREDITS THAT ARE FUNDED THROUGH A

BANK LOAN FROM THE NATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTION FOR AGRICULTURAL,

RURAL, FORESTRY AND FISHING DEVELOPMENT, WITH POSSIBILITIES

OF REVERSING THE CURRENT FINANCIAL SITUATION OF MY REPRESENTED ALREADY

MENTIONED.

The manifestations raised by CAPRECO in the document in question, as well as the evidence to which it makes

mention, result, on the one hand, inoperative and on the other unfounded to disprove the cause of revocation

established in article 84 section III of the LRASCAP, which is attributed to it in the present administrative

procedure, by reason of the considerations exposed below.

In principle, it is convenient to keep in mind that, as specified in the summons office before

mentioned, that Society was located in the cause of revocation provided for in section III of article 84 of the

LRASCAP, by reason of having a significant deterioration in its book capital, which led to its net capital

on February 28, 2019 to a negative balance of $21,154 thousand, lower than the total of the

capitalization requirements for credit and market risks, established in article 49 (2) of the Provisions

of

General Character Applicable to the Activities of Savings and Loan Cooperatives (3) (in

advance the Provisions), which located its Capitalization Level at -340.51%, with respect to the total of the

capitalization requirements for credit and market risks, as shown in the box

following:

MONTH/YEAR

ASR

CAPITAL REQ.

FOR RISKS

NET CAPITAL

CAPITAL SHORTAGE

NICAP

07/31/2017

$162,227,085

$13,044,130

$25,270,191

193.73%

08/31/2017

$161,717,186

$13,062,153

$26,604,132

203.67%

09/30/2017

$164,116,524

$13,317,392

$25,393,945

190.68%

10/31/2017

$169,153,403

$13,683,347

$27,008,135

197.38%

11/30/2017

$170,916,726

$13,777,724

$26,691,273

193.73%

12/31/2017

$169,357,267

$13,610,832

$24,374,355

179.08%

01/31/2018

$163,702,851

$13,222,233

$20,685,951

156.45%

02/28/2018

$160,785,286

$13,052,425

$18,646,957

142.86%

03/31/2018

$154,081,919

$12,478,744

$14,273,629

114.38%

04/30/2018

$150,762,796

$11,722,925

$11,261,642

$461,283

96.07%

05/31/2018

$145,986,602

$11,249,275

$5,922,487

$5,326,78

52.65%

06/30/2018

$140,539,410

$10,803,252

$780,875

$10,022,377

7.23%

07/31/2018

$129,117,107

$9,843,680

-$9,203,575

$19,047,255

-93.50%

08/31/2018

$120,443,071

$9,120,773

-$14,984,565

$24,105,338

-164.29%

09/30/2018

$106,587,062

$8,496,870

-$25,101,448

$33,598,318

-295.42%

10/31/2018

$99,905,045

$7,970,393

-$23,099,900

$31,070,293

-289.82%

11/30/2018

$93,411,161

$7,425,327

-$23,578,195

$31,003,522

-317.54%

12/31/2018

$90,358,334

$7,040,497

-$16,973,386

$24,013,883

-241.08%

01/31/2019

$86,734,452

$6,574,995

-$19,618,086

$26,193,081

-298.37%

02/28/2019

$82,814,627

$6,212,356

-$21,153,885

$27,366,241

-340.51%

ASR = Assets Subject to Risk, valued according to the accounting criteria established in the

Annex E, issued in accordance with article 195 of the Provisions.

From the above, it stands out that the Entity had a significant deterioration in its book capital starting

in the month of July 2017, to finally bring its net capital to February 28, 2019 to a negative balance

of $21,154 thousand, lower than the total capitalization requirements for credit and market risks,

provided for in articles 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions, in relation to what is established in

article 31, section VI of the LRASCAP, provisions that, in letter, establish the following:

Law for Regulating the Activities of the

Savings and Loan Cooperatives

Article 31.- The Commission will issue, through general character provisions,

minimum guidelines related to eminently technical or operational aspects

tending to preserve the liquidity, solvency and stability of the Societies

Cooperatives of Savings and Loans with Levels of Operation I to IV, in the matters

following:

...

VI. Capitalization requirements applicable depending on credit risks and, in

its case, of market. These requirements will contemplate the treatment relative to the

investments in real estate and other assets that correspond to the activities to which

refers Article 27 of this Law that, if applicable, must be subtracted from net capital

based on their degree of liquidity or other associated risk concepts.

General Provisions Applicable to the Activities of the Societies

Savings and Loan Cooperatives

Article 49.- Societies must maintain a net capital in relation to the

credit and market risks they incur in their operation, which cannot be

lower than the capital requirements established in this section. For such purposes,

operations must be valued according to the Accounting Criteria.

Operations will be included from the date they are concluded,

regardless of the settlement, delivery or validity date, as the case may be.

It will be considered that the ownership of an asset has been transferred, and therefore this

will not have capitalization requirements according to what is established in the present

section, provided that the operation complies with all and each of the conditions

established to be recognized as a sale of assets, in the criterion regarding the

" Recognition and derecognition of financial assets " contained in the Criteria of

Accounting.

In the case of operations denominated in UDIS, these must be converted to national currency

applying the value of the UDI published by the Bank of Mexico in the Official

Federal Register, corresponding to the date to which the requirements are being determined.

Article 50.- Societies, for the determination of capital requirements for

credit risk, must adjust to the following procedure:

I. Classification of operations.

Societies must classify their assets and operations that originate contingent liability

contingent, in attention to the credit risk and counterparty of the operation with

independence of the underlying asset, in any of the following groups:

a) Group 1. Cash; securities issued or guaranteed by the Federal Government; credits with

express guarantee of the Federal Government itself and contingent operations carried out with the persons indicated in this subsection; as well as other operations where the counterparty of the Societies is any of the persons mentioned in this group.

b) Group 2. Deposits, securities and credits owed to or guaranteed or backed by credit institutions and brokerage houses; shares of investment companies; credits and securities owed to or guaranteed or backed by public trusts established by the Federal Government for economic promotion; securities owed to decentralized bodies of the Federal Government; as well as repurchase agreements and other operations where the counterparty of the Societies is any of the persons mentioned in this group.

Without prejudice to what is established in the preceding paragraph, operations subject to credit risk with or owed to development banking institutions in which, pursuant to their respective organic laws, the Federal Government responds at all times for such operations, shall have a credit risk weighting of zero percent.

c) Group 3. Credits, securities and other assets that generate credit risk, where the counterparty of the Societies is different from the persons mentioned in the groups provided for in subsections a) and b) above.

Without limitation of what is established in this section, the groups into which operations exposed to credit risk are classified, will be integrated by the operations in national currency and UDIS specified in this fraction, as appropriate, according to the following: i) deposits and investments in securities include the respective accrued interest; ii) credit operations shall be understood in their broadest sense and shall include the taking of documents for immediate collection, current and overdue portfolio; loans to personnel; refinancing and capitalization of interest; guarantees, accrued interest, and accrued commissions and premiums; and iii) investments charged to the reserve fund for staff pensions and seniority premiums shall be considered as another investment in the group to which they correspond.

