Acerca del IPAB > Cumplimiento del Articulado transitorio y Acontecimientos Históricos > Historia y Estatus Actual de la Banca en Liquidación y Quiebra

As a consequence of the economic crisis Mexico underwent in 1994 and 1995, several full service banks experienced financial difficulties that resulted in intervention by the National Banking and Securities Commission (Spanish acronym CNBV), and eventually in the revocation by the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit (SHCP) of their authorization to organize and operate in such capacity. By virtue of such revocation, the full service banks in question were placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation and in some cases were declared bankrupt.

Liquidation comprises all operations necessary to finalize pending business affairs; pay debts; collect credits; arrange for the substitution of fiduciary duties; realize assets; and divide the remainder, if any, among the partners, to ultimately extinguish the corporation.

In the case of bankruptcy proceedings in full service banks, under applicable regulations the process began at the failure stage, comprising the implementation of the measures necessary to sell the affected bank’s assets in order to pay its creditors. This procedure was overseen by a judge, who had the authority to enforce the provisions of the Law of Bankruptcies (Spanish acronym LCM), the LPAB, and applicable supplementary regulations.

Under applicable regulations, responsibility to act as liquidator or receiver for full service banks that enter a state of dissolution and liquidation or are declared bankrupt corresponds to IPAB, which may fulfill such functions through its own personnel or through duly designated attorneys-in-fact.

Thus, IPAB has served as liquidator or receiver for 13 full service banks:

As liquidator in:

Banco Anáhuac, S.A. (Anáhuac);
Banco del Atlántico, S.A. (Atlántico);
BNP (México), S.A. (BNP);
Banco Capital, S.A. (Capital);
Banco Industrial, S.A. (Industrial);
Banco Promotor del Norte, S.A. (Pronorte);
Banca Quadrum, S.A. (Quadrum), y
Banco del Sureste, S.A. (Sureste)

As receiver in:

Banco Unión, S.A. (Unión);
Banco Obrero, S.A. (Obrero);
Banca Cremi, S.A. (Cremi);
Banco de Oriente, S.A. (Oriente), y
Banco Interestatal, S.A. (Interestatal)

The following table shows the starting dates of the liquidation and bankruptcy of the above-named full service banks, and the attorneys-in-fact in charge of each process:

Bank	Start of liquidation	Start of Bankrupcy	Present Attorney-in-Fact	Completed
Cremi	September 2001	May 2006	D&T Case, S.A. de C.V.
Oriente		November 2006
Unión		March 2003
Obrero		March 2003
Capital	October 2001	-
Interestatal		December 2006
Pronorte		-
Quadrum	March 2002	-	KPMG, Cárdenas Dosal S.C.
Anáhuac	August 2002	-	Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.
Industrial	August 2002	-	S.C.I., S.A. de C.V.
Sureste	November 2002	-	S.C.I., S.A. de C.V.
Atlántico 1/	June 2004	-	-
BNP2/	December 2005	-	Canizzo, Ortiz y Asociados, S.C.

1/ At the start of the liquidation process, S.C.I., S.A. de C.V., acted as liquidating attorney-in-fact in Atlantico. Starting November 10, 2006, IPAB has handled Atlantico’s liquidation process with its own personnel.

2/ Date IPAB took over management of the bank.

The following graph shows progress in realization of the assets of banks in liquidation or bankruptcy at the end of the year indicated:

Anáhuac
On August 1, 2002, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Anahuac to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on August 5, 2002, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm Ruiz, Urquiza y Cia., S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.) by subscribing an