Superintendency Resolution Deputy SMV

No. 024-2024-SMV/10

Lima, 03 May 2024

Summary: Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. is sanctioned with a fine of 2 UIT for having incurred in four (04) infractions: two (2) minor ones typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, in one (1) serious one typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation and in one (1) serious one typified in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.27 of the Sanctions Regulation, for not having complied with sending the associate their account statements; for not having complied with sending the associate their assembly calendars; for not complying with the provisions of the collective funds administration contract entered into with the associate by not having complied with sending the payment receipts to the associate; and for not having complied with keeping its seller registry updated.

Administered
:
Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A.
Subject
:
Administrative sanctioning procedure
File No.:
2023033893

The Deputy Superintendent of Prudential Supervision

VIEWS:

Administrative file No. 2023033893, and Report No. 401-2024-SMV/10.3, issued by the General Intendancy of Prudential Compliance; as well as the defenses presented by Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A.; and,

CONSIDERING:

1. Pursuant to article 1 of Law No. 29782, Law for the Strengthening of the Supervision of the Securities Market, the name of Comisión Nacional Supervisora de Empresas y Valores (CONASEV) is replaced by that of Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores (SMV), therefore any reference to CONASEV in legal norms shall be understood as made to the SMV;

I. FACTS

2. On 23 June 2021, MR.1 entered into with AUTOPLAN EAFC the “Collective Funds Administration Contract Special Program for Early Award with Designated Supplier – Purchase Certificate Modality” No. 217242, Group No. 17, Program “Plan 21” for the award of a purchase certificate of US$ 13,000.00 (Thirteen thousand and 00/100 US dollars) (hereinafter, CONTRACT);

3. By means of the brief received on 30 June 2022, MR.1 filed a complaint before the Superintendencia del Mercado de Valores (SMV) against AUTOPLAN EAFC2, in which he states that, among others, MR.2, an employee of the administering company, indicated that with the payment of a down payment he would deliver the chosen vehicle within a maximum term of thirty (30) days, which did not occur. In that sense, he denounced misinformation and requested the return of his contributions. Likewise, he denounced the following facts: (i) AUTOPLAN EAFC had not sent him the account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT, nor had it communicated the dates of the assemblies and (ii) AUTOPLAN EAFC had not delivered to him the totality of payment receipts corresponding to the payments made by the CONTRACT;

4. MR.1 attaches as part of his complaint, among others:

a) Copy of the “Collective Funds Administration Contract Special Program for Early Award with Designated Supplier – Purchase Certificate Modality” No. 217242;

b) Copy of the document called Schedule of the 3 following assemblies;

c) Copy of the document with the title “Toc Biometrics” in which the DNI number and full name of MR.1 are observed; as well as an alphanumeric code and the date 23 June 2021 at 21:44:45 hours. Likewise, a frontal photo that would be of the face of MR.1 is observed. AUTOPLAN EAFC presented this document as support of the subscription of the “Collective Funds Administration Contract Special Program for Early Award with Designated Supplier – Purchase Certificate Modality” No. 217242, “Important information”, the “Booklet for the associate”, the characteristics of the Plan 21 Program, the “Application for Admission Plan 21 Program” and the schedule of the 3 following assemblies on the indicated date;

d) Copy of the POS payment voucher made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 300.00 (three hundred and 00/100 US dollars) made on 23 June 2021;

e) Copy of the document called “Payment Receipt for admission to the Autoplan-002 Program” No. 027414, dated 24 June 2021 for the amount of S/ 16,808.00;

[1] In the Annex attached to this resolution, the complete data of the natural persons to whom the denominations used in this resolution belong are detailed

[2] With File No. 2022026928.

f) Copy of the payment proof corresponding to the USD collection service of Banco de Crédito del Perú, made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 280.56 (two hundred eighty and 56/100 US dollars) made on 20 December 2021;

g) Copy of the payment proof corresponding to the USD collection service of Banco de Crédito del Perú, made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 280.56 (two hundred eighty and 56/100 US dollars) made on 23 September 2021;

h) Copy of the payment proof corresponding to the USD collection service of Banco de Crédito del Perú, made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 280.56 (two hundred eighty and 56/100 US dollars) made on 21 October 2021;

i) Copy of the payment proof corresponding to the USD collection service of Banco de Crédito del Perú, made in favor of AUTOPLAN EAFC for the amount of US$ 280.56 (two hundred eighty and 56/100 US dollars) made on 24 November 2021;

j) Copy of the document called “Payment Schedule” as of 18 April 2022 with the installments paid and pending with respect to contract No. 217242;

5. By means of Official Letter No. 3647-2022-SMV/10.3, notified on 13 July 2022 (hereinafter, OFFICIAL LETTER), the complaint filed by MR.1 was brought to the attention of AUTOPLAN EAFC so that it may submit the corresponding comments and it was requested the following documentation and/or information:

(…)

d. Copy of the notification of the call to the first (3) Assemblies in which the COMPLAINANT was to participate, as well as the respective Calendar of Assemblies of Associates, under the CONTRACT.

(…)

f. Proof of sending of all account statements sent to the Complainant, since their admission, corresponding to the CONTRACT.