II. Computation of Assets.

For purposes of determining the required net capital regarding the assets mentioned in subsections a), b) and c) of the previous fraction I, the following shall apply:

a) Regarding the credit portfolio, it shall count net of the corresponding estimates.

b) With regard to securities and other assets, these shall count net of the respective estimates, depreciation and write-offs.

III. Calculation of the Requirement.

The net capital requirements shall be determined by applying 8 percent to the sum of its assets and other operations, weighted as follows:

GROUPS
RISK WEIGHTING
PERCENTAGE

1.
0%

2.
20%

3.
100%

In the case of loans for the acquisition or construction of personal housing that carry a guarantee of at least 50 percent of the outstanding balance of the loan granted by any public development entity, for purposes of the capitalization requirements, the Societies shall consider the guaranteed portion of the credit within group 2 and the remaining unguaranteed portion within group 3.

Additionally, the capital requirements referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph shall benefit from a reduction of 25 percent.

For purposes of what is stated in this article, the Societies may deduct from the total amount of each credit, up to 100 percent of the money deposits constituted by the accredited party itself in the Society, which meet the conditions to be considered a guarantee under the provisions of Section V of
Annex C of these regulations. The amount to be deducted cannot exceed the
outstanding balance of the credit.

Article 51.- The capital requirement for market risk shall be that obtained
by applying 1 percent to the total amount resulting from the sum of the credit portfolio granted by the Societies, net of the corresponding preventive estimates for credit risks, the total of investments in securities and the balance of debtors by repurchase agreement, observing for this purpose the applicable accounting criteria.

Article 52.- For purposes of what is provided in this section, net capital shall be
composed of:

I. Book capital or equity.

Less:

II. Items recorded in the Society's assets as intangibles or that,
in case, imply deferral of expenses or costs in the Society's capital, such as:

a) Intangibles of any kind including commercial goodwill.

b) Any item except fixed assets and prepaid expenses less than one year, which represents expenditures or expenses whose recognition in book capital is deferred over time.

All these concepts shall be subtracted net of their corresponding amortizations.

III. Liquidity loans granted to other Societies based on what is established
in Article 19, fraction I, subsection h), of the Law.

IV. Credits that are granted net of their corresponding estimates and the
other operations, which are carried out in violation of the applicable provisions.

Investments in real estate and other assets shall be included in this fraction, net of their corresponding depreciation, carried out by the Societies in violation of what is provided in Article 27 of the Law, provided they were effectuated after the entry into force of said legal provision.

This without prejudice to the sanctions and penalties that apply under the Law and other applicable regulations.

V. Excess or voluntary certificates subscribed in accordance with what is provided by
Article 51 of the Cooperative Law, which do not meet the characteristics
indicated in Article 53 of these regulations.

VI. Investments in any debt instrument whose payment by the issuer or
debtor, as appropriate, is intended to be made, having agreed so between the parties, after covering other liabilities, i.e., subordinated titles.

VII. Financing and any type of contribution on an onerous basis, including its
accessories, whose resources, directly or indirectly, are destined for the acquisition of shares or titles representing the capital of the Society itself that lends the resources.

Article 53.- Excess or voluntary certificates subscribed in accordance with what is
provided by Article 51 of the Cooperative Law, must be issued prior approval of the General Assembly of Partners of the program referred to in the following fraction I, to which the objectives of such issuance must be presented. This, in order to consider them within the net capital of the Societies.

Such certificates must meet the following characteristics:

I. Be issued under a program that provides for the maximum authorized amount
of the issuance, as well as its duration.

II. Have the term determined by the General Assembly of Partners and upon expiration
thereof they must be liquidated, unless such certificates provide for the possibility of being renewed automatically and the program under which they were issued remains in effect.

III. Be numbered and of the same value.

IV. Contain the following:

a) The yield rate that, if any, such certificates will pay at the close of the exercise, which cannot exceed 150% of the CCP on the date of issuance. Pursuant to what is provided by Article 51 of the Cooperative Law, the interest rate referred to in the preceding paragraph shall only be paid if the Society has retained earnings in the corresponding exercise.

b) The term designated for payment, conditions and manner in which the certificates shall be returned.

c) The place and mode of payment.

d) The legends described below:
" These certificates are contributions to the social capital of the Society and do not constitute deposits, therefore they are not subject to the coverage provided by the Protection Fund as referred to in the second paragraph of Article 54 of the Law " . " The holder of this certificate may request its withdrawal, provided that such withdrawal does not result in a breach of the minimum capital or the capitalization requirements that the Society must observe " .

Under no circumstances may Partners acquire excess certificates for an amount that represents more than 2 percent of the social capital, unless they obtain authorization from the Commission, previously proving to the Society that this could address solvency or liquidity problems.

Non-withdrawable excess or voluntary capital certificates originating from government programs shall be exempt from what is provided in this article.

Article 54.- The Society must perform monthly computation of the Capitalization Level,
based on balances as of the last day of the month in question. These computations must be sent to the Commission and the Auxiliary Supervision Committee no later than the last day of the immediately following month to which they correspond, based on the form contained in Article 307 of these regulations and in terms of what is stated by Article 308 of these regulations. Without prejudice to the foregoing, the Commission may verify the determination of capitalization requirements as well as the computation of the Capitalization Level, pursuant to what is provided by this subsection, for which, the Societies must provide said Commission with the information requested regarding the matter.

The Commission may require that the computation of the Capitalization Level be sent with greater frequency and on any date for a specific Society, when it judges that between the days that elapse between one computation and another, such Society is assuming risks notably higher than those shown by the closing figures of each month.

The Commission, in terms of the second paragraph of Article 19 of the Law, will resolve regarding the risk weighting percentages and procedure for determining the conversion value, which will be applicable to analogous or related operations to those referred to in the cited article.

The capitalization requirements and the computation of the Capitalization Level calculated by the Societies shall be used for all legal effects that correspond. This, unless the Commission has performed the verification indicated in the first paragraph of this article and has obtained a different computation, in which case the one obtained by the Commission shall be considered definitive and shall be used for all legal effects derived therefrom.

Article 55.- The Commission may demand any Society additional capitalization requirements
beyond those indicated in this regulation, when in its judgment so justified, taking into account, among other aspects, the integration of its capital, the composition of its assets, the efficiency of its internal control systems and, in general, the exposure and administration of risks.

Article 56.- The Commission will make known the Capitalization Level of the Societies and
the date to which it corresponds, through the worldwide electronic network known as Internet, at the site http://www.cnbv.gob.mx and through publication of the latest available classification in the Statistical Bulletin of Savings and Loan Cooperatives of the Commission itself.

In the event that the Commission has not received from the Society in question the information regarding the computation of the Capitalization Level, pursuant to what is provided by
Article 54 of these regulations, it will make this situation known to the public through the means
referred to in the preceding paragraph. This, without prejudice to the powers of inspection and oversight that the Commission exercises, as well as the sanctions that apply under the applicable provisions.

It should be added that due to the deterioration in the book capital of the Entity, by notice number 134-7532/2018 dated August 8, 2018, this Commission classified it in the capitalization category 4, pursuant to what is established in articles 76, 77, fraction IV and 78 of the LRASCAP (4) , in relation to articles 231 and 232 of the Regulations (5) .

