Notice revoking the authorization granted to the Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V. to operate as a credit union

If the document appears incomplete on the right margin, it contains tables that exceed the default width. If so, click here to view it correctly.

DOF: 17/05/2016

OFFICE LETTER revoking the authorization granted to the Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V.

At the margin, a seal with the National Coat of Arms, which reads: United Mexican States.- Ministry of Finance and Public Credit.- National Banking and Securities Commission.- Legal Vice Presidency.- General Litigation Directorate.- Office No. P-029/2016.

UNION DE CREDITO EJIDAL, AGROPECUARIA E INDUSTRIAL DEL MUNICIPIO DE ANGOSTURA, S.A. DE C.V.

16 de Septiembre y Miguel Hidalgo A.P.53, Col. Centro Municipality of Angostura, Sinaloa, C.P. 81600

Attention: Mr. Carlos Joaquín Sánchez Castro Legal Representative and President of the Board of Directors

This National Banking and Securities Commission, based on the provisions of articles 97, sections II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII and XIV, of the Credit Unions Law and 12, section V, of the National Banking and Securities Commission Law; as well as in accordance with the Tenth Agreement adopted by the Governing Board of this Decentralized Body in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016, and in order to comply with said legal regulations, issues this resolution revoking the authorization to operate as a credit union, which was previously granted to the Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V., according to the following:

BACKGROUND

Through office 601-II-26078 of July 2, 1986, the then National Banking and Insurance Commission granted a concession to operate as a Credit Union to the Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura S.A. de C.V. (hereinafter UNCEA, Entity, Society, Union or Credit Union, interchangeably).

Through office 132-C/101593/2014 of December 10, 2014, observations resulting from the omission in the delivery of regulatory reports referenced in articles 49 and 50, sections I, subsections a) and b) and II, in relation to the first three paragraphs of article 57 of the General Provisions applicable to auxiliary credit organizations, exchange houses, credit unions, regulated multiple-object financial societies, published in the Official Journal of the Federation on January 19, 2009, reformed by resolutions published in the same Journal on July 1 and 30, 2009, February 18, 2010, February 4, April 11 and December 22, 2011, February 3 and June 27, 2012 and January 31, 2013 (hereinafter Provisions), as well as the capitalization requirement, which must be sent through the Interinstitutional Information Transfer System (SITI) for the period from December 2009 to December 2013, were communicated to the aforementioned Credit Union.

Likewise, UNCEA was granted the right to be heard, within a period of 20 business days, counted from the next business day following the date on which its notification took effect, to state what was convenient for its rights, and to remit the documentation and information that it deemed convenient in order to refute the observations made.

Through writing dated April 22, 2015, received by this Commission on May 27 of the same year, the Union stated that "we are still in the process of regularizing these observations, as we are waiting for the results of the internal audit being conducted on our company...".

In compliance with office 132-C/101213/2014 of January 30, 2014, an ordinary inspection visit with figures as of September 30, 2013, was conducted on the aforementioned Union.

Through office 132-C/101243/2014 of April 21, 2014, observations resulting from the ordinary inspection visit conducted in compliance with the aforementioned office 132-C/101213/2014 were communicated to that Entity.

Likewise, UNCEA was granted the right to be heard, within a period of 10 business days, counted from the next business day following the date on which its notification took effect, to state what was convenient for its rights, and to remit the documentation and information that it deemed convenient in order to refute the observations made.

In writing dated May 23, 2014, received by this Commission on the 27th of the same month and year, that Society exercised its right to be heard granted in office 132-C/101243/2014, stating what was convenient for its interest and exhibiting the documents it deemed appropriate.

By office 132-C/101390/2014 of June 23, 2014, UNCEA was communicated the corrective actions and measures that were deemed appropriate, given that that Entity did not refute the observations made to it through office 132-C/101243/2014.

To this effect, in each of the corrective actions and measures ordered in said office, the deadlines available to that Entity to comply with each of them were indicated.

Notwithstanding the above, in the files and records of this Commission, there is no record whatsoever that that Union responded to office 132-C/101390/2014, nor much less that it offered or provided any element of conviction by virtue of which it could prove that it had attended to and resolved the corrective actions and measures dictated to it.

Through office 132-C/1206/2015 of January 13, 2015, UNCEA was requested to deliver to this Commission various corporate and financial information of said Entity by January 30, 2015, regarding the figures and situation that that Union held as of November 30, 2014.

Without as of today, in the files and records of this Commission, there is any record whatsoever that that Entity had delivered the information requested of it.

In compliance with office 132-C/1207/2015 of January 13, 2015, an Ordinary Inspection Visit with figures as of November 30, 2014, was conducted on the aforementioned Union and various information was requested.

It is worth highlighting, that that Union did not deliver the information requested of it in terms of what was required in office 132-C/1207/2015, which was recorded in the visit start act of February 9, 2015, drawn up at the Entity's domicile.

Additionally, during the course of the aforementioned inspection visit, information request number 1 of February 11, 2015, was made, in which that Entity was required to deliver various information by February 13, 2015 at the latest, which was not delivered by UNCEA, as recorded in the visit conclusion act of February 13, 2015.

As a result of the above, through office 132-C/1246/2015 of March 27, 2015, the observations deemed appropriate resulting from the ordinary inspection visit conducted were communicated to the Credit Union.

To this effect, UNCEA was granted a period of 5 business days, counted from the next business day following the date on which its notification took effect, to state what was convenient for its rights, and to remit the documentation and information that it deemed convenient in order to refute the observations made to it.

Notwithstanding that the aforementioned term has passed, in the records held by this Commission, it is not evident that that Union has responded to it, nor much less that it has offered any element of conviction by virtue of which it provides evidence of having attended to the observations made to it.

Through office 212/165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, this Commission summoned UNCEA to revoke its authorization to operate as a Credit Union, as it was located in the grounds for revocation provided for in sections II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII and XIV, of article 97 of the Credit Unions Law.

The aforementioned summons was duly notified to the Union at the domicile it has registered with this Decentralized Body on January 20, 2016, as evidenced on the first page of the respective receipt acknowledgment, from a simple reading of which the legend "received (sic) office number 212/165362/2016 which contains autograph signature" is derived, written by Mr. Carlos Joaquín Sánchez Castro, in his capacity as President of the Board of Administration of the Entity and legal representative thereof, as well as from the content of the notification act drawn up on that same date, at the same domicile of the Union and the annexes that integrate it, among which is a simple copy of the voter credential of the aforementioned person.

Additionally, this Commission, in terms of the aforementioned office, granted UNCEA a period of ten business days counted from the day following the date it was notified, so that in exercise of its guarantee of hearing provided for in article 97 of the Credit Unions Law, in relation to what is established in section I of article 110 of the same legal instrument, it would state what was convenient for its rights, offer evidence and formulate arguments, in relation to the grounds for revocation for which it was summoned.