(…)

h. Any other information and/or documentation deemed pertinent to the case and that allows clarifying the reported facts”;

6. By Official Letter No. 6145-2022-SMV/10.3 notified on 7 December 2022, and in view of the lack of response from AUTOPLAN EAFC, the request for information and/or documentation made in the OFFICIAL LETTER was reiterated;

7. On 5 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC submitted a written request for an extension to present the information and documentation required by the OFFICIAL LETTER;

8. By Official Letter No. 2544-2023-SMV/10.3 notified on 5 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC was informed of the granting of the requested extension;

9. On 14 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC submitted a written request for a new extension to present the information and documentation required by the OFFICIAL LETTER;

10. By Official Letter No. 2693-2023-SMV/10.3 notified on 14 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC was informed of the granting of the requested extension;

11. On 27 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC sent the SMV its comments and part of the information required by the OFFICIAL LETTER;

12. By Official Letter No. 3582-2022-SMV/10.3 notified on 3 August 2023 (hereinafter, OFFICIAL LETTER OF CHARGES), an administrative sanctioning procedure was initiated against AUTOPLAN EAFC, imputing charges for certain facts related to the complaint of SEÑOR1;

13. By written submission presented on 14 August 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC presented its defenses to the charges formulated by the OFFICIAL LETTER OF CHARGES;

14. On 25 September 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC submitted a supplementary written submission to the defenses presented on 14 August 2023. Said submission attaches a copy of an out-of-court settlement signed by AUTOPLAN EAFC and Señor1, whereby the administrator acknowledges in favor of the complainant the sum of US$ 5667.36 and S/ 1066.01 for the return of contributions corresponding to the CONTRACT and to Contract No. 214512 signed on 22 December 2022;

15. The charges formulated have been subject to evaluation by the General Superintendence of Prudential Compliance in Report No. 401-2024-SMV/10.3, which has been submitted to the knowledge of this Deputy Superintendence;

16. In observance of the Principle of Due Process contemplated both in article IV, paragraph 1, numeral 1.2 of the Preliminary Title, as well as in article 248, numeral 2, of the Single Ordered Text of Law No. 27444, General Administrative Procedure Law, approved by Supreme Decree No. 004-2019-JUS (hereinafter, TUO LPAG), by Official Letter No. 1264-2024-SMV/10, the administrative file to which this resolution refers was made available to AUTOPLAN EAFC for its review;

II. ISSUES TO BE DETERMINED

17. In the present administrative procedure, in the opinion of this Deputy Superintendence, it is appropriate to determine the following:

a. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or not in an infraction set forth in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01 (hereinafter, SANCTIONS REGULATION), by not having sent the associate the account statements corresponding to the collective funds administration contract;

b. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or not in an infraction set forth in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having sent the associate its assembly calendars, as from the assembly held in September 2021;

c. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or not in an infraction set forth in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, for not having complied with sending the payment receipts to SEÑOR MENDOZA;

d. Whether AUTOPLAN EAFC incurred or not in an infraction set forth in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.27 since it has not kept its registry of sellers updated;

e. Whether or not it is appropriate to impose a sanction on AUTOPLAN EAFC;

III. ANALYSIS

3.1 Of the applicable regulations

18. Regarding the CONTRACT, article 21 of the REGULATION provides:

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

A. ON THE SENDING OF ACCOUNT STATEMENTS AND CALENDAR OF ASSEMBLIES

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

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

20. Article 70 of the REGULATION establishes the following:

“Article 70.- Obligation to provide periodic information to the Associates The Administrator has the obligation to provide information to its Associates about their account statements and the calendar of Assemblies. When applicable, it shall send information on the price variation of the goods under determined goods Programs and other services that they contract. The account statements must be sent at least at the frequency with which the Assemblies are held. The calendar of Assemblies must be sent with a minimum frequency of three (03) months. The price variation of the goods under determined goods Programs may be included in the account statement that the Administrator sends to the Associate. The Associate's account statement must contain at least the information contained in Annex 8. The modality to be used to provide the aforementioned information must be agreed upon in the Contracts. Additionally, the Administrator may use different electronic communication means that enable the Associate to become adequately and timely aware of the respective information.

In the event that email is used, said means must guarantee non-repudiation and allow traceability of the communication". (Underline added);

B. ON THE REMISSION OF PAYMENT RECEIPTS

21. Regarding the obligation of AUTOPLAN EAFC to send the respective payment receipts to the associate, clause 7, numeral 7.6, of the CONTRACT establishes the following:

"CLAUSE SEVEN: ON PAYMENTS

(...)

7.6 Autoplan shall issue the respective payment receipts in the name of the Associate, which shall be sent to the address provided by the Associate in the General Conditions of this Contract. Prior to the aforementioned, Autoplan must validate the payment made into the Collection Accounts and identify that the same payment made for obtaining the Purchase Certificate has been made.

(...)" (Underline added);

C. ON THE REGISTRATION OF SELLERS BY THE COLLECTIVE FUND MANAGEMENT COMPANIES

22. Article 61 of the REGULATION establishes the following:

"Article 61.- Sellers

The seller is the person who participates in the process of placing Contracts directly, when hired by the Administrator, or indirectly, when maintaining a contractual relationship with a legal entity hired by the Administrator for said purpose.

The contract entered into by the Administrator with the aforementioned legal entities must establish the obligation of indirect sellers to submit to the Regulation and other norms applicable to the Collective Fund System. These legal entities and the Administrator are jointly and severally liable for the acts of the indirect sellers.

Direct and indirect sellers must sign a document in which they submit to the Regulation and other norms applicable to the Collective Fund System, as applicable, as well as to the supervision of the SMV.

The Administrator is jointly and severally liable to the Associates and the Collective Fund for damages caused by the sellers with whom it maintains a contract.";

23. In this regard, article 62 of the REGULATION provides the following:

""Article 62.- Registry

The Administrator must have a registry containing the information of its direct and indirect sellers, as well as of the legal entities with which it has a contract for said purpose.

The registry must include the following information:

a) Names and surnames, type and number of identity document of the seller.

b) Denomination or corporate name and Single Taxpayer Registry number of the legal entity contracted by the Administrator.

c) Start date of duties.

d) End date of duties.

e) Reasons for termination of duties.

The Administrator must permanently disseminate on its website the data referred to in literals a) and b) of this article and, if a direct or indirect seller enters or ceases, this must be registered no later than the day following its occurrence.