Now then, as had already been anticipated, the statements made by the Entity, identified with numerals I, II, III, IV, V, VI and VII contained in the writing in which it exercises its right to hearing prove inoperative and unfounded to disprove the cause for revocation of its authorization to continue carrying out savings and loan operations, established in article 84 fraction III of the LRASCAP, given that, as will be explained in subsequent paragraphs, the Society does not convincingly demonstrate compliance with the capital requirements established in article 31, fraction VI of the LRASCAP, in relation to articles 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Regulations previously transcribed.

Indeed, in numeral I of said writing, CAPRECO mentions that the revocation procedure established in the LRASCAP, infringes to its detriment fundamental rights, such as the right of progressivity of cooperatives within the framework of economic, social and cultural rights provided in international treaties on human rights.

Such allegations prove inoperative, since the Society limits itself to making a series of subjective statements regarding the concept of human rights and their characteristics, without thereby providing elements or convincing proof with which it accredits that it complies with the capitalization requirements that are exigible to it pursuant to the applicable regulatory framework in the matter, so that by failing to demonstrate such extent, its simple statements on human rights matters prove ineffective to disprove the cause for revocation attributed to it in the present procedure.

Regarding this, the jurisprudence whose localization data, rubric and text are transcribed below are applicable:

Era: Tenth Era
Registry: 2010038
Instance: Circuit Collegiate Tribunals
Type of Thesis: Jurisprudence
Source: Gazette of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation Book 22, September 2015, Volume III Subject(s): Common Thesis: (V Region)2o. J/1 (10a.)
Page: 1683

INOPERANT CONCEPTS OR GRIEVANCES. WHAT MUST BE UNDERSTOOD BY "REASONING" AS A COMPONENT OF THE CAUSE OF ACTION FOR ITS STUDY TO PROCEED. According to the conceptualization developed by diverse jurists of modern doctrine regarding the elements of the cause petendi, it is inferred that it is composed of a fact and reasoning with which to explain the illegality alleged. This is consistent with jurisprudence 1a./J. 81/2002, of the First Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation in the sense that the cause of action does not imply that complainants or appellants can limit themselves to mere assertions without support or foundation, since it corresponds to them (except in cases of supplementation of the deficiency of the complaint) to expose, reasoned, why they deem unconstitutional or illegal the acts they claim or appeal; however, it has not remained completely defined what must be understood by reasoning. Thus, pursuant to what distinguished authors have expounded on the latter, it is established that a legal reasoning presupposes some problem or issue to which, through the distinct interpretative or argumentative forms provided by formal logic, material or pragmatic, a response is reached from inferences obtained from given premises or judgments (facts and foundation). What, transferred to the judicial field, in specific, to the motives of non-conformity, a true reasoning (independently of the argumentative model used), translates to the minimal need to explain why or how the challenged act, or the appealed resolution departs from the law, through the confrontation of concrete factual situations against the applicable norm (in such a way as to evidence the violation), and the proposal of solution or conclusion drawn from the connection between those premises (fact and foundation). Consequently, in matters governed by the principle of strict law, an allegation that limits itself to making assertions without any support or undemonstrated conclusions, cannot be considered a true reasoning and, by extension, must be qualified as inoperative; without it being possible to enter its study under the pretext of the cause of action, since this is formed by the expression of a concrete fact and reasoning, understood by this, whatever the method argumentative, the exposition in which the complainant or appellant makes the comparison of the fact against the corresponding foundation and its conclusion, deduced from the link between one and the other, in such a way as to evidence that the challenged act or the resolution appealed is illegal; because otherwise, analyzing any assertion that does not satisfy these requirements, would be resolving based on arguments not sketched, which would translate into a true supplementation of the complaint in matters where this figure is barred.

SECOND CIRCUIT COLEGIATE TRIBUNAL OF THE CENTRAL AUXILIARY OF THE FIFTH REGION.

Era: Tenth Era
Registry: 2008514
Instance: Circuit Collegiate Tribunals
Type of Thesis: Jurisprudence
Source: Gazette of the Judicial Weekly of the Federation Book 15, February 2015, Volume III Subject(s): Common Thesis: XXVII.3o. J/11 (10a.)
Page: 2241

DIFFUSE CONTROL OF CONSTITUTIONALITY. IF ITS EXERCISE IS REQUESTED AND IT DOES NOT CLEARLY INDICATE WHICH IS THE HUMAN RIGHT ESTIMATED TO BE INFRINGED, THE GENERAL NORM TO CONTRAST NOR THE GRIEVANCE THAT PRODUCES, THE CORRESPONDING PLEADING MUST BE DECLARED INOPERATIVE. Although diffuse constitutional control -connotation that includes conventional control-, which is exercised in the ex officio modality, is not limited to the manifestations or acts of the parties, when its exercise is requested minimum elements that enable its analysis must be clearly indicated, namely, which is the human right estimated to be infringed, the general norm to contrast and the grievance it produces, because, if not, the corresponding pleading must be declared inoperative, since outside the fulfillment of the principle iura novit curia, the judge is not obliged to undertake an "express" ex officio study of human rights or constitutional or conventional precepts or provisions that are transcribed to him, or that generally invoked as belonging to the system.

THIRD COLEGIATE TRIBUNAL OF THE TWENTY-SEVENTH CIRCUIT.

Furthermore, the Society starts from a false premise, since when summoning it to the revocation procedure, it does not imply that the principle of progressivity of human rights is infringed, but rather it must be understood as an expression of the punitive faculty with which the State disposes, and particularly, of the CNBV, which pursuant to the objectives established in article 5 of the LCNBV, has powers to achieve financial stability for the benefit of the community.

Likewise, contrary to what was stated by that Entity, when summoning it to the revocation procedure in terms of what is provided in article 84 of the LRASCAP, the guarantee of hearing established in article 14 Constitutional is fulfilled, and therefore, it is not left in a state of defenselessness within the present procedure.

With regard to what was manifested by CAPRECO in numeral II , regarding that " no current information is presented, that is, from the months prior to the issuance of the notice, pursuant to the Regulations, to determine if the accounting and financial situation persists or has changed " , such statements prove unfounded, in reason that in notice 212-1/64708/2019, by which it was summoned to revocation to that Society, the evolution of the Capitalization Level until February 28, 2019 is indicated, which is not disproven by said Entity, added to the fact that it does not demonstrate pursuant to the burden of proof that corresponds to it, in terms of article 81 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures (6) , that in the aforementioned period it complied with the capitalization requirements for credit and market risk exigible in the applicable regulatory framework previously transcribed, so that by failing to demonstrate such extremes, the statements it raises prove unfounded to disprove the cause for revocation attributed to it.

Likewise, regardless of whether that Society estimates that information from " the months prior to summons " should have been considered , such statement does not benefit it in any way, because besides not convincingly demonstrating compliance with the precepts transcribed in preceding paragraphs, it is worth noting that from the analysis of regulatory report A-2112 " Disaggregated capital requirements by risk " , of Series R21, with figures from March to July 2019 that said Entity transmitted to this Commission via the Interinstitutional Information Transfer System (SITI), it is observed that in said period, the very information generated and transmitted by that Society reflects that its net capital is lower than the capital requirements for credit and market risks, which results in that during the indicated period, the Capitalization Level of that Society remained below 50 percent (7) , a fact that, even, updates its classification in category 4, pursuant to what is provided in article 231 of the Regulations.

As a consequence of the foregoing, it is evident that the Capitalization Level of CAPRECO was located in the months previously indicated, below 50 percent, an event that keeps it in category 4, pursuant to what is provided in fraction IV of article 231 of the Regulations.

On the other hand, regarding the manifestation of that Entity in the sense that in the Notice of summons " ... an deterioration in the society's capital is exposed between July 2017 and February 2019, however, it does not agree with the rating that supposedly places my represented party in category 4 ... " , proves unfounded, since said category was notified to it by Notice 134-7532/2018 dated August 8 2018, which subsists and which for quick reference is transcribed below in the parts that interest:

" ... From the review of regulatory report A-2112 " Disaggregated capital requirements by risk " , of Series R21, with figures as of June 30, 2018, that said Society transmitted to this Commission on July 31, 2018, in compliance with what is provided by articles 307, 308 and 310 of the Regulations, it was determined that said Society presented a Capitalization Level of 7.23%.

As a result of the foregoing, this Commission, based on Article 234 of the Provisions, notifies CAPRECO that its Capitalization Level places it in Category 4 referred to in Article 231, Section IV of the Provisions, based on Article 76 of the LRASCAP; therefore, based on Articles 239 and 244 of said Provisions, Article 78, in relation to Article 85 of the LRASCAP, applies to it...".

In addition to the above, it is important to highlight that in accordance with the information contained in the aforementioned regulatory report A-2112 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", from Series R21, with figures from August to November 2019, the latest information available at this Commission at the date of issuance of this document, which that Society submitted to this Commission via SITI, the Capitalization Level of CAPRECO during said period remained below 50 percent, as detailed below:

CONCEPT

aug-19

sept-19

oct-19

nov-19

Capitalization Level

-48.57%

-105.05%

-135.35%

-138.95%

Total capital requirement

by risk

5,748,887

5,476,664

5,332,971

5,301,498

Net Capital

-2,792,324

-5,753,241

-7,218,125

-7,366,457

Therefore, the statements made by that Entity in section II of its written submission of its right to a hearing are unfounded, and consequently, the ground for revocation imputed to it in the present procedure subsists.

Regarding what CAPRECO manifested in section III of the written submission of its right to a hearing, insofar as it does not "... establish in the aforementioned notice (of summons) how it obtained the information that gave rise to the aforementioned figures, what method or study was carried out to obtain said figures and when they were carried out ...", such claims are unfounded, given that the figures contained in the aforementioned notice of summons 212-1/64708/2019, were determined based on the information that the same Society provided to this Commission, as explained below:

a) In relation to the Capitalization Level and its Risk Assets (ASR), the Capital Requirement by Risks, as well as the Net Capital corresponding to the months from July 2017 to August 2018, these correspond to the information sent by that Society via SITI, through the regulatory report A-2112 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", of Series R21, which is established in Articles 307, 308 and 310 of the Provisions.

b)

In relation to the information contemplated in the aforementioned Notice of Summons, corresponding to the period from September 2018 to February 2019, it is emphasized that the information sent via SITI by that Society through the regulatory report A-2112 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", of Series R21, provided for in the provisions specified in the preceding paragraph, was taken as a basis, also considering the aspects mentioned in notices 134-7492/2018 dated July 9, 2018 (notice of observations) and 134-6717/2019 dated January 10, 2019 issued by this Commission, which were notified to that Entity on July 11, 2018 and January 15, 2019, respectively, and which consist of the following:

i.

Based on Article 52 of the Provisions, in the determination of CAPRECO's Net Capital, the corrective measures corresponding to observations 1 and 2, issued through Notice No. 134-7492/2018, dated July 9, 2018, were considered, which for quick reference are transcribed below:

"Observation 1 Simulation of credit collection and disbursement operations without the existence of a real cash flow.

...

In view of the above, given the simulation in the accounting records and in the credit portfolio, this Commission instructs you that from the financial information with figures as of the close of June 2018, in the determination of net capital, you must deduct from the accounting capital the 60 credits contained in the database that integrates CAPRECO's credit portfolio with figures as of November 30, 2017, indicated in this observation, net of their corresponding estimates, as they are considered operations carried out in contravention of the applicable provisions, in accordance with Article 52 of the Provisions, which we will verify in the regulatory report C-0451 "Disaggregated credits for consumption, housing and commercial", of Series R04 "Credit Portfolio".

" Observation 2

Omission of recognition of overdue portfolio and constitution of preventive estimates for credit risks.

...

In view of the above, you must reclassify the indicated credits, registering them as overdue portfolio and constitute against the results of the period the missing preventive estimates for credit risks (EPRC) up to the total of the outstanding balance as of the close of June 2018, of the 24 credits described in the observation we are concerned with ... " .

ii. Likewise, in the determination of Net Capital, the aspect observed through Notice No. 134-6717/2019 dated January 10, 2019, was reduced, which is transcribed below for quick reference:

"Observation Capitalization of deposits covering granted credits.

From the review of the regulatory report A-0111 "Minimum Catalog" of Series R01, with figures as of the close of September 2018, submitted by that Society through SITI on October 31 of this year, it was observed that it presented a balance

of

$13,995,000.00 in concept 410303000000 "Certificates for Risk Capital" , which is part of the share capital item, an amount that comes from liquid guarantees of granted credits ...

Consequently, the liquid guarantee of the granted loans that must be maintained as a requirement in accordance with the technical sheets of the different credit products, which is recorded in accordance with what is established in their respective credit and savings contracts, and in what is established in their credit and collection manual, section 27.1 which states: "The Reciprocity Guarantee is the deposit made by the member in their savings account, which upon disbursement of their credit will pass to the account called Reciprocity Guarantee, which they cannot withdraw until the credit is settled, as it is based on the credit contract" , omitting to recognize said deposits as a liability. " .

It should be added that, although the conversion of liquid guarantees into risk certificates was approved in the Extraordinary General Assembly of September 27, 2018, submitted by that Society through a written document dated November 6, 2018, received by this Commission on November 8, 2018, the agreements adopted in said Assembly were not considered valid, since, although it was held on second call, CAPRECO did not prove that it had been held in the terms provided for in Article 37 of the General Law of Cooperative Societies (LGSC), since a second call always takes place whenever an Assembly has been attempted to be held on first call, and it could not be carried out due to the lack of quorum, for which that Society had to duly prove the number of members present, as well as that they were not sufficient to prove the existence of legal quorum, in terms of what is provided in Articles 36 and 37 of the LGSC and 31 and 32 of its Constitutive Bases, which was not demonstrated by that Society.

Additionally, although the Constitutive Bases of CAPRECO provide for the participation of delegates, that Society did not prove the participation of the same in the first, nor in the second call, nor that, if applicable, the same had an express written mandate on the different issues contained in the call and voting of the members who had represented all the delegates designated for the Assembly, this in terms of what is provided in Article 40 of the LGSC and 34 of its Constitutive Bases.

iii. Likewise, additional certificates issued under the capitalization program approved in the aforementioned Assembly of September 27, 2018, were deducted from the calculation of the Entity's Net Capital, since, in addition to what is stated in the preceding subsection, said program was approved in the following terms:

" THIRD.- In accordance with the approved capitalization program, it contains the following characteristics.- a) The issuance will be up to $60,000,000.00, containing the various categories or sources of capitalization referred to in the previous agreements. The issuance will be made gradually or in various acts in accordance with its nature.- b) The contribution certificates will have the characteristics referred to in the General Provisions to which the Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies refer.- c) The certificates of this program will have a term of 360, 540 and 720 days, they will be automatically renewable; however, in the event of a merger procedure, they cannot be withdrawn during that period or any mechanism of sanitation of the society. Therefore, the right of withdrawal can only be exercised if the situation of the society allows it.- d) The Board of Directors must issue the certificates within a maximum period of 30 days, must bear the signature of the President and Secretary and other requirements referred to in the constitutive bases.- FOURTH.- It is agreed to issue contribution certificates of a voluntary nature in accordance with the capitalization program in which members who choose to capitalize all or part of their savings and investments receive a special prize in the terms permitted by the legislation in comparison with the conditions received in said instruments. The duration and characteristics will be applicable with respect to stabilization certificates. " .

It should be noted that the program approved in the aforementioned Assembly does not establish its duration, which is why it does not comply with what is established in Article 53 of the Provisions and, consequently, the voluntary certificates issued under the aforementioned program cannot be considered within the calculation of CAPRECO's Net Capital, in accordance with what is provided in Section V of Article 52 of said Provisions.

Thus, as has been exposed, the information of the Entity included in the period from September 2018 to February 2019, the figures provided by it were adjusted taking into account the aspects mentioned in notices numbers 134-7492/2018 dated July 9, 2018 and 134-6717/2019 dated January 10, 2019, specified in advance and which are fully known to it, from which, as stated, the outstanding balance of 60 credits granted in contravention of the Provisions and the Preventive Estimates for Credit Risks (EPRC) of 24 credits pending to be constituted were subtracted from its net capital, and additionally, the additional certificates issued under the capitalization program approved in the Assembly of September 27, 2018 were deducted from the calculation of its Net Capital, since CAPRECO did not prove that said Assembly had been held in accordance with what is provided in the General Law of Cooperative Societies, so that such certificates do not comply with what is provided in Article 53 of the Provisions.

Therefore, if the Entity does not prove that it has complied with the capitalization requirements that are required of it in accordance with what is established in Article 31, Section VI of the LRASCAP, in relation to Articles 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions, it is conclusive that the statements it makes in section III that concerns us are unfounded and, consequently, the ground for revocation for which it was summoned is proven.

In another order of ideas, in section IV, the Entity refers that what is provided in Article 32 of the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure was not complied with, since in its opinion, this Commission had a period of 10 days to issue the summons to the procedure for revocation of the authorization to operate as a Cooperative Society, in which conditions and in accordance with what the cited provision stipulates, the CNBV prescribed the right to summon my represented party and of course initiate the procedure.

This is unfounded, since the provision in question is not applicable supplementarily to the revocation procedure provided for in the LRASCAP. This is so, since in Article 5, Section III of the aforementioned LRASCAP, it is established as follows:

Article 5.- In what is not provided for by this Law, the subjects of it will be applied supplementarily and in the following order:

...

III. The Federal Law of Administrative Procedure in its Titles Third A, regarding regulatory improvement, and Sixth, regarding the processing of the resources referred to in this Law.

In this sense, the Federal Law of Administrative Procedure is only applicable supplementarily in its Titles Third A, regarding regulatory improvement, and Sixth, regarding the processing of the review resource, sections in which the cited Article 32 invoked by CAPRECO is not found, hence that, contrary to its appreciation, such article is not applicable to the revocation procedure that concerns us, from which it is inferred that its statements are unfounded.

On the other hand, the Entity's claims raised in section V, in which it complains that, in its opinion, the notice of summons does not comply with the guarantee of substantiation and motivation, are unfounded.

It is said that its statements are unfounded, in virtue of the fact that, as was exposed at the beginning of this Consideration, in the notice of summons the essential grounds and motives that support the probable update of the ground for revocation were specified, as well as the detailed information from which it is observed that the Entity does not comply with the capitalization requirements required in accordance with the applicable regulations in the matter (Articles 31, Section VI of the LRASCAP, in relation to Articles 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions) without the Entity demonstrating faithfully that it complies with the capitalization requirements that are required of it in the same, from which it is inferred that, by not demonstrating such compliance, the ground for revocation subsists and the information contained in the aforementioned notice of summons.

In section VI, the Entity states that, prior to the revocation procedure, what is provided in Articles 55, 85, 87 and 89 of the LRASCAP was not complied with, since the Entity was not given the opportunity to apply any of the (financial) supports provided for in said provisions.

What is referred to by the Entity is unfounded, since the financial supports established in the provisions it refers to (8), do not imply a constituted right in favor of the entity, since, if applicable, they are subject to the requirements established in the applicable regulations and their granting is not in charge of this Commission, so that the supports referred to in the aforementioned provisions are independent of the compliance with the obligations that that Society has at its disposal and, in addition, they do not hinder or prevent the CNBV from exercising its faculties to substantiate the revocation procedure that concerns us, since such matter is not expressly established in the articles in question, hence that CAPRECO's claims are unfounded.

In another order of ideas, the statements made by the Society in section VII, in which it states that, supposedly, it is "working" on, among others, a resource restructuring program from the National Financial Development Agency for Agriculture, Rural, Forestry and Fisheries, called "Attention Scheme for the Economic Reactivation of FND Creditors", which would have an impact on the Net Capital of that Society, such statements are unfounded, since they are simply subjective statements of expectations of uncertain realization, with which it does not faithfully demonstrate that it complies with the credit and market capitalization requirements provided for in Article 31 Section VI of the LRASCAP and 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions.

To add to this, it should be mentioned that the Capitalization Level of CAPRECO with figures as of November 30, 2019, the latest information available at this Commission, that Society reported through the regulatory report A-2112 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", of Series R21, to that date, a Capitalization Level of -138.95%, so its arguments are unfounded.

Likewise, taking into consideration the information alluded to in the previous paragraph, as well as what was manifested in the previous sections, the Capitalization Level of CAPRECO at that same date, once the operations indicated in notices numbers 134-7492/2018 dated July 9, 2018 and 134-6717/2019 dated January 10, 2019, as well as the certificates for risk capital and the additional certificates, that Society presents a Capitalization Level of -798.00%

As a result of the foregoing, it is concluded that said Society continues to not comply with the capitalization requirements in accordance with what is provided by the provisions invoked in advance.

Finally, from the analysis of the annex attached to the Response Written Document, consisting of the "ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION THROUGH CREDIT RESTRUCTURING JULY 2019", prepared by the Bajío Federation of Cooperatives, S.C. de R.L. de C.V., it was determined that, the same, contemplates the following aspects:

a) Part of the basis is that the credit for $15,000,000.00 that they currently have with the "NATIONAL FINANCIAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AGRICULTURAL, RURAL, FORESTRY AND FISHERIES (FND)", enters the scheme called "ATTENTION SCHEME FOR THE ECONOMIC REACTIVATION OF FND CREDITORS", which, according to the referred document, consists of a possible forgiveness of the interest rate that FND charges CAPRECO (13.40%), benefit that, if approved by said FND, would be transferred to the group of creditors who were financed with the resources from the aforementioned credit.

b)

The analysis carried out by the referred Federation was based on figures for the month of July 2019 and refers to the fact that the benefit indicated in the preceding subsection will be transferred to 108 credits, which were not identified, so their integration and characteristics are unknown, limiting itself to indicate in its analysis the following:

" There are 18 credits that as of the close of the month of July have covered at least 20% of the capital of the same, so these have no inconvenience for their renewal, however, the differential (90 credits), must cover 20%, this in accordance with what is established in Annex E of the DCG applicable to the LRASCAP " .

c) In relation to the aforementioned credits, they propose in the referred document the following scenarios:

" I. The credits at the time of restructuring maintain their situation, as well as the corresponding days of default, only the excess of EPRC that results will be recognized against results.

II. The credits under analysis, remain in the overdue portfolio, with the original days of default and an EPRC of 50% is maintained, which will serve for the consideration of a conservative scenario, the excess will be recognized against results.

III. The credits, are moved to active portfolio with zero days of default and the EPRC corresponding to the days of default is applied to them, the excess EPRC is recognized against Results. " .

Notwithstanding the above, that Society did not attach to its Response Written Document documentary evidence with which to prove that the scenarios proposed in subsections a) to c) above were concretized; likewise, it did not send the corresponding integration of the credits alluded to in subsection b), nor supporting documentation with which to prove that the 108 credits referred to had been subject to restructuring, nor that the same, had been given in conditions that allowed CAPRECO to reduce its preventive estimates for credit risks and consequently achieve a favorable impact on the Capitalization Level.

For the foregoing, it is concluded that the statements made by CAPRECO in the written document in which it exercises its right to a hearing, as well as the analysis carried out on the proof it attached to the same, are unfounded and inoperative to disprove the ground for revocation indicated in Article 84, Section III of the LRASCAP and, therefore, the same subsists.

This is reinforced by the opinion formulated by the Auxiliary Supervision Committee of the Auxiliary Supervision Fund of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies and Protection of their Savers, contained in the written document of September 17, 2019, received in the Deeds Office of this Commission on the same day, which, in the parts that interest, are transcribed below:

" 3. From the analysis of the financial information sent by CAPRECO to the CNBV, through the Regulatory Reports " Series R21 Capitalization. A-2112 Disaggregated capital requirements by risk " , in compliance with what is established in Article 307 of the PROVISIONS, relative to the credit and market risks in which it incurs in its operation, regarding the period from July 2017 to February 2019, an important deterioration in its accounting capital is observed and from the month of April 2018 it registers a net capital that is lower than required, in accordance with what is provided in Articles 49, 50 and 51 of the PROVISIONS , as can be seen in the table shown below ...

4.

...

On this matter, the CNBV after having carried out an exhaustive and detailed analysis of the information available and of the acts issued regarding CAPRECO, requests the Opinion of this Auxiliary Supervision Committee of the Protection Fund (Auxiliary Supervision Committee), regarding that CAPRECO is located in the ground for revocation provided for in Section III of Article 84 of the LRASCAP, for which reason, in terms of what is provided in the first paragraph of said Article 84, of the cited legal body, in relation to what is established in Section XIV, of Article 52 of the same legal order, this Committee issues an Opinion regarding the revocation of the authorization to operate as a Savings and Loan Cooperative that,

as mentioned in the antecedent with numeral 1 of the present writing, it is mentioned,

was granted to CAPRECO, for which this report is presented.

II. DEVELOPMENT

A Financial Analysis was carried out with figures as of the close of July 31, 2019 (amounts are indicated in thousands of pesos).

Financial Coverage Indicators according to applicable prudential regulations:

a)

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE CAPITALIZATION LEVEL FOR CREDIT AND MARKET RISK.

1)

The Capitalization Level (hereinafter NICAP) PRESENTED TO THIS Auxiliary Supervision Committee by CAPRECO through its regulatory report R21-A 2101 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", from the R21 Capitalization series, with figures as of July 31, 2019 is -39.4218%, from which its classification in category 4 is derived according to article 231, fraction IV of the PROVISIONS.

Likewise, from the analysis of the financial information from March to July 2019 reported by the Society, regarding the credit and market risks it incurs in its operation, which was presented to this Auxiliary Supervision Committee through Regulatory Report R21-A 2101 "Disaggregated capital requirements by risk", from the R21 Capitalization series, in compliance with what is established in articles 307, 308 and 310 of the PROVISIONS, it is derived that its Net Capital is lower than the Capitalization requirements established in the second section, of chapter II, of Title Third of the PROVISIONS, in relation to what is established in article 31, fraction VI, of the LRASCAP, as shown:

MONTH/YEAR

CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS

BY RISKS

NET CAPITAL

CAPITAL SHORTAGE

NICAP

31/03/2019

6,854.98

-32.66

-6,887.64

-0.4765%

30/04/2019

6,665.26

1,220.60

-5,444.66

18.3129%

31/05/2019

6,507.38

-0.55

-6,507.93

-0.0084%

30/06/2019

6,292.83

-1.35

-6,294.18

-0.0215%

31/07/2019

5,860.16

-2,310.18

-8,170.34

-39.4218%

For the above, it is confirmed that, during the period between March and July 2019, CAPRECO did not comply with the requirement to maintain a net capital higher than the capital requirements for risks, determined in accordance with what is established in the second section, of chapter II, of Title Third of the PROVISIONS, in relation to article 31, fraction IV, of the LRASCAP.

It is important to mention that the Society registers a net capital lower than the capital requirements for risks since April 2018, as referred to in numeral 3 of the ANTECEDENTS section of this official notice.

Under these conditions, since, from the analysis of the content of the aforementioned reports, it is derived that the Society, during the period between April 2018 and July 2019 (16 months), did not comply with the Capitalization requirement for credit and market risk, provided for in articles 40, 50 and 51 of the PROVISIONS, in the opinion of this Auxiliary Supervision Committee, it is concluded that the Society falls under the cause for revocation provided for in fraction III of article 84 of the LRASCAP, which for quick reference is transcribed below ...

GENERATE LOSSES THAT PLACE IT BELOW ITS MINIMUM CAPITAL.

From the analysis of the monthly financial information from January to July 2019 that the Society presented to this Supervision Committee through the Regulatory Report "Series R01 Minimum Catalog. A-0111 Minimum Catalog", it is derived that its minimum capital is lower than that required in terms of what is provided for in article 48 of the PROVISIONS, in relation to what is established in article 31, fraction I, of the LRASCAP, as shown:

31/01/

2019

28/02/

2019

31/03/

2019

30/04/

2019

31/05/

2019

30/06/

2019

31/07/20 1

Total social capital

33,783

33,618

36,394

36,440

37,280

37,655

38,007

Capital Reserves

-32,533

-32,495

-32,495

-32,495

-32,495

-32,495

-32,495

E.I.R.S.A.P.

3,388

3,388

3,388

3,388

3,388

3,388

3,388

Net result

-2,607

-5,283

-7,319

-6,112

-8,008

-9,898

-11,210

Total minimum capital

2,030

-772

-33

1,221

165

-1,351

-2,310

Value of the UDI

6.2476

6.2509

6.2606

6.2773

6.2725

6.2588

6.2745

Minimum capital in

thousands of UDIS

325

-124

-5

194

26

-216

-368

Required minimum capital in thousands

of UDIS

500

500

500

500

500

500

500

Surplus /(

shortage)

-175

-624

-505

-306

-474

-716

-868

For the above, it is confirmed that, during the period between January and July 2019, CAPRECO did not comply with the required minimum capital in accordance with article 48 of the PROVISIONS, in relation to what is established in article 31, fraction I, of the LRASCAP.

Under these conditions, since, from the analysis of the content of the aforementioned reports, it is derived that the Society, during the period between January and July 2019 (7 months), did not comply with the minimum capital, provided for in article 48 of the PROVISIONS, in the opinion of this Auxiliary Supervision Committee, it is concluded that the Society falls under the cause for revocation provided for in fraction IV of article 84 of the LRASCAP, which for quick reference is transcribed below ...

III. CONCLUSION

In conclusion, from the acts issued by the National Banking and Securities Commission regarding Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V. and from the updated analysis of its financial information, it is evident that it fails to comply with:

a)

The capital requirements for risks, in terms of what is provided for in articles 49, 50 and 51 of the PROVISIONS, in relation to what is established in article 31, fraction VI, of the LRASCAP.

b)

The minimum capital requirements, in terms of what is provided for in article 48 of the PROVISIONS, in relation to what is established in article 31, fraction I, of the LRASCAP.

Therefore, in the Opinion of the Auxiliary Supervision Committee of the Protection Fund, due to the evident deterioration in its financial situation described above, Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V., does not credibly demonstrate that it has the economic solvency and financial viability to continue operating, so that in accordance with the LRASCAP in its Article 84 fractions III and IV, the declaration of revocation of the authorization to Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V., to operate as a Savings and Loan Cooperative Society is appropriate.

In this order of ideas, considering the opinion formulated by FOCOOP and since CAPRECO did not demonstrate compliance with what is established in article 31, fraction VI of the LRASCAP, in relation to articles 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56 of the Provisions, it is concluded that it falls under the hypothesis of revocation provided for in fraction III of article 84 of the LRASCAP, so it proceeds to revoke its authorization to continue carrying out savings and loan operations, in the terms in which it was granted by the National Banking and Securities Commission, through official notice number P012/2016 dated February 15, 2016, to Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V.

Based on the above, the National Banking and Securities Commission, prior to the agreement of its Board of Directors, taken in its ordinary session held on September 15, 2020 and with the object of preserving the stability of the financial system as a whole, safeguarding the interests of the public:

RESOLVES

FIRST. This Decentralized Body, based on what is provided in articles 84, first paragraph, of the Law to Regulate the Activities of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies and 12, fraction V, of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission; as well as in accordance with the Eighth Agreement adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission in its ordinary session held on September 15, 2020 and the considerations that were exposed in this resolution, revokes the authorization to continue carrying out savings and loan operations, in the terms in which it was granted by the National Banking and Securities Commission, through official notice number P012/2016 dated February 15, 2016, to Cooperativa de Ahorro y Préstamo Renacimiento Costa de Oro, S.C. de A.P. de R.L. de C.V.

SECOND. From the date of notification of this resolution, COOPERATIVE SAVINGS AND LOAN RENASCIMIENTO COSTA DE ORO, S.C. DE A.P. DE R.L. DE C.V., is unable to carry out operations and will be placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, in accordance with what is provided for in the antepenultimate paragraph of article 84 of the Law to Regulate the Activities of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies.

THIRD. Based on what is provided in articles 91, fraction I and 84, antepenultimate paragraph, of the Law to Regulate the Activities of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies, as well as 19 of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission, the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee, of the Auxiliary Supervision Fund of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies and Protection for their Savers, must certify before this Commission, within the term of 60 business days following the publication of this resolution in the Official Gazette of the Federation, the designation of the corresponding liquidator.

FOURTH. Based on what is provided for in the second paragraph of article 84 of the Law to Regulate the Activities of Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies, this resolution shall be inscribed in the corresponding Public Registry of Commerce and published in the Official Gazette of the Federation and an extract of this official notice, in two newspapers of wide circulation in the geographic area where said Society operated.

FIFTH. Based on what is established in the antepenultimate paragraph of article 16 of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission, in articles 4, fractions I, section B and II, section B, subsection 26), 9 and 12 of the Internal Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on November 12, 2014; as well as 51 of the Agreement by which the President of the National Banking and Securities Commission delegates Powers to the Vice Presidents, General Directors and Assistant General Directors of said Commission, published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on November 30, 2015, updated with the reforms published in said Gazette on December 14, 2016, and in terms of what is ordered in the Tenth Agreement, adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission in its ordinary session held on September 15, 2020, it is delegated indistinctly to the public servants of this Commission, Mónica Brenda Villarreal Medel, Luz María Padilla Longoria, Enrique Aduna Mondragón, Irma Azucena Muñíz Domínguez, Blanca Elena Luna Sierra, Saúl Hernández Pérez, Bárbara Espinosa Lizcano, Lucia Guadalupe Manríquez Morán, Laura Jazmín Ruíz Valencia, Evelyn Martínez Beltrán, Armando Díaz Betancourt, Ivonne Marcela López Franco, Cristian Javier Mosqueda Salazar, Rogelio García Martínez, Mariana Cecilia Luna Rivera, Karen Yoselim Montes Hernández, Erick Pineda Luis, Juan Manuel Hernández Vega and Francisco Godínez Ayala, the charge of notifying, jointly or separately, the present official notice by which compliance is given to the agreement adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission.

The above is made known to you based on what is provided in articles 16, fraction VI, and penultimate paragraph, of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission and 12 of the Internal Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission, as well as in terms of the Ninth Agreement, adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission in its ordinary session held on September 15, 2020.

This was provided by the President of the National Banking and Securities Commission, based on what is established in articles 16, fractions VI and XVII, of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission and signed, in substitution for his absence, the Legal Vice President of this Commission, in accordance with what is provided for in articles 3, fraction III, second paragraph, 4, fraction I, section A, fraction II, section A, subsection 7), 12 and 54 of the Internal Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission.

Respectfully

Mexico City on September 17, 2020 .- The Legal Vice President of the National and Securities Commission, Mónica Brenda Villarreal Medel .- Rubric.

1

Article 84.- The Commission may declare the revocation of the authorizations granted in terms of Article 10 of this Law, to Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV, after having heard the opinion of the Auxiliary Supervision Committee and prior to the hearing of the interested Society, in the following cases:

...

III. If it does not comply with the capitalization requirements established in accordance with what is provided by Article 31, fraction VI, and the provisions to which said provision refers.

2

Article 49.- Societies must maintain a net capital in relation to the credit and market risks they incur in their operation, which cannot be lower than the capital requirements established in this section. For these purposes, operations must be valued in accordance with the Accounting Criteria.

Operations will be included from the date they are concluded, regardless of the liquidation, delivery or validity date, as the case may be.

It will be considered that the ownership of an asset has been transferred, and therefore it will not have capitalization requirements in accordance with what is established in the present section, provided that the operation meets all and each of the conditions established to be recognized as a sale of assets, in the criterion regarding the Recognition and derecognition of financial assets contained in the Accounting Criteria.

In the case of operations denominated in UDIS, these must be converted to national currency applying the value of the UDI published by the Bank of Mexico in the Official Gazette of the Federation, corresponding to the date to which the capital requirements are being determined.

3

Published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on June 4, 2012, modified by resolution published in said Gazette on January 9, 2015; January 7, 2016; April 4, July 24 and October 18, 2017; January 23, April 26, July 23 and November 15, 2018.

4

Article 76.- The Commission will classify Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV in one of the 4 categories referred to in article 77 of this Law, according to their adequacy to the Capitalization Levels, which it will establish through general character provisions the capitalization ranges that will determine each of such categories.

Article 77.- In an enumerative and not limiting manner, Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV must comply with the measures indicated below, depending on the Capitalization Level in which they are classified:

...

IV. To societies classified within category 4, what is provided in Article 78 of this Law will be applicable.

Article 78.- In the event that a Savings and Loan Cooperative Society with Operation Levels I to IV is classified in category 4 referred to in fraction IV of Article 77 of this Law, the Commission may request the removal of the director or general manager and of the Board of Directors, informing the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee and the Auxiliary Supervision Committee. Said Cooperative Savings Protection Committee will require the Society in question to convene an Extraordinary General Assembly of Partners to inform them of the situation in which the Savings and Loan Cooperative Society is, and if applicable, proceed to the appointment of the persons who will be in charge of the administration of the Society, as well as to carry out the selection of any of the mechanisms indicated in Article 85 of this Law.

In the event that the Society in question refuses to convene the aforementioned assembly, within the 15 days following the date on which said Commission had notified the order referred to in the previous paragraph, the latter will be empowered to issue the respective summons.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commission, attending to the situation of the Society in question, may at any time proceed in terms of Article 80 of the present Law.

5

Article 231.- The classification of Societies into categories will be carried out in accordance with the following:

Societies presenting a Capitalization Level equal to or higher than 150 percent will be classified in category 1.

II. Societies presenting a Capitalization Level equal to or greater than 100 percent and less than 150 percent will be classified in category 2.

III. Societies presenting a Capitalization Level equal to or greater than 50 percent and less than 100 percent will be classified in category 3.

IV. Societies presenting a Capitalization Level less than 50 percent will be classified in category 4.

Article 232.- The Commission will make known the category in which the Societies have been classified, their modifications and the date to which the Capitalization Level used to carry out the classification corresponds, through its page on the worldwide electronic network called the Internet, within the 10 business days following the close of the month immediately following that to which the information corresponds. For greater dissemination, the Auxiliary Supervision Committee will publish through its page on the worldwide electronic network Internet, this same information once the Commission makes it known to the public in accordance with what is provided for in the present article.

6

Supplementary application in matters of evidence within the present administrative procedure, in accordance with what is provided in article 97 of the LRASCAP.

7

The above can be expressed in the following form:

CONCEPT

mar-19

apr-19

may-19

jun-19

jul-19

Capitalization Level

-0.48%

18.31%

-0.01%

-0.02%

-39.42%

Total capital requirement by risks

6,854,980

6,665,260

6,507,384

6,292,825

5,860,161

Net Capital

-32,661

1,220,602

-546

-1,351

-2,310,182

8

Article 55.- The Protection Fund, through the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee, may approve the granting of the following supports:

I. Preventive liquidity supports to Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV, provided that the following are available for this purpose:

a) A technical study prepared by an external auditor and approved by the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee, which justifies the viability of the Savings and Loan Cooperative Society, the suitability of the support and that with the granting of said support there is a lower cost for the Protection Fund.

b) The granting of guarantees to the satisfaction of the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee constituted in its favor.

c) A capital restoration program, if applicable.

If applicable, the Savings and Loan Cooperative Society must be complying, or should have complied with the corrective measures that have resulted applicable to it, including those referred to in Article 79 of the present Law.

The sum of the amounts of the preventive liquidity supports granted by the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee, at no time may exceed 15 percent of the resources of the deposit insurance account. Exceptionally, and attending to the financial situation of the Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV as a whole, the Technical Committee may authorize that the sum of the amounts of the preventive liquidity supports be up to 30 percent of the resources of the deposit insurance account.

Once the payment by the Savings and Loan Cooperative Society of the supports granted has been covered, the Commission may, if applicable, lift the corrective measures that have been imposed on the cited Society, including those referred to in Article 79 of this Law.

II. Financial supports to Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV provided that, additionally, said Society splits, merges, sells assets, or carries out any other transaction that contributes to reducing the risk of insolvency or bankruptcy, in accordance with what is indicated in Title Sixth of this Law, provided that this option is considered reasonably less costly than the payment of the money deposits of the Saving Partners.

Exceptionally, the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee may authorize financial supports in the circumstances or in cases different from those indicated in the previous paragraph, even when its cost is higher than the payment of the money deposits of the Saving Partners of a Savings and Loan Cooperative Society, provided that if not done, serious negative effects could be generated in another or other Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies in such a way that their stability or solvency is endangered.

In any case, the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee will grant the financial supports referred to in this fraction, provided that the elements referred to in subsections a) to c) of the previous fraction I are available for this purpose.

Article 85.- The Cooperative Savings Protection Committee may determine the implementation by the Savings and Loan Cooperative Societies with Operation Levels I to IV of any of the following mechanisms:

I. Splitting.

II. Merger.

III. Others that contribute to reducing the risk of insolvency or bankruptcy.

IV. Dissolution and liquidation, as well as commercial bankruptcy in terms of the General Law of Cooperative Societies and the constitutive bases.

Article 87.- When the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee determines the application of any of the mechanisms provided for in fractions I to III of Article 85 of the present Law, in no case, in the documents in which the acts necessary to carry them out are implemented, can it be established that the Protection Fund pays amounts that exceed the amount that would have to be covered for the money deposits of the Saving Partners in terms of Article 54 of this Law, unless it is the case provided for in the second paragraph of fraction II of Article 55 of the present Law.

Such financial supports may be guaranteed with the assets of the Savings and Loan Cooperative Society, for which the person in charge of the administration may carry out the corresponding guarantee encumbrance.

Article 89.- In the event that the Cooperative Savings Protection Committee determines as the mechanism to follow the dissolution and liquidation of the Cooperative Savings and Loan Society with Operation Levels I to IV, and the consequent payment of money deposits, the liabilities of the Cooperative Savings and Loan Society shall be covered in accordance with what is stated in Chapter IV of this Title.

In the document you are viewing, there may be text, characters, or objects that do not display correctly due to conversion to HTML format, so we recommend always taking the digitized image of the DOF or the PDF file of the edition as a reference. The content, form, and scope of published documents are the strict responsibility of their issuer.

CONSULT

BY DATE

Do
Lu
Ma
Mi
Ju
Vi
Sá

INDICATORS

Exchange Rate and Rates as of 08/28/2026

DOLAR
16.9712 UDIS

8.808812 TIIE 28 DIAS

6.7559% TIIE 91 DIAS

6.7931% TIIE 182 DIAS

6.8474% TIIE DE FONDEO

6.50%

See more

SURVEYS

Did you like the new image of the Federal Official Gazette website?

No
Yes

Federal Official Gazette

Río Amazonas No. 62, Col. Cuauhtémoc, C.P. 06500, Mexico City Tel. (55) 5093-3200, where you can access our service menu

Electronic address: dof.gob.mx

113

LEGAL NOTICE | SOME RIGHTS RESERVED © 2026