Notwithstanding that the term granted to UNCEA through office 212/ 165362/2016 has excessively passed for the exercise of its guarantee of hearing, this Commission has not received any communication from said Entity, nor much less any document by virtue of which it refutes the grounds for revocation in which it was located.

The above, as confirmed by the Deputy General Directorate of Material Resources and General Services, who through memorandum DGARMSG/164/2016, stated that after an exhaustive review in the Institutional Management System (SGI), no record of any documentation from the Union in question was found, regarding the specific matter of revocation of authorization.

The Governing Board of the National Banking and Securities Commission, analyzing all and each of the backgrounds referred to in this chapter, in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016, unanimously agreed to revoke the authorization granted to operate as a credit union to the society named Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V.

As a result of the above, the reasons and legal provisions that support and motivate the revocation of the authorization to operate as a Credit Union, which was previously granted to the

Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V., are exposed below, according to the following:

CONSIDERATIONS

FIRST. Based on the provisions of articles 14 and 97, sections II, III, IV, V, VIII and XIV of the Credit Unions Law, in relation to what is established in article 12, section V, of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission, the Governing Board of this Decentralized Body is authorized to authorize the constitution and operation of Credit Unions and, if applicable, to agree on the revocation of said authorizations.

SECOND. That the second transitory article of the Decree by which the Credit Unions Law is issued and the General Law of Titles and Credit Operations is added and reformed, published in the Official Journal of the Federation on August 20, 2008 provides:

"Second.- Chapter III of Title Two of the General Law of Auxiliary Credit Organizations and Activities, published in the Official Journal of the Federation on January 14, 1985, is repealed, as well as any reference in said Law to credit unions.

Credit unions authorized to operate as such in accordance with the provisions that are repealed, shall be deemed authorized to operate under the terms of this Decree.

..."

THIRD. That in terms of what is provided in article 97 of the Credit Unions Law, this Commission, with the agreement of its Governing Board and prior hearing of the interested society, may declare the revocation of the authorization granted to credit unions, in the cases referred to therein, among which are those established in sections II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII and XIV, which for prompt reference are referred to below:

"Article 97.- The Commission, with the agreement of its Governing Board and prior hearing of the interested society, may declare the revocation of the authorization granted to the unions, in the following cases:

...

II. If the union does not comply with the capitalization requirements established in accordance with what is provided by article 48 of this Law and the provisions to which said provision refers;

III.

If the union in question does not comply with any of the minimum corrective measures referred to in article 80 of this Law; does not comply with more than one additional special corrective measure referred to in said article or, well, repeatedly fails to comply with an additional special corrective measure;

IV. If it carries out operations in contravention of what is provided by this Law or by the provisions emanating from it, or if it abandons or suspends the operations for which it is authorized in terms of article 40 of this Law;

V. If, despite the Commission's observations, the union carries out operations other than those for which it is authorized or does not maintain the proportions of assets or liabilities established therein; or well, if in the opinion of the Commission it does not adequately comply with the functions for which it was authorized due to the lack of diversification of its operations or its corporate object, in accordance with what is provided by this Law;

VI.

When due to causes attributable to the union, the same day on which acts or contracts that signify variation in the assets or liabilities of the union, or imply direct or contingent obligation, are not registered in the accounting;

...

VIII. If it omits to comply with the requirements of the financial authorities in the exercise of their powers;

...

XIV. If the accounting capital of the union is less than the minimum capital required based on the level of operations authorized to it, and

...".

FOURTH. That this National Banking and Securities Commission through office 212/165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, cited in paragraph 11 of the background section of this resolution, fully complied with what is provided in article 97 of the Credit Unions Law, in relation to what is established in section I of article 110 of the same legal instrument, by granting that Union a period of ten business days counted from the next business day following its notification, so that in exercise of its right to hearing, it would state what was convenient for its interests, offer evidence and formulate arguments, in relation to the grounds for revocation of its authorization to operate as a Credit Union, in which it was located, which are provided for in sections II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII, XIV, of article 97 aforementioned.

FIFTH. From the integral and exhaustive analysis of the content of all and each of the documents referred to in the background section of this resolution, especially of the summons office 212/ 165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, as well as the fact that UNCEA did not exercise its guarantee of hearing, despite having been legally summoned for it, it is determined that the grounds for revocation for which that Entity was summoned are met.

In effect, from the analysis of the content of office 212/165362/2016 referred to in paragraph 11 of the background section of this resolution, it is derived that this Commission summoned that Union, by virtue of the following:

1.- LACK OF RESPONSE TO REQUIREMENTS OF THIS COMMISSION.

( ... )

I.

Acts of authority derived from surveillance processes:

Requirement Situation Office No. 132-C/101593/2014 of December 10, 2014, through which the lack of delivery of regulatory reports was observed for the period from December 2009 to December 2013, for which a response period of 20 business days was granted.

This office was duly notified in terms of article 133, section II of the LUC, on January 6, 2015.

No response was received from the Union.

Office No. 132-C/101506/2014 of October 28 2014, through which information was requested on patrimonial links with Multiple-Object Financial Societies, for which a response period of 10 business days was granted.

This office was duly notified in terms of article 133, section II of the LUC, on October 30, 2014.

No response was received from the Union.

July 2014, receiving the receipt acknowledgment from the Union on August 8, 2014.

No response was received from the Union.

II.

Acts of authority derived from inspection processes:

Requirement Situation Office No. 132-C/1206/2015 of January 13, 2015, through which a request for information of 14 specific points in matters of organization and corporate information and 8 requirements regarding financial information of that Union was made, establishing the maximum delivery date as January 30, 2015.

This office was duly notified in terms of article 133, section II of the LUC, on January 21, 2015.

No response was received from the Union.

In this sense, as evidenced in the fact I of the Partial Act of February 12, 2015 generated during the visit, the Union did not have this information and it was not delivered to the Commission personnel during the visit.

Initial information for visit required in Annex of Office No. 132-C/1207/2015 of January 13 2015, which was required to be exhibited at the time of opening the visit, in which it was requested to have support for the information required at its time through Office No. 132-C/1206/ 2015.

This office was duly notified in terms of article 133, section II of the LUC, on January 21, 2015.

In the Visit Start Act of February 9, 2015, it was recorded that the Union did not exhibit any information required through the office of visit notification, regarding which, Mr. CARLOS JOAQUÍN SÁNCHEZ CASTRO, President of the Board of Administration of UNCEA, in the use of the word stated that they did not have this information and documentation required, which would be delivered on February 10, 2015.

In this sense, as evidenced in facts II and III of the Partial Act of February 12, 2015 generated during the visit, the information required through the office of visit notification was not presented either at the time of the opening of the same, nor on the date February 10, 2015, as was recorded that it would be in the Act of Start.

In the absence of the presentation of the information in reference during the visit, the Union offered visual access to the documents and records that were in its facilities and computer equipment, based on which Information Additional Request No. 1 of February 11 2015 was generated.