The Administrator is obligated to send to the SMV the information referred to in this article for its annotation in the Special Registry, no later than the last day of the month in which the entry or cessation of the direct or indirect seller occurred, as applicable." (Underline added);

3.2. On the charges formulated

A. ON THE REMISSION OF ACCOUNT STATEMENTS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT

24. According to the provisions of the exposed regulations, administrators have, among others, the obligation to provide information to their associates about their account statements, which must be sent at least at the same frequency as the assemblies are held and, through the modality established in the CONTRACT;

25. In this sense, AUTOPLAN EAFC should have sent to SEÑOR1, in his capacity as associate of the Plan 21 Program, Group No. 17, his account statements during the term of his contract, at least at the frequency in which the assemblies are held, that is, for the present case, they should have been sent monthly;

26. In this regard, SEÑOR1 has stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with delivering his monthly account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT, so through the OFICIO the administrative company was requested for the charges of remission of all account statements sent by SEÑOR MENDOZA since his entry through the CONTRACT;

27. It should be noted that, on 27 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC presented copies of the account statements updated as of 13 June, 12 August and 12 September 2022, corresponding to SEÑOR1 regarding the CONTRACT. However, it did not comply with presenting the charges of remission of all account statements that it should have sent to SEÑOR MENDOZA corresponding to the signed contract. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC has not presented evidentiary means that accredit the remission to SEÑOR MENDOZA of the charges of remission of the respective account statements corresponding to the CONTRACT;

28. In this sense, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC would have breached clause 10, numeral 10.4, literal l) of the CONTRACT and article 70° of the REGULATION, by not having accredited that it sent to SEÑOR MENDOZA the information corresponding to his account statements;

29. Therefore, it was imputed to AUTOPLAN EAFC THAT it would have incurred in one (1) minor infraction typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subsection 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGULATION, according to which constitutes an infraction: "Not timely sending to associates the information on account statements or assembly calendar;

B. ON THE SUBMISSION OF THE ASSEMBLY CALENDARS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT

30. In accordance with the provisions set forth in the regulations, the administrators have, among others, the obligation to provide their associates with information on the assembly calendar. Likewise, it is specified that the assembly calendars must be sent at a minimum frequency of three (3) months, by the method established in the CONTRACT;

31. In this regard, AUTOPLAN EAFC should have sent to SEÑOR1, in his capacity as an associate of the Plan 21 Program, Group No. 17, its assembly calendars during the term of the CONTRACT, at a minimum frequency of three (3) months;

32. In this regard, SEÑOR1 has stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with notifying him of the dates on which the assemblies were held, and therefore, through the OFICIO, the submission of the proof of notification of the call to the first three (3) assemblies in which SEÑOR MENDOZA was to participate, the respective Calendar of Associate Assemblies for the CONTRACT, and any other information and/or documentation deemed pertinent to the case and that allows clarification of the reported facts, was requested;

33. In response to the request made, on 27 June 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC submitted the “schedule of the next 3 assemblies,” which is part of the “Application for Admission to Program 21” signed by SEÑOR1 on 23 June 2021, which corresponds to the proof of notification of the first three (3) assemblies in which the complainant was to participate, held in June, July and August 2021. However, AUTOPLAN EAFC has not complied with submitting the proof of notification of the other assembly calendars corresponding to the CONTRACT, for the assemblies held between September 2021 and September 2022, taking into account that the CONTRACT shows the status of “Resolved” in the “Associate Status File (SIT)” with a withdrawal date of 29 September 2022, according to the information provided by AUTOPLAN EAFC;

34. In this regard, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC would have breached clause 10, numeral 10.4, literal l) of the CONTRACT and article 70° of the REGLAMENTO, by not having accredited that it sent SEÑOR MENDOZA the assembly calendars, for the assemblies held as of September 2021;

35. Therefore, it was imputed to AUTOPLAN EAFC THAT it would have incurred in one (1) minor infraction typified in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subsection 3.7 of the SANCTIONS REGLAMENTO, according to which the following constitutes an infraction: “Failure to timely send associates information on account statements or assembly calendars”;

C. ON THE SUBMISSION OF PAYMENT RECEIPTS

36. In accordance with the regulations set forth, AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to issue the respective payment receipts in the name of the associate, which shall be sent to the address provided by the latter;

37. On this matter, SEÑOR1 has stated that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have given him any payment receipt after he made the payment of S/ 16,808.00 (Sixteen thousand eight hundred eight and 00/100 soles) and US$ 1,702.80 (One thousand seven hundred two and 80/100 US dollars). In this regard, SEÑOR1 submitted as support the “Payment Receipt for admission to the Autoplan-002 Program” No. 027414, which records the receipt of S/. 16,808.00 by AUTOPLAN EAFC dated 24 June 2021; the POS payment voucher of 23 June 2021 and the payment receipts for collection services from Banco de Crédito del Perú dated 23 September, 21 October, 24 November and 20 December 2021, for a total of US$ 1,422.24 (One thousand four hundred twenty-two and 24/100 US dollars);

38. Likewise, he attached to his complaint the payment schedule as of 18 April 2022 sent to him by AUTOPLAN EAFC, where the payments of the installments corresponding to the CONTRACT can be seen for a total of US$ 5,667.36;

39. Therefore, through the OFICIO, AUTOPLAN EAFC was requested to provide the information and/or documentation that allows clarification of the reported facts; said request for information was reiterated through Oficio No. 6145-2022-SMV/10.3. Likewise, through Oficios No. 2544-2023-SMV/10.3 and No. 2693-2023-SMV/10.3, AUTOPLAN EAFC was granted extensions to the deadline granted in the OFICIO. However, as of the date of issuance of this resolution, the administering company has not submitted any documentation that allows accrediting that it sent SEÑOR1 the payment receipts for the contributions made in accordance with the CONTRACT;

40. Considering the foregoing, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with observing the provisions of clause 7, numeral 7.6 of the CONTRACT, that is, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with sending the payment receipts to SEÑOR MENDOZA;

41. Therefore, it was imputed to AUTOPLAN EAFC that it would have incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, in accordance with Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.16 of the SANCTIONS REGLAMENTO, according to which the following constitutes an infraction: “Failure to comply with the provisions of the collective funds administration contract entered into with the associate”; since it would not have complied with sending the payment receipts to SEÑOR1;

D. ON THE REGISTRATION OF SELLERS BY THE COLLECTIVE FUNDS ADMINISTERING COMPANIES

42. In accordance with the regulations set forth, AUTOPLAN EAFC has the obligation to maintain a registry containing the information of its direct or indirect sellers, as well as of the legal entities with which it has a contract for said purpose;

43. Likewise, it is obligated to send said information to the SMV for its annotation in the Special Registry no later than the last day of the month in which the entry or cessation of the direct or indirect seller has occurred;

44. On this matter, the file contains a document called “Payment Receipt for entry into the Autoplan-002 Program” No. 027414, in which the name, national identity document and address of SEÑOR1 are observed, as well as the following: “We have received the amount of S/ 16,808”. Likewise, in said document it is recorded that the proof of the payment described was received by SEÑOR2 as “seller/supervisor/coordinator” of AUTOPLAN EAFC, dated 24 June 2021;

45. On this matter, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC, in its response to the OFICIO, has not denied the document described above. Likewise, it is noted that the amount paid according to the document, S/ 16,808.00 (Sixteen thousand eight hundred eight and 00/100 soles), has been considered among the contributions made by SEÑOR1 under the CONTRACT, as can be seen in the payment schedule as of 20 January 2023 submitted by the administering company;

46. In that sense, upon observing that SEÑOR2 has participated in the placement process of the CONTRACT, AUTOPLAN EAFC should have sent to the SMV the information described in article 62 of the REGLAMENTO, corresponding to said seller, no later than the last day of the month in which the direct or indirect seller entered, as applicable;

47. However, from the review of the SMV records it was noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have submitted to the SMV the information established in article 62 of the REGLAMENTO corresponding to its seller, Señor2;

48. Considering the foregoing, AUTOPLAN EAFC would not have complied with the provisions of the aforementioned article 62 of the REGLAMENTO, since it has not kept its seller registry updated;

49. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC was charged with having incurred one (1) infraction classified as serious, according to Annex XIII, numeral 2, subsection 2.27 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, according to which the following constitutes an infraction: “Not having or not keeping updated the seller registry or not approving and/or implementing the seller training plan”;

3.3. Of the defenses

50. In response to the charges made, by brief submitted on 14 August 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC states that article 257 of the TUO LPAG and literals a) and b) of article 26 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES establish as mitigating factors the acknowledgment of the infraction and the offender's contribution to clarifying the infraction;

51. In this regard, and after citing the aforementioned provisions, AUTOPLAN EAFC expressly, precisely, concisely, clearly and unconditionally acknowledges its responsibility regarding the four (4) infractions charged in the OFICIO DE CARGOS, for which reason it requests the application of this mitigating factor of responsibility;

52. Additionally, the administering company considers that through the information in the file and that it submitted in due course, it could be considered, ex officio, whether it falls within the assumption established in literal b) of article 26 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, taking into consideration all the information submitted for the clarification of the infraction (the administering company refers to the brief dated 27 June 2023);

53. In view of the foregoing, the administering company requests that this mitigating factor also be considered for its responsibility in determining the sanction that must be imposed;

54. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC requests that the acknowledgment of responsibility set forth be accepted, and that its contribution to the clarification of the infraction be taken into account as another mitigating factor, in accordance with the provisions of article 26 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES and article 257 of the TUO LPAG;

55. In addition to the foregoing, on 25 September 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC submitted a supplementary brief to its submitted defenses, by which it states that it has entered into an Extrajudicial Transaction (hereinafter, TRANSACCIÓN) with SEÑOR1, dated 14 September 2023, for which reason it considers it important to submit said transaction in order to confirm that the controversy that gave rise to this complaint has already been resolved;

56. In this regard, the administering company states that in clause 2.4 of the TRANSACCIÓN, in relation to the charges imputed, the complainant has declared the following:

“2.4 Likewise, SEÑOR1 acknowledges that he received the following documents, information and response from AUTOPLAN: (i) Associate Handbooks, (ii) contract templates, (iii) fee schedules, (iv) copies of his contracts, (v) notifications of the calls to the Assemblies in which he was to participate, (vi) his current account statements from the first month he started the program until its completion, (vii) payment receipts for his paid installments, (viii) assembly schedules, and (ix) payment schedules for his contracts. Likewise, SEÑOR1 acknowledges that the documents detailed in points (i), (i) and (ii) were delivered to him prior to the signing of the contract.”

57. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC attaches the TRANSACCIÓN signed with SEÑOR MENDOZA;

3.4. Evaluation of the defenses

58. This analysis must begin by stating that AUTOPLAN EAFC has expressly acknowledged its responsibility in the commission of the four (4) infractions under analysis, relying on the provisions of article 26 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, which will be taken into consideration at the time of evaluating the sanction to be imposed;

59. Notwithstanding the foregoing, it should be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC is a company supervised by the SMV, with operating authorization granted by Superintendente Resolution No. 024-2015-SMV/02 of 17 February 2015, and is aware of the regulations under which the collective funds system operates, as well as the rights and obligations established in the contracts it administers, and is therefore obliged to act diligently as a collective funds management company; however, this did not occur, since the management company incurred in the commission of four infractions that are the subject of charges;

60. The foregoing paragraph affects the performance of its duties and obligations as a collective funds management company. Likewise, in the conduct of its activities, the management company is obliged to comply with its conduct rules, in accordance with the provisions of article 48 of the REGLAMENTO, including complying with the “Priority of interests”, which means that at all times it must prioritize the interests of the collective funds it administers and their members over its own interests, act with “Care and diligence” in the best interest of the Collective Fund and its Members, avoiding acts that may undermine their trust, as well as “Observance” in compliance with the rules governing the exercise of its activities and its own internal procedures established in the corresponding manuals. Regarding

[3] Published in the Official Gazette El Peruano on 20 February 2015.

this, the management company must implement the necessary procedures and controls for its proper observance;

61. Likewise, AUTOPLAN EAFC is obliged to comply with the contract entered into with its members, which establishes the rights and obligations of the members and the management company and whose model is authorized by the SMV, at the request of the management company;

A. ON THE SENDING OF ACCOUNT STATEMENTS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT

62. Taking into account the acknowledgment of its responsibility in the commission of the infraction that is the subject of charges, in this case it has been established that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not sent MR MENDOZA the account statements during the term of the CONTRACT; and, therefore, has breached the provisions of clause 10, numeral 10.4, literal l) of the CONTRACT and article 70 of the REGLAMENTO;

63. Consequently, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in one (1) infraction classified as minor, in accordance with Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Failure to timely send members the information on account statements or assembly calendars”;

B. ON THE SENDING OF ASSEMBLY CALENDARS CORRESPONDING TO THE CONTRACT

64. Likewise, it has been established that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not sent MR MENDOZA the assembly calendars, with respect to the assemblies held as of September 2021, breaching the provisions of clause 10, numeral 10.4, literal l) of the CONTRACT and article 70 of the REGLAMENTO;

65. Therefore, AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in one (1) infraction classified as minor, in accordance with Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Failure to timely send members the information on account statements or assembly calendars”;

C. ON THE SENDING OF PAYMENT RECEIPTS

66. Similarly, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not complied with sending MR MENDOZA the payment receipts, in relation to the payments made corresponding to the CONTRACT; and therefore, has breached the provisions of clause 7, numeral 7.6 of the CONTRACT;

67. In that sense, it is observed that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, in accordance with Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.16 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Failure to comply with the provisions of the collective funds management contract entered into with the member;

D. ON THE REGISTRATION OF SELLERS BY COLLECTIVE FUNDS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES

68. Likewise, it has been established that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not sent the information established in article 62 of the REGLAMENTO corresponding to the seller, Andy Sanchez, who has participated in the placement process of the CONTRACT; and, consequently, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not kept its seller registry updated, breaching the provisions of the aforementioned article 62 of the REGLAMENTO;

69. In that sense, it is noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in one (1) infraction classified as serious, in accordance with Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.27 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, according to which it constitutes an infraction: “Failure to have or failure to keep updated the seller registry or failure to approve and/or implement the seller training plan”;

70. Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that AUTOPLAN EAFC has not rebutted the charges imputed;

71. On the other hand, it should be noted that the assessment of what AUTOPLAN EAFC has stated regarding its having contributed to the clarification of the infractions that are the subject of charges and the TRANSACTION will be considered at the time of assessing the sanction to be imposed;

IV. ASSESSMENT OF THE SANCTION

72. In accordance with article 7 of Decreto Ley No. 21907 on Collective Funds Companies and article 25 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES; in accordance with article 248, numeral 34 of the TUO LPAG and article 2575 of the aforementioned body of regulations; the administrative sanctions imposed must take into account the criteria set forth in Decreto Ley No. 21907, the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES and the TUO LPAG;

[4] “Article 248.- Principles of the administrative sanctioning power The sanctioning power of all entities is additionally governed by the following special principles: (…) 3. Reasonableness.- The authorities must foresee that the commission of the sanctionable conduct does not prove more advantageous for the offender than complying with the infringed norms or assuming the sanction. However, the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the non-compliance qualified as an infraction, observing the following criteria that are indicated for the purposes of their gradation: a) The illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; b) The probability of detection of the infraction; c) The severity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal interest; d) The economic harm caused; e) Recidivism, for the commission of the same infraction within the term of one (1) year from when the resolution that sanctioned the first infraction became final. f) The circumstances of the commission of the infraction; and g) The existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the offender”.

[5] “Article 257°.- Exemptions and mitigating circumstances of liability for infractions 1.- The following constitute conditions exempting liability for infractions: a) Fortuitous event or duly proven force majeure. b) Acting in compliance with a legal duty or the legitimate exercise of the right of defense. c) Mental incapacity duly proven by the competent authority, provided that it affects the aptitude to understand the infraction. d) The mandatory order of a competent authority, issued in the exercise of its functions. e) The error induced by the Administration or by a confusing or illegal administrative provision. f) The voluntary correction by the possible sanctioned party of the act or omission imputed as constituting an administrative infraction, prior to the notification of the imputation of charges referred to in subsection 3) of article 255. 2.- The following constitute conditions mitigating liability for infractions: a) If, once an administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated, the offender acknowledges its responsibility expressly and in writing. In cases where the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced to an amount not less than half of its amount. b) Others that are established by special norm”.

73. Within that framework, the evaluation of the sanction must consider: a) Background of the offender; b) Recidivism6 ; c) Circumstances of the commission of the infraction; d) Economic harm caused and its repercussion in the market; e) Illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infraction; f) Probability of detection of the infraction; g) Severity of the damage to the public interest and/or protected legal interest; h) Existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the offender;

74. In that sense, in order to reconcile the criteria of the TUO LPAG with those indicated in Decreto Ley N° 21907 and in the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, and for these criteria to be considered adequately so that their assessment observes the principle of reasonableness and that the sanction to be imposed adapts to them, the following criteria are analyzed;

75. Regarding the background, in accordance with the provisions of article 25°, literal a) of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, the final sanctions imposed by the SMV within the term of four (4) years prior to the commission of the infraction to be sanctioned constitute background. The referred article specifies that the commission of the same infraction in the year prior to the infraction to be sanctioned is not considered background;

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

No.	Resolution	Resolved	Finality	Background (*)	Recidivism
i	Deputy Superintendency Resolution SMV No. 112-2017-SMV/107	AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of two (02) UIT, for having incurred one (01) infraction of a serious nature typified in Annex XIX, numeral 2, subsection 2.12 of the Reglamento de Sanciones approved by Resolución CONASEV N° 055-2001-EF/94.10 and its amending norms (hereinafter ANTIGUO REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES), for not having complied with submitting the First Semiannual Report of the Compliance Officer for the 2015 fiscal year, within the term established in the Norms for the Prevention of Money Laundering and Financing of Terrorism.	12/12/2017	A, B, C and D	No
ii	Deputy Superintendency Resolution SMV No. 017-2018-SMV/108	AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with six (06) warnings and a fine of 15.48 UIT for having incurred eleven (11) infractions of a minor nature typified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, subsection 3.1 of the ANTIGUO REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONEs, for not having complied with submitting periodic information within the term established in the applicable regulations.	30/12/2021	A, B, C and D	No

[6] The sanction criteria referred to Recidivism and the Probability of detection of the infraction were introduced by article 2° of Decreto Legislativo N° 1272 which modified, among others, article 230°; numeral 3 of Ley N° 27444, Ley del Procedimiento Administrativo General.

[7] Notified on 17 November 2017.

[8] Notified on 11 May 2018.

No.	Resolution	Resolved	Finality	Background (*)	Recidivism
		By Resolución de Superintendencia Adjunta SMV N° 070-2021-SMV/10, the reconsideration appeal filed by Autoplan EAFC was declared partially founded and consequently the amount of the fine imposed by article 17 of Resolución de Superintendencia Adjunta SMV N° 017-2018-SMV/10 was graduated to 9.675 UIT.
iii	Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 011-2019-SMV/109	AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with two (02) reprimands for having incurred two (02) serious infractions classified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, subsection 2.21 and Annex XIV, numeral 2, subsection 2.41 of the OLD SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not having adequately determined the order of preference of the awarded substitutes.	11/04/2019	A, B, C and D	No
iv	Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 004-2020-SMV/1010	AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with a fine of three (03) UIT for having incurred two infractions: one (01) serious infraction classified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, subsection 2.22 of the OLD SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not complying with the conditions established in the regulations for the calling or holding of assemblies; and, one (01) minor infraction classified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, subsection 3.13 of the OLD SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not timely sending to the member the information on the assembly calendar. By means of RSUP No. 119-2020-SMV/02, the appeal filed by AUTOPLAN EAFC was declared partially founded and consequently the sanction imposed as a fine in article 3 of the Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 004-2020-SMV/10 was modified, reducing it from three (3) UIT to two (2) UIT, in force at the time of effective payment of the fine; and, revoking the corrective measure provided in article 4 of the aforementioned Deputy Superintendent Resolution.	01/12/2020	A, B, C and D	No
v	Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No.	AUTOPLAN EAFC is sanctioned with three (03) reprimands and a fine of 28.0045 UIT for having incurred twenty (20) minor infractions classified in Annex XIV, numeral 3, subsection 3.1 of the OLD SANCTIONS REGULATIONS and in two (02) minor infractions classified in Annex I, numeral 3, subsection 3.1, of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not having complied with submitting periodic information within the term established by the applicable regulations referred to interim financial information and management report.	21/04/2021	A, B, C and D	No

[9] Notified on 21 March 2019.

[10] The resolution was subject to appeal by AUTOPLAN EAFC. Subsequently, by means of Superintendent Resolution No. 119-2020-SMV/02, the appeal was declared partially founded.

No.	Resolution	Resolved	Finality	Background (*)	Recidivism
	013-2021-SMV/1011	SANCTIONS and in two (02) minor infractions classified in Annex I, numeral 3, subsection 3.1, of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not having complied with submitting periodic information within the term established by the applicable regulations referred to interim financial information and management report.
	Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 060-2021-SMV/1012	Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. is sanctioned with a fine of 18.3345 UIT for having incurred twelve (12) minor infractions classified in Annex I, numeral 3, subsection 3.1, of the SANCTIONS REGULATIONS, for not having complied with submitting periodic information within the term established by the applicable regulations.	19/01/2022	A and B	No
	Deputy Superintendent Resolution SMV No. 003-2022-SMV/1013	Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. is sanctioned with four (04) UIT for having incurred one (01) serious infraction classified in Annex XIV, numeral 2, subsection 2.6 of the Sanctions Regulations, for granting loans to third parties exceeding the limit established by the regulations.	17/03/2022	A and B	No

[*] Literals of recital 18.

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

78. With regard to the circumstances of the commission of the infractions, it must be mentioned that AUTOPLAN EAFC, in its capacity as a company supervised by the SMV, is aware of the rules that regulate the collective funds system and in that sense, of the rules that oblige it to keep its registry of sellers in the RPMV updated. Likewise, it is aware of the rules that oblige it to deliver the respective assembly calendars, account statements and payment receipts to its members;

79. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the present case it has been proven that AUTOPLAN EAFC did not comply with delivering the account statements to the SEÑOR1 during the term of the CONTRACT, that is from 23 June 2021 to 29

[11] Notified on 26 March 2021.

[12] Notified on 29 December 2021.

[13] Notified on 24 February 2022.

of September 2022, nor did it deliver the assembly calendars corresponding to the assemblies held as of September 2021, nor the payment receipts corresponding to the CONTRACT. Likewise, it is observed that it did not comply with the provisions of article 62 of the REGULATIONS, and, consequently, it has not kept its registry of sellers in the RPMV updated;

80. In the present case, AUTOPLAN EAFC has stated that it has contributed to the clarification of the infractions. In this regard, it must be noted that although the administering company has submitted various information that has contributed to the clarification of the infractions subject of charges (such as, for example, the brief of 27 June 2023), it must be reiterated that it has been evidenced by not presenting the reception charges by the SEÑOR1, among others and in attention to the acknowledgment made by the administering company, that it has not complied with delivering to the member, the account statements, assembly calendars (as of the assembly held in September 2021), nor the payment receipts corresponding to the CONTRACT, as well as that it has not kept the registry of sellers in the RPMV updated;

81. It should be added that, by means of a document dated 25 September 2023, the administering company reported that on 14 September 2023, it entered into the TRANSACTION with MR.1 by which, among others, AUTOPLAN EAFC undertook to grant to MR. MENDOZA, one time only, the fixed, total and invariable sum of US$ 5,667.36 (Five thousand six hundred sixty-seven and 36/100 US Dollars), for the concept of refund of contributions corresponding to the CONTRACT and S/ 1066.01 for the Collective Funds Administration Contract Special Program for Early Award with Designated Supplier – Purchase Certificate Modality 21451214;

82. It should be noted that within the framework of the direct dialogue space promoted by the Investor Ombudsman of the SMV – which was requested by MR. MENDOZA, in attention to compliance with the TRANSACTION –, through the email of 24 October 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC presented the proof of a bank transfer in favor of MR.1, corresponding to the amount that the administering company acknowledged in the TRANSACTION, US$ 5,667.36 for the concept of refund of contributions, made that same day;

83. Likewise, it is observed that in numeral 2.4 of the TRANSACTION, MR. MENDOZA acknowledges that he received, among others, the following documentation and/or information: “(…) (v) notifications of the calls to the assemblies in which he was to participate, (vi) his current account statement from the first month the program began until its completion; (vi) payment receipts for his paid installments, (viii)) schedule of assemblies, (…)”

84. Regarding the economic harm caused and the repercussion in the market, in the present case, it has not been evidenced that the infractions incurred by AUTOPLAN EAFC have had repercussion in the

[14] According to the search carried out on the INDECOPI website, the complaint filed before said entity by MR. MENDOZA against AUTOPLAN EAFC has been found registered under File No. 0352-2022/ILN-CPC-DENUNCIA, presented on 27 September 2021. However, through Final Resolution No. 655-2023/ILN-CPC of 29 September 2023, Indecopi terminates the procedure and orders the archiving of the file based on the extrajudicial transaction signed on 14 September 2023. MR.1 did not file a complaint before the SMV against AUTOPLAN EAFC for breaches related to this second contract

market, nor produced a concrete quantifiable economic harm in the latter. However, these facts affect the trust of the associates or potential associates in the collective funds system;

85. Regarding the illicit benefit resulting from the commission of the infractions, it must be noted that it has not been proven that AUTOPLAN EAFC has obtained a benefit that bears a direct relation to the infractions subject to charges;

86. Regarding the probability of detection of the infractions, it must be indicated that the facts constituting the infraction committed by AUTOPLAN EAFC were evidenced when verifying compliance with the regulations applicable to the development of its functions, based on the facts set forth by MR.1 in the complaint filed against the administering company, so the probability of detection of the infraction was low;

87. Regarding the severity of the harm to the public interest and/or protected legal interest, in the present case it has not been possible to prove that the action of AUTOPLAN EAFC in the commission of the infraction subject to analysis in the present sanctioning procedure has caused determinable harm to the public interest;

88. However, a protected legal interest has been affected, consisting of the protection of the associate, since AUTOPLAN EAFC has breached the obligation to provide periodic information to the associate. The breached obligation has the purpose of preventing the affectation of the interests of the associates, in particular their trust in the System, since the sending of account statements allows the former to verify the detail of their contributions based on the paid installments, the administration expenses charged by the company and to carry out the control of their payments made monthly, as well as the other information established in Annex 8 of the REGULATION;

89. Likewise, in accordance with the provisions of clause 7, numeral 7.6, of the CONTRACT, the administering company was obliged to send the payment receipts corresponding to the payments made by the associates. In this sense, and in order to avoid a possible affectation to its clients, AUTOPLAN EAFC should have established the procedures to comply with the obligations established in the contract and the rules of the collective funds system;

90. Likewise, in accordance with the provisions of article 62, AUTOPLAN EAFC was obliged to send to the SMV the information corresponding to its sellers. However, it did not comply with sending the information corresponding to the seller MR.2 to the RPMV, so it has not kept its registry of sellers updated;

91. Thus, taking into account that the collective funds administering companies have the obligation to act in strict compliance with the regulations applicable to them, such as the provisions established in the REGULATION and in the CONTRACT and, in safeguarding the collective funds system, the transgression of said regulations also affects the legal interest referring to the integrity of the market, that is, of the collective funds system and especially affects the trust of the associates or potential associates in the collective funds system;

92. Regarding the existence or not of intentionality in the conduct of the infringer, it must be specified that no intentionality has been verified in the conduct of AUTOPLAN EAFC regarding the infractions subject to analysis;

93. In addition to the foregoing, it is appropriate to analyze the exemptions and mitigating circumstances of liability established in article 257 of the TUO LPAG as well as the mitigating and exempting conditions of liability established in articles 26 and 27 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES;

94. In this regard, in accordance with the provisions of article 257, numeral 1 of the TUO LPAG and article 27 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, it is not observed that in the present case any of the circumstances constituting exempting conditions of liability has been configured;

95. With regard to the voluntary declaration of the commission of the infraction and the contribution of the offender to its clarification, established in article 257, numeral 2, subparagraph a) of the TUO LPAG and in article 26, literals a) and b) of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES15, it must be noted that AUTOPLAN EAFC has acknowledged its responsibility for the infractions incurred expressly and in writing, within the term granted for the submission of defenses, and in a precise, concise, clear and unconditional manner, without ambiguous or contradictory expressions, as well as has contributed to its clarification;

96. From the foregoing, it is concluded that AUTOPLAN EAFC has incurred in the commission of two (2) infractions classified as minor in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the Reglamento de Sanciones, one (1) infraction classified as serious in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.16 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES and one (1) infraction classified as serious in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.27 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, with respect to which it is appropriate to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a sanction corresponding to the infractions classified as serious in accordance with article 38 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES;

97. In this regard, it must be noted that because the infractions determined are of a different nature, it is appropriate to impose the sanction for the most serious infraction, as indicated in the second paragraph of article 2916 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES;

[15] “Article 26.- Mitigating circumstances of liability for infractions The following constitute mitigating conditions of liability for infractions: a) Acknowledgment of responsibility by the offender expressly and in writing, once the administrative sanctioning procedure has been initiated. When the applicable sanction is a fine, it is reduced, taking into account the following: 1. If the acknowledgment of the infraction is presented within the term granted for the submission of defenses, the reduction amount shall be fifty percent (50%). 2. If the acknowledgment is presented after the expiration of the term granted for the submission of defenses and before the expiration of the term granted to formulate allegations to the instruction report, the reduction amount shall be thirty percent (30%). 3. If the acknowledgment is presented after the expiration of the term granted to formulate allegations to the instruction report and up to before the issuance of the sanction resolution, the reduction amount shall be ten percent (10%). The acknowledgment of responsibility regarding an infraction must be made in a precise, concise, clear, express and unconditional manner, and must not contain ambiguous or contradictory expressions; otherwise, it shall not be understood as an acknowledgment. If defenses are presented, despite having made an acknowledgment of responsibility, it shall be understood as a non-acknowledgment, and the authority shall proceed to evaluate the defenses. b) Contribution of the offender to the clarification of the infraction. (…)”.

[16] “Article 29.- CONCURRENCE OF INFRACTIONS (…)

98. From the foregoing, it is concluded that it is appropriate to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a sanction corresponding to the infractions classified as serious in accordance with article 38 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES; therefore, it would be appropriate to apply a fine greater than 25 UIT and up to 50 UIT or the prohibition of formation of new groups; however, to the extent that AUTOPLAN EAFC has acknowledged the commission of the infractions, it is appropriate to apply the provisions of article 26, literals a), numeral 2 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, so the fine for the infractions must range between 12.5 UIT and 25 UIT; that is, 50% of the range established for serious infractions;

99. However, taking into account the sanction criteria analyzed, and in application of the Principle of Reasonableness contemplated in article 248, numeral 3 of the TUO LPAG which states that the sanctions to be applied must be proportional to the non-compliances classified as infractions, it must be considered that with respect to the infractions subject to charges, it has not been evidenced that these have had an impact on the market. Likewise, it has not been established that the administering company has obtained an illicit benefit directly related to the commission of the infractions, nor that it has had intentionality in its actions in this regard. Similarly, it has been verified that AUTOPLAN EAFC is not a repeat offender with respect to the infractions; furthermore, it must be taken into account that it has acknowledged the infractions, that it has contributed to their clarification and that through the TRANSACTION, signed on 14 September 2023, AUTOPLAN EAFC returned to the associate the contributions corresponding to the CONTRACT and has regularized the delivery of the information observed in three (3) of the infractions subject to charges;

100. In that sense, in accordance with the provisions of the last paragraph of article 25 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES, this Deputy Superintendency considers that it is appropriate to impose on AUTOPLAN EAFC a fine sanction applicable to minor infractions, in accordance with the provisions of article 39 of the REGLAMENTO DE SANCIONES;

101. In accordance with the provisions of article 32, numeral 16, of the Regulation of Organization and Functions of the SMV, approved by Supreme Decree No. 216-2011-EF and its amendments;

RESOLVES:

Article 1.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as minor as established in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for having failed to send the account statements to the associate.

Article 2.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as minor as established in Annex XIII, numeral 3, subparagraph 3.7 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for having failed to send the assembly calendars to the associate.

[*] Likewise, when several conducts qualify as more than one infraction, the sanction corresponding to the most serious infraction is imposed.”

Article 3.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as serious as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.16 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, for having failed to send the payment receipts to the associate.

Article 4.- Declare that Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A has incurred one (1) infraction classified as serious as established in Annex XIII, numeral 2, subparagraph 2.27 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01, since it has not kept its registry of sellers updated.

Article 5.- Sanction Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A with a fine of 2 UIT in force at the time of effective payment of the fine for the commission of the infractions referred to in articles 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this resolution.

Article 6.- This resolution does not exhaust the administrative remedy, unless it is consented to, and may be challenged before the Deputy Superintendency of Prudential Supervision by filing a motion for reconsideration or appeal before the same, within a period of fifteen (15) business days counted from the day following its notification.

Article 7.- In the event that this resolution is not challenged by motion for reconsideration or appeal within fifteen (15) business days of notification and becomes final, it must be published on the SMV Institutional Page on the Single Digital Platform of the Peruvian State, in observance of the provisions of numeral 1, article 7 of the Policy on dissemination of regulatory projects, general legal norms, early agenda and other administrative acts of the SMV, approved by SMV Resolution No. 014-2014-SMV/01 and its amendment, and by the provisions of article 14 of the Sanctions Regulation, approved by SMV Resolution No. 035-2018-SMV/01.

Article 8.- Transcribe this resolution to Autoplan Empresa Administradora de Fondos Colectivos S.A. and to SEÑOR1.

Register, communicate and publish.

Omar Gutiérrez Ochoa
Deputy Superintendent
Deputy Superintendency of Prudential Supervision