Office No. 132-C/101390/2014 of June 23 2014, through which corrective actions and measures were instructed regarding the observations determined in ordinary inspection visit conducted in February 2014 and which were made known through Office No. 132-C/101243/2014 of April 21, 2014. For the attention of the 23 corrective actions of this office, a period of 20 business days was granted.

This office was duly notified in terms of article 133, section II of the LUC, on July 11, 2014.

No response was received from the Union within the maximum deadline granted for the attention of the corrective actions.

( ... )

Likewise, in this Commission there is no record whatsoever that that Union has responded to the following acts of authority and information requests made by this Commission, in exercise of its supervisory powers:

Requirement Date and Grounds of Notification Current Situation Office No. 132-B/10231/2014 of February 10, 2014, with which observations on its audited financial statements at closure of December 2010 are communicated. March 10, 2014 Art. 133, section II of the LUC. They only notified on April 11, 2014 that the Board of Directors would give an answer, without having given a response. Office No. 132-B/10232/2014 of February 10, 2014, with which observations on its audited financial statements at closure of December 2011 are communicated. March 10, 2014 Art. 133, section II of the LUC. They only notified on April 11, 2014 that the Board of Directors would give an answer, without having given a response.

( ... )"

2.- SUSPENSION OF OPERATIONS.

( ... )

I.

There is no attendance and participation of the Union's officials within its facilities, as was recorded in facts VI and VII of the Partial Act of February 12, 2015 generated during the inspection visit.

II.

Null activity regarding the attention to members and the carrying out of credit operations, collections, member loans or similar.

III.

In the review of the documentary information that supports the income and expenditures made during 2014, the following could be corroborated:

There was no evidence that during the entire year 2014 any credit granting operation or member loan was carried out from multiple banking institutions, development banks or any other type of institution.

From November 27, 2014 until the close of the exercise, there is no monetary movement recorded in the Union's records.

( ... )

3.- CARRIING OUT UNAUTHORIZED OPERATIONS.

( ... )

I.

In Observation 5, of the Annex of Office No. 132-C/101243/2014, of April 21, 2014, this Commission pointed out that there was evidence of the celebration of operations consisting of the granting of commercial credits to the legal entities named: Paraíso del Évara, S.P.R. de R.I., Agroesperanza, S.P.R. de R.I. and Finpromex, S.A. de C.V., Sofom E.N.R., without them being identified as members of that Union at the date of review.

Regarding this, UNCEA in its writing of May 23, 2014, stated the following:

"In this point it is necessary to state that the previous General Manager Mr. José Jaime Rubio Ureta, was in charge of managing these operations, which he stated were correct, and due to the lack of knowledge of the members of the directive council in legal matters, we validated them without knowing that they were contrary to the"

normatividad. Manifesting to the Commission that we are in the stage of correcting these anomalies."

With this response, that Union, far from disproving the observation made to it, acknowledged the carrying out of said operations alleging ignorance of the regulations and, consequently, at no time and under no circumstances did it prove that said legal entities had participation in the paid-up social capital of UNCEA, which is why through Notice No. 132-C/ 101390/2014 of June 23, 2014, through which the actions and corrective measures deemed appropriate were communicated to that Union in relation to the observation in question, it instructed said Union as follows:

" ... regularize these operations through the recovery of the credits, also abstain from carrying out this type of operations, through which the resources granted by that Credit Union are destined for the placement of credits with persons unrelated to that Society, it is evident that it is being operated irregularly with respect to the commercial credit portfolio item, notwithstanding that it infringes what is provided in fraction I of Article 103 of the LUC, so that within a period of twenty business days counted from the next business day following the date of receipt of this notice, present the documentation supporting the recovery of the credits and implement measures so as not to reiterate this type of situations, it must also remit to this Commission the supporting documentation of the corporate acts carried out with respect to it, in order to remedy its current situation. "

It should be noted that as of the date of this notice, there is no record that that Union has responded to Notice No. 132-C/101390/2014, much less that it has offered evidence by virtue of which UNCEA proves having attended to the corrective action and measure indicated and resolved the observation that gave rise to it.

II.

This Commission in Observation 3, of the annex of Notice No. 132-C/1246/2015 of March 27, 2015, based on an inventory carried out regarding the total of credit files that UNCEA maintained within the credit portfolio item up to its last known figures, pointed out that the persons who sign the promissory notes backing the credit rights in favor of the Union were not identified as members, being the following:

Persons who sign promissory notes and are not members of UNCEA

• JUAN DE DIOS HIGUERA CASTRO
• GUILLERMO MONJARDIN BENITEZ
• ANTONIO HIGUERA CASTRO
• JUAN TRUJILLO CAMPOS
• AURELIO ANGULO MONTOYA
• AURELIO ANGULO MONTOYA
• ISAÍAS MONTOYA BURGOS
• SOTERO TORRES ESTRADA
• RODOLFO SANTOS CAMACHO
• RAMÓN GARCÍA REYES
• ORLANDO LÓPEZ HERNÁNDEZ
• SERGIO DUARTE LÓPEZ
• CARLOS JOAQUÍN SÁNCHEZ CASTRO
• JUAN DE DIOS HIGUERA CASTRO
• VICENTE GONZÁLEZ SÁNCHEZ
• RAFAEL CASTRO GAMEZ
• GABRIEL MONTOYA BURGOS
• JOEL CAMACHO RENTERÍA
• JUAN GUADALUPE GARCÍA LÓPEZ
• SAUL TAPIA BOJORQUEZ
• CONRADO URIAS FERNÁNDEZ
• LEONARDO MANUEL ANGULO CASTRO
• JUAN RAMÓN BARRAZA HERAZ
• REMIGIO HIGUERA CASTRO
• RAÚL HERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ
• ROMUALDO ORTIZ VILLALEJOS
• FERNANDO HERNÁNDEZ HERNÁNDEZ
• ANTONIO HIGUERA CASTRO
• JOSÉ ADELADIO AGRAZ
• JUAN DE DIOS HIGUERA CASTRO
• JUALIÁN MONTOYA PEÑUELAS
• HERIBERTO GAMALIEL CAMARGO CAMARGO
• LORENZO ANGULO INZUNZA
• ENRIQUE SANCHEZ
• HERIBERTO CAMARGO CAMARGO
• ASCENSIÓN GARCÍA QUIROZ
• MIGUEL ÁNGEL VEGA ROMERO
• JESÚS VALENTÍN CAMACHO URIARTE
• JOSÉ JAIME RUBIO QUINTERO MARIA ISABEL CASTRO SANTOS

( ... )

4.- LACK OF REPORTING OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION TO THIS COMMISSION

( ... )

In view of the above, this Commission, in the exercise of its powers, made various authority requirements to that Union, none of which were attended to in accordance with the terms and deadlines established, as detailed below:

I.

Through Notice No. 132-C/101325/2014, of June 18, 2014, that Union was observed for the lack of delivery and forwarding of regulatory reports for the period from April 2009 to November 2013.

This notice was duly notified to the Union in terms of article 133, fraction II, of the LUC, on July 21, 2014, receiving the receipt acknowledgment from UNCEA on August 8, 2014, without any argument or response having been received to date from said Union.

II.

Through Notice No. 132-C/101593/2014, of December 10, 2014, the lack of sending of Regulatory Reports for the period from April 2009 to December 2013 was observed.

The Union responded to this Notice through a letter of April 22, 2015, received in this Commission on May 27 of the same year, the case being that in said letter UNCEA only referred to being in the process of regularization and waiting for results of an audit, a situation that does not disprove nor regularize the lack of sending of Regulatory Reports for the period from April 2009 to December 2013.

III.

In Observation 4 of the Annex of Notice No. 132-C/1246/2015, of March 27, 2015, UNCEA was pointed out the date from which various Regulatory Reports and documentary financial information have not been presented, making special emphasis that said Union is obligated to deliver said information in the terms and conditions established in the Provisions.

This notice was duly notified to the Union in terms of what is provided in article 133, fraction II, of the LUC on April 10, 2015, without any response existing to date from UNCEA and, consequently, there is no documentation or means of conviction by virtue of which said omissions are disproven and/or remedied.

In this way, as of the date of this notice this Commission has not received any communication from the Union, by virtue of which it remits evidence of the regularization of these omissions, persisting a relevant age as to the last formally reported information, as indicated below:

Financial Information

Month of the Last Reported Period

Monthly Regulatory Reports via SITI:

• A-0111 Minimum catalog.
• A-1011 Reclassifications in the balance sheet.
• A-1012 Reclassifications in the income statement.
• B-1321 Balance sheet.
• B-1322 Income statement.
• B-1413 Number of members, employees and branches.

Nov-2013 Nov-2013 Nov-2013 Nov-2013 Nov-2013 Nov-2013

Quarterly Regulatory Reports via SITI:

• C-0411 Disaggregated commercial credits.
• D-0812 Disaggregated bank loans and from other organizations.
• A-1311 Statement of changes in equity.
• A-1316 Statement of cash flows.
• A-1411 Disaggregated shareholding integration.

Sep-2010 Jun-2010 Jun-2013 Jun-2013 Jun-2013

Printed Regulatory Reports:

• B-1321 Balance sheet.
• B-1322 Income statement.

Jul-2012 Jul-2012

Basic quarterly financial statements with figures for the months of March, June, September and December.

Jun-2012

Audited annual financial statements with figures for the month of december.

Dic-2012

Thus, in view of the lack of delivery of financial information by UNCEA, in non-compliance with the obligations established for the Union in terms of what is provided in article 78, first paragraph, of the LUC, in relation to 96, first paragraph, of the same normative body, it is concluded that the Union:

a)

Omitted the sending of monthly and quarterly Regulatory Reports via SITI and printed, with which UNCEA departs from what is provided in article 49 of the Provisions, in relation to what is provided in articles 50 and 57, first paragraph, of the same.

b)

Stopped delivering the quarterly financial statements to which it was obligated, with which UNCEA departs from what is provided in article 56 of the Provisions, in relation to what is established in article 67 of the LUC.

c)

Did not present its audited annual financial statements by an external auditor, with which UNCEA departs from what is provided in articles 41 and 56 of the Provisions, in relation to what is established in article 67, fourth paragraph, of the LUC.

d)

Did not present the computation of capitalization requirements, with which UNCEA fails to comply with what is provided in article 81 of the Provisions, in relation to article 48 of the LUC.

( ... )

5.- LACK OF REGISTRATION OF ITS OPERATIONS.

Through Observations 2, 3, 7, 20, 22 and 23 of the Annex of Notice 132-C/101243/2014 of April 21, 2014, this Commission observed that Union various elements associated with the lack of adherence to applicable accounting criteria and lack of registration in its accounting of the operations carried out by UNCEA, regarding which, through a letter dated May 23, 2014, said Union manifested the following:

Observation Union's Response

2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The Credit Union did not present the documentation supporting the credits given to members, presented Delinquent Credit Portfolio registered as Current, did not reduce the " Reserves Liquid without Right to Withdraw " of which it did not prove its possession and in " Accounts Payable "

... On the other hand, it did not register the effect of the " Preventive Estimation for Credit Risks " , the " Estimates for Accounts Receivable " , and the " Interest Expenses "

... " As in the preceding point, once the Auditors validate us the accounting and portfolio information, which is in process, we will inform you the results immediately. "

3 DELINQUENT CREDIT PORTFOLIO REGISTERED AS CURRENT

... it was observed that 20 members with a joint responsibility for $20 ' 748,597, present a delay in the liquidation of their amortizations by 30 or more natural days of delinquent ...

" As in the previous point, we are in process of correcting this anomaly, with the support of the new General Accountant and auditors, actions that are still in process. "

20 LIQUID RESERVES WITHOUT RIGHT TO WITHDRAW

...

These balances originate from the celebration of a " Irrevocable Trust Agreement for Administration and Investment " with Financiera Rural ... From the above, it is evident that the Society maintains in its accounting assets and reserves without having legal possession, since on August 26 of 2013, the Credit Union celebrated with Financiera Rural a convention of extinction of the " Irrevocable Trust Agreement for Administration and Investment " ...

" Once the review process we have underway concludes, we will inform this Commission the pertinent. "

22 INTEREST INCOME

... accounting vouchers supporting the registration of the income that the Credit Union has were analyzed, they are detailed for greater reference:

... From the above, it was observed that the resources for the collection of the credit portfolio were registered in a liability account, this situation departs from best accounting practices and the basic postulate " Economic Duality " . Therefore, it was determined that the Administration does not have defined internal controls that mitigate the operational risks of that Credit Union, besides exposing the members who make payments to losses in their equity by not decreasing their debts with payments but maintaining them registered in their asset.

" At the time of resolving this observation we do not have veracious information, such that once the review process of accounting information concludes, any anomaly will be corrected. "

23 INTEREST EXPENSES

... the Credit Union did not register any amount for the concept of interest expenses, notwithstanding that it maintains registered in the account of Loans from Development Banking Institutions a balance $13 ' 930,186. Likewise, based on the letter from Financiera Rural with number CRNO/AGVE/02/0063/2014 of date February 26, 2014, through which it informs the President of the Board of Directors of the Credit Union, that the debt it maintains with Financiera Rural is for an amount of $12 ' 832,087, which correspond to capital and $577,444 to interest, at a variable rate of 9.00% annual, it was proven that if interest expenses have been generated still unpaid, neither registered in the income statement ...

" At the time of resolving this observation we do not have real information, such that once the review process of accounting information concludes, any anomaly will be corrected. I accompany this letter the documentary information that for the moment we have, making the commitment that once all imprecisions or lacks that we would have had are corrected, immediately we will inform this Commission. "

In view of the sense of the response that said Union gave to the observations made to it through Notice 132-C/101243/2014, it is worth noting that it did not disprove them and, consequently, through Notice No. 132-C/101390/2014, of June 23, 2014, the actions and corrective measures were dictated to UNCEA as follows:

Reason why the Observation was not disproven Corrective Action Unattended

2 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The response is noted and this Commission communicates to it that it does not disprove the observation, since it is evident that it has presented imprecise or incomplete information to this Authority. For the above, this Commission instructs it to remit the minutes of the Board of Administration in which the agreements and the measures to issue the financial information in a truthful and reliable manner, as well as evidence of the measures implemented with respect to it, within a period of twenty business days, counted from the next business day following the date of receipt of this notice.

3 DELINQUENT CREDIT PORTFOLIO REGISTERED AS CURRENT

The response is noted and this Commission communicates to it that it does not disprove the observation, since the current credit portfolio as of September 30 of 2013 does not meet the accounting characteristics to be presented as current. For the above, this Commission instructs it that within a period of twenty business days, counted from the next business day following the date of receipt of the present notice, send the photocopy of the accounting vouchers of the transfer of current portfolio to delinquent, as well as the reconciliations that prove the corrections made.

7 ESTIMATION OF ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE

The response is noted and this Commission communicates to it that it does not disprove the observation, since it does not provide elements that make proof of its statements. For the above, this Commission instructs that they must remit a copy photocopy of the accounting vouchers of the registration of the estimation of the accounts receivable, within a period of twenty business days, counting from the next business day following the date of receipt of the present notice.

20 LIQUID RESERVES WITHOUT RIGHT TO WITHDRAW

The response is noted and this Commission communicates to it that it does not disprove the observation, since it did not present the legal documentation that supports the mentioned balances. For the above, this Commission instructs to present the copy photocopy of the accounting vouchers, that they elaborate for the cancellation of the balances registered in accounts 1203 " Titles held to maturity " and 4201 " Other reserves " , within a period of twenty business days, counted from the day following the business day of receipt of this notice.

23 INTEREST EXPENSES

The response is noted and this Commission communicates to it that it does not disprove the observation, since it has not presented information and documentation that proves its statements. For the above, this Commission instructs to remit a copy photocopy of the accounting vouchers referent to the accounting recognition of interest expenses, within a period of twenty business days, counted from the next business day following the date of receipt of this notice.

( ... )

For the above, in the existence of facts and records that necessarily imply variations in the assets and liabilities of UNCEA, which have not been recognized in its accounting in terms of what is provided in the applicable regulations, in addition to that said Union has failed, among others, with the obligation incumbent on it consisting of the sending of Regulatory Reports through SITI, it is indisputable that said situation implies the lack of valuation and determination of legal computations that the Union is obligated to fulfill, identifying among others, the following relevant aspects:

a)

Lack of valuation of the Credit Portfolio according to Accounting Criterion B-4 CREDIT PORTFOLIO, of Other Accounts Receivable (NET) and of Shareholder's Equity according to Accounting Criterion A-2; contained in Annex 4, to which article 6 of the Provisions refers.

b)

Lack of qualification of the Credit Portfolio and constitution of the Preventive Estimates for Credit Risks that correspond in terms of article 90, first paragraph, fraction I, of the Provisions, in relation to what is provided in article 46 of the LUC.

c)

Lack of the determination of updated compliance of Net Capital in relation to Minimum Capital, in compliance with what is provided in article 48, third paragraph, of the LUC, in relation to what is established in article 18, first paragraph, fraction I of the same Law.

d)

Lack of updated determination of the computation of Net Capital and the requirements of capitalization for risks in terms of what is established by article 81 of the Provisions, in relation to what is provided in article 48, first paragraph, of the LUC.

e)

Lack of the updated determination of the Capitalization Index, in non-observance of what is provided in article 83 of the Provisions, in relation to what is established in article 48, fourth paragraph, of the LUC.

Based on the above, it is concluded that despite the various requirements that this National Banking and Securities Commission has made to said Union, it has not registered in its accounting, in the terms and conditions in which it is obligated, those acts that have meant variation in its assets or liabilities, confirming a constant and reiterated non-observance and non-compliance with what is provided in article 65 of the LUC.

( ... )

6.- NET AND ACCOUNTING CAPITAL INFERIOR TO THE REQUIRED MINIMUM.

( ... )

a)

The Net Capital calculated in terms of article 80 of the Provisions, results inferior to the amount of the minimum subscribed and paid capital, with which that Union should have counted according to its level of operations, at the latest by the close of the 2014 exercise, departing from what is provided in article 48, third paragraph, of the LUC.

Net Capital Minimum Capital for Level of Operations I Insufficiency

nov-13 9,897,171 2,000,000 Udis

Value of UDI at 31-dec-2013 = 5.058731

Minimum Capital in Pesos $10,117,462 -202,291

b)

The Accounting Capital calculated based on the information from Regulatory Report R01-A-0111 Minimum catalog and report R21-A 2111 Capitalization requirements for credit risk, both with figures as of November 30, 2013 which were the last reported to this Commission by part of the UNCEA, results inferior to the amount of the minimum subscribed and paid capital, with which it should have counted that Union according to its level of operations, at the latest by the close of the 2014 exercise:

Accounting Capital Minimum Capital for Level of Operations I Insufficiency

nov-13 10,037,313 2,000,000 Udis

Value of UDI at 31-dec-2013 = 5.058731

Minimum Capital in Pesos $10,117,462 -80,149

Therefore, since UNCEA has a Net Capital inferior to the required minimum capital, in addition to that said society did not present before this Commission for its authorization the capital restoration plan that expressly was required as a minimum corrective measure, as well as that its Capital Accounting is located below the required minimum capital, in terms of what is provided in article 18, first paragraph, fraction I, of the LUC ...

( ... )

7.- NON-COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM CORRECTIVE MEASURES

In terms of Notice No. 132-C/101213/2014, of date January 30, 2014, an Ordinary Inspection Visit was carried out from February 17 to 28, 2014, on figures as of September 30, 2013; as a result of the visit, through Notice No. 132-C/101243/2014 of date April 21, 2014, the observations deemed appropriate were made known, the case being that the Union responded to said notice of observations through a letter of date May 23, 2014.

Subsequently, in view that it was determined that UNCEA did not disprove the observations made through notice 132-C/101243/2014, of date April 21, 2014, this Commission determined 23 actions and corrective measures deemed appropriate, which were made known to the Union through notice 132-C/101390/2014 of June 23, 2014, among which, in relation to observation 19, a minimum corrective measure was imposed on UNCEA, instructing it:

" ... to carry out the necessary management with the objective of having the Net Capital, within the proportions established by the regulations applicable to it as a Credit Union, likewise, present the capital restoration plan for its approval as established in subsection b, of article 80 of the LUC, said document must be authorized by the Board of Administration, within a period of twenty business days, counted from the next business day following the date of receipt of this notice. "

However, as has been referred to previously, as of the date of this notice there is no record any of that said Union has responded to notice 132-C/101390/2014, and much less that it has offered evidence by virtue of which UNCEA proves having attended to the actions and corrective measures imposed, as well as the minimum corrective measure indicated, reason why it is worth concluding that said Union has not attended 22 actions and corrective measures, and 1 minimum corrective measure, in non-compliance and contravention to what is provided in article 80, fractions I, subsection b), and II, subsection e), of the LUC.

( ... )

Likewise, in strict observance and respect of the guarantee of hearing established in favor of UNCEA, in terms of what is provided in articles 97 and 110, fraction I, of the Credit Unions Law, this Commission granted said Entity the period of 10 business days counted from the day following that it was notified of notice 212/165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, to which reference is made in numeral 11 of the section of antecedents of this resolution, to the effect that it manifested what to its right convened, remitting the information and documentation it deemed appropriate to disprove the grounds for revocation attributed to it.

Notwithstanding the above, after having carried out an exhaustive review of the records that exist

in this Commission, as of today, there is no record that that Union has responded to the aforementioned notice, nor much less any document by virtue of which it disproves the grounds for revocation in which it is located. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that UNCEA did not exercise its right to a hearing, despite having been legally summoned, and consequently, it is determined that the grounds for revocation for which that Entity was summoned are met, as follows:

LACK OF RESPONSE TO REQUIREMENTS OF THIS COMMISSION. As stated in notice 212/165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, by which that Entity was summoned, UNCEA omitted to give due attention and compliance to the following information requests made by this Commission, in exercise of its supervisory powers: (I) notice 132-C/101593/2014 of December 10, 2014; (II) notice 132-C/101506/2014 of October 28, 2014; (III) notice 132-C/101325/2014 of June 18, 2014; (IV) notice 132-C/1206/2015 of January 13, 2015; (V) initial information for visit requested in Annex of notice 132-C/1207/2015 of January 13, 2015; (VI) information request number 1 of February 11, 2015; (VII) notice 132-C/101390/2014 of June 23, 2014; (VIII) notice 132-B/10231/2014 of February 10, 2014, and (IX) notice 132-B/10232/2014 of February 10, 2014.

In light of the above, and since UNCEA did not exercise the right to a hearing granted in its favor under the cited summons notice, nor much less provided any document by virtue of which it disproves this ground for revocation, it is concluded that that Union failed to comply with what is established in articles 75, 76, and 78, first paragraph, in relation to what is provided in article 96, first paragraph, of the Credit Unions Law; 19 of the National Banking and Securities Commission Law; 15, second paragraph, and 29, first and second paragraphs, of the Supervision Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission.

SUSPENSION OF OPERATIONS. As referred to in the aforementioned summons notice, as a result of the ordinary inspection visit 2015 carried out on that Entity, through notice 132-C/1246/2015 of March 27, 2015, it was observed, among other matters, that: (I) there is no attendance and participation of the Union's officials within its facilities; (II) there is no activity regarding the attention to members and the carrying out of credit operations, collections, member loans, or similar; (III) from the documentary information supporting the income and expenditures carried out during 2014, there is no evidence that during that fiscal year any operation of granting credit or member loans, multiple banking institutions, development banks, or any other type of institution was carried out, in addition to the fact that from November 27, 2014, until the close of the fiscal year, there is no monetary movement recorded in the Entity's records. This, coupled with the fact that as of the date of the summons notice, no response has been received from that Company, nor has communication been established with any of its legal representatives or officials through phone calls, emails, in-person meetings, or any other means.

Derived from the above, and given that that Company did not exercise the right to a hearing granted to it in the aforementioned summons notice, in compliance and strict observance of what is provided in articles 97 and 110, fraction I, of the Credit Unions Law and 62 of the Supervision Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission, it is concluded that during the 2014 and 2015 fiscal years, UNCEA has abandoned the carrying out of the operations for which it was authorized, in terms of what is provided in article 40 of the Credit Unions Law and, consequently, does not comply with its social object.

CARRYING OUT OF PERMITTED OPERATIONS. As stated in the aforementioned summons notice, this Commission identified that there was evidence of the celebration of operations consisting of the granting of commercial credits to the legal entities named: Paraíso del Évara, S.P.R. de R.I., Agroesperanza, S.P.R. de R.I. and Finpromex, S.A. de C.V., Sofom E.N.R., without them being identified as members of that Union; which was confirmed by the fact that that Company acknowledged the carrying out of said operations alleging ignorance of the regulations and, consequently, at no time and under no circumstances proved that said legal entities had participation in the paid-up social capital of UNCEA.

Furthermore, based on an inventory carried out regarding the total of credit files that UNCEA maintained within the credit portfolio category up to its last known figures, it was identified that various individuals who sign the promissory notes backing the credit rights in favor of the Union were not identified as members, without that Entity having made any statement or provided documentation tending to disprove such situation.

For the above, given that Credit Unions can only grant credits to their members and since UNCEA did not exercise the right to a hearing granted in its favor under the cited summons notice, nor much less provided any document by virtue of which it disproves this ground for revocation, it is concluded that that Entity violates what is provided in article 40, fraction IV, of the Credit Unions Law and falls under the infringement scenario provided in fraction I of article 103 of the Credit Unions Law.

LACK OF REPORTING OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION TO THIS COMMISSION. As stated in the aforementioned summons notice, from the review of the documentary records held by this Commission, as well as the information recorded in the Interinstitutional System for Information Transfer (SITI), it is clear that that Union has repeatedly omitted to present the financial information it is obligated to deliver to this Commission through regulatory reports, despite this Decentralized Body having observed such situation and requested the delivery thereof, without that Union having delivered them.

Thus, given the lack of delivery of financial information by UNCEA and by virtue of that Entity not exercising the right to a hearing granted to it in terms of what is provided in articles 97 and 110, fraction I, of the Credit Unions Law and 62 of the Supervision Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission and consequently not providing any element of conviction by virtue of which to dismiss such situation, it is concluded that said Entity has repeatedly failed to comply with the obligations established in its charge in terms of what is provided in article 78, first paragraph, of the Credit Unions Law, in relation to what is established in numeral 96, first paragraph, of the same normative body.

LACK OF REGISTRATION OF ITS OPERATIONS. As stated in the summons notice referred to in numeral 11 of the background section of this resolution, this Commission identified elements that could be associated with a lack of adherence to applicable accounting criteria and lack of registration in its accounting of the operations carried out by UNCEA, such as: (I) not presenting legal documentation supporting the credits granted to members, (II) presenting overdue credit portfolio registered as current, (III) not reducing liquid reserves without right of withdrawal for which it did not prove possession, as well as (IV) not registering the effect of the preventive estimate for credit risks, estimates for accounts receivable, and expenses and income from interest, making the corresponding observations, without that Entity having provided any element tending to disprove them and, consequently, the corrective actions and measures that were necessary were issued, the case being that there is no record in the files of this Commission by virtue of which UNCEA proves compliance with them.

Furthermore, in the ordinary inspection visit carried out during the 2015 fiscal year, it was identified that the last accounting records carried out by that Union were prepared with figures as of December 31, 2013, without this information having been subjected to a formal closing process of the fiscal year, approval by the Board of Directors, audited by an external auditor, and presented through an ordinary general assembly to the members of the Credit Union, in addition to bank statements, copies of issued checks, bank transfers, invoices, receipts, and other documentation that corroborates the existence of income, expenses, and other acts that affected the financial situation of the Credit Union during the period from January to December 2014, without finding evidence that the Union has carried out any accounting registration to that effect.

Based on the above, and given that UNCEA did not exercise the right to a hearing granted in its favor under the cited summons notice, nor much less provided any document by virtue of which it disproves this ground for revocation, it is concluded that that Union did not register in its accounting, in the terms and conditions in which it is obligated, those acts that have meant a variation in its assets or liabilities, confirming a constant and repeated non-observance and non-compliance with what is provided in article 65 of the Credit Unions Law.

NET AND ACCOUNTING CAPITAL BELOW THE REQUIRED MINIMUM. As established in notice 212/165362/2016, by which that Company was summoned, it was identified that based on the figures reported by that Union as of September 30, 2013, the net capital of UNCEA calculated in terms of what is provided in article 80 of the Provisions, results in an amount lower than the minimum subscribed and paid-up capital, with which that Entity should have been counted according to its level of operations (-$202,291), no later than the close of the 2014 fiscal year, as well as that the accounting capital calculated based on the information from the "Regulatory Report R01-A-0111 Minimum Catalog" and report "R21-A 2111 Capitalization Requirements for Credit Risk", both with figures as of November 30, 2013 which were the last reported to this Commission by that Company, results in an amount lower than the minimum subscribed and paid-up capital, with which that Union should have been counted according to its level of operations (-$80,149), no later than the close of the 2014 fiscal year.

Thus, since UNCEA did not exercise the right to a hearing granted in terms of what is provided in articles 97 and 110, fraction I, of the Credit Unions Law and 62 of the Supervision Regulations of the National Banking and Securities Commission, it is concluded that that Union has a net capital lower than the required minimum capital, as well as that its accounting capital is below the required minimum capital, in contravention of what is provided in article 18, first paragraph, fraction I, of the Credit Unions Law.

NON-COMPLIANCE WITH MINIMUM CORRECTIVE MEASURES. As expressly stated in the aforementioned summons notice, through notice 132-C/101390/2014 of June 23, 2014, this Commission determined various corrective actions and measures for UNCEA, among which was the minimum corrective measure consisting of that Entity "... carry out the necessary procedures with the objective of having Net Capital, within the proportions established by the regulations applicable to it as a Credit Union, likewise, present the capital restoration plan for its approval as established in subsection b, of article 80 of the LUC, this document must be authorized by the Board of Directors, within a period of twenty business days, counted from the business day following the date of receipt of the present notice."

However, the case is that that Union omitted to respond and comply with the aforementioned notice and, consequently, to prove strict observance of the corrective measures imposed on it, as well as the carrying out of the necessary procedures to strictly comply with the minimum corrective measure previously transcribed, which concatenated with the fact that that Entity did not exercise the right to a hearing granted to it in terms of the aforementioned summons notice, allows concluding that that Union has not attended to the corrective actions and measures dictated to it, as well as the minimum corrective measure ordered to it, in contravention of what is provided in article 80, fractions I, subsection b), and II, subsection e), of the Credit Unions Law.

SIXTH.- In attention to the content of the documents referred to in the background chapter of this resolution, especially the summons notice 212/165362/2016, as well as the fact that UNCEA made no statement in exercise of its right to a hearing, despite having been legally summoned for it, it is determined that the grounds for revocation for which that Entity was summoned are met.

Thus, based on what is provided in articles 197, 129, 130, and 202 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures, supplementary application to the matter in terms of what is established in the last paragraph of article 108 of the Credit Unions Law and given the nature of public document, full probative value is granted to the document consisting of the summons notice to the revocation procedure identified with number 212/165362/2016 of January 19, 2016, to which reference is made in numeral 11 of the background section of this resolution, from whose text it is clear that UNCEA incurred in the grounds for revocation provided in fractions II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII, and XIV of article 97 of the Credit Unions Law, given the facts, records, and grounds stated therein.

In the same sense, based on what is provided in articles 197, 129, 130, and 202 of the Federal Code of Civil Procedures, supplementary application to the matter in terms of what is established in the last paragraph of article 108 of the Credit Unions Law, and given the nature of public document, full probative value is granted to the document consisting of the notification act of January 20, 2016, referred to in numeral 11 of the background section of this resolution, from which it is clear that the summons notice was duly notified to UNCEA and, therefore, it was legally summoned to the revocation procedure of its authorization to operate as a Credit Union, granting it for this effect a period of ten business days counted from the business day following that in which the notification of the aforementioned notice took effect, to exercise its right to a hearing and manifest what suited its rights, sending the information and documentation it deems appropriate, in order to disprove the grounds for revocation in which it was found located.

Now, although the term granted for the exercise of the right to a hearing established in favor of the referred Entity has elapsed excessively, this Commission has not received, nor has received any communication from UNCEA, nor much less any document by virtue of which that Company disproves the grounds for revocation in which it was found located, consequently, what is provided in article 108 of the Credit Unions Law is applicable, which states: "In the administrative procedures provided for in this Law, relevant proofs will be admitted with the acts subject to the procedure as long as they are offered within the term for the discharge of the right to a hearing...". (Emphasis added)

If the above is not sufficient, it is necessary to make clear that in fraction II of article 110 of the Credit Unions Law, it is established that in the event that the Entity does not use its right to a hearing within the term granted for such effect, the imputed infractions will be considered proven and the corresponding administrative sanction will be imposed, a legal device that for quick reference is referred to below:

"Article 110.- The Commission, in the imposition of administrative sanctions referred to in this law, will be subject to the following:

...

II. In case that the alleged infringer does not use the right to a hearing referred to in the previous fraction, within the term granted or, having exercised it, fails to dispel the imputations made against it, the imputed infractions will be considered proven and the corresponding administrative sanction will be imposed, and

...

". (Emphasis added)

Seeing its content, and since in the case at hand the circumstance provided in said legal provision is met, it is appropriate to affirm that having elapsed excessively the term granted in the summons notice, as has been referred to on various occasions, without having received any communication by virtue of which the Credit Union Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V. "made any statement or allegation or offered information or documentation by virtue of which the referred Union disproves the grounds for revocation for which it was summoned, this Decentralized Body considers the imputed infractions proven and, therefore, the grounds for revocation for which it was summoned.

Thus, having been met and proven the infractions imputed to the Union, the appropriate course is to revoke its authorization to operate as a Credit Union.

Application is given to what was held in the following criterion:

Era: Ninth Era

Registry: 185049

Instance: Circuit Collegiate Courts

Type of Thesis: Isolated

Source: Judicial Weekly of the Federation and its Gazette

Volume XVII, January 2003

Subject(s): Administrative

Thesis: XIV.2o.71 A

Page: 1868

ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTION. ONCE THE INFRACTION IS MET, THE AUTHORITY IS OBLIGED TO IMPOSE IT, SINCE IT DOES NOT HAVE DISCRETION IN THIS REGARD.

Discretion only exists when the law grants the authority a wide field of appreciation to decide when and how it must act, or even to freely determine the content of its possible action, from which it is concluded that the authority does not have discretionary powers regarding infractions to the law, since once met, it is legally obliged to impose the corresponding sanction, because, if it acts otherwise, impunity would be generated by leaving to its arbitrium whether the governed must comply or not with the legal imperatives, which is legally inadmissible.

SECOND CIRCUIT COLEGIATED TRIBUNAL.

Direct Amparo 191/2002. Joaquín Pacheco Medina. May 31, 2002. Unanimity of votes. Reporter: Alfonso Gabriel García Lanz, secretary of the tribunal authorized by the Judicial Career Commission of the Federal Judiciary Council to perform the functions of Magistrate. Secretary: Leticia Evelyn Córdova Ceballos.

For all the above, this Decentralized Body concludes that the "Union de Credito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V." did not disprove the grounds for revocation that were made known to it by this Commission, the case being that as of the date of the present, there is no record or evidence that that Union has given any response nor much less has offered an element of conviction by virtue of which UNCEA disproves the grounds for revocation provided in fractions II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII, XIV, of article 97 of the Credit Unions Law, which for greater reference are transcribed to that effect:

"Article 97.- The Commission, with the agreement of its Government Board and prior hearing of the interested society, may declare the revocation of the authorization granted to the unions, in the following cases:

...

II. If the union does not comply with the capitalization requirements established in accordance with what is provided by article 48 of this Law and the provisions to which said precept refers;

III. If the union in question does not comply with any of the minimum corrective measures referred to in article 80 of this Law; does not comply with more than one additional special corrective measure referred to in said article or, well, repeatedly fails to comply with an additional special corrective measure;

IV. If it carries out operations in contravention of what is provided by this Law or by the provisions emanating from it, or if it abandons or suspends the operations for which it is authorized in terms of article 40 of this Law;

V. If, despite the observations of the Commission, the union carries out operations different from those for which it is authorized or does not maintain the proportions of assets or liabilities established in the same; or well, if in the judgment of the Commission it does not adequately comply with the functions for which it was authorized due to the lack of diversification of its operations or with its social object, in accordance with what is provided by this Law;

VI. When due to causes imputable to the union, the acts or contracts that signify a variation in the assets or liabilities of the union, or imply a direct or contingent obligation, are not registered in the accounting on the same day they are carried out;

...

VIII. If it omits to comply with the requirements of the financial authorities due to the exercise of their powers;

...

XIV. If the accounting capital of the union is less than the minimum capital required in function of the level of operations authorized to it, and

...

".

Based on what is stated, this National Banking and Securities Commission, prior agreement of its Government Board in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016 and with the object of preserving the stability of the financial system as a whole, safeguarding the interests of the public:

RESOLVES

FIRST.- Based on what is provided in articles 97, fractions II, III, IV, V, VI, VIII, and XIV of the Credit Unions Law and 12, fraction V, of the National Banking and Securities Commission Law; and in accordance with the Fourteenth Agreement adopted by the Government Board of said Commission in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016, and to the considerations that were expressed in the

This resolution revokes the authorization granted to operate as a Credit Union previously issued to "Union de Crédito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V." through notice 601-II-26078 dated July 2, 1986.

SECOND.- From the date of notification of this Resolution, "Union de Crédito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V." is unable to carry out operations and will be placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for an agreement by the shareholders' assembly of said Company, in accordance with what is provided in Article 99 of the Credit Unions Law.

THIRD.- Based on the provisions of Articles 78 of the Credit Unions Law and 19 of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission, "Union de Crédito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V." must demonstrate to this Commission, within a period of 60 business days following the publication of this resolution in the Official Gazette of the Federation, that the appointment of the corresponding liquidator was carried out in accordance with what is established in Article 100, fraction II, of the aforementioned Law; otherwise, this Decentralized Body will promote before the competent judicial authority to appoint the liquidator and, if it finds it impossible to carry out said liquidation, to order the cancellation of its registration in the corresponding Public Commerce Register, in accordance with what is established in Articles 100, fraction II, and 102, of the Credit Unions Law.

FOURTH.- This Resolution is notified to "Union de Crédito Ejidal, Agropecuaria e Industrial del Municipio de Angostura, S.A. de C.V."

FIFTH.- Based on Article 99 of the Credit Unions Law, this Notice is registered in the corresponding Public Commerce Register and published in the Official Gazette of the Federation.

SIXTH.- Based on what is established in the penultimate paragraph of Article 16 of the Law of the National Banking and Securities Commission, in relation to what is provided in Articles 4, 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, and in terms of what was ordered by the Board of Directors of said Commission in the Sixteenth Agreement adopted in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016, the task of notifying, jointly or separately, this notice by which compliance with the agreement adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission is given, is delegated indistinctly to the public servants of this Commission: Karla Patricia Montoya Gutiérrez, María Isabel Almaráz Guzmán, Mariana Vázquez Bracho García, Ivonne Marcela López Franco, Angel Jonathan García Romo, José Luis García González, Luis Antonio Rodríguez Rodríguez, Juan Carlos Macías Luna, Alfredo Omar Morlan Fernández, José Alberto Jiménez Rosales, Rogelio García Martínez, Saúl Hernández Pérez, Alberto Erick Méndez Medina, Rosa Cristina Ávalos Gutiérrez, Selene Saucedo García, and Tania Patricia Morales Reyes.

The foregoing is made known to you by the President of the National Banking and Securities Commission, in accordance with what is provided in Articles 16, fraction VI, and the 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 Fifteenth Agreement adopted by the Board of Directors of said Commission in its extraordinary session held on April 29, 2016.

Respectfully, Mexico City, May 4, 2016. - The President, Jaime González Aguadé. - Initials.

In the document you are viewing, there may be text, characters, or objects that are not displayed 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 the published documents are the strict responsibility of their issuer.

INQUIRY

BY DATE

Do Lu Ma Mi Ju Vi Sá

INDICATORS

Exchange Rate and Rates as of 31/08/2026

DOLLAR 17.0427 UDIS

8.810483 TIIE 28 DAYS

6.7659% TIIE 91 DAYS

6.8033% TIIE 182 DAYS

6.8577% TIIE DE FONDEO

6.51%

See more

SURVEYS

Did you like the new look of the Official Gazette of the Federation website?

No Yes

Official Gazette of the Federation

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

111

LEGAL NOTICE | SOME RIGHTS RESERVED © 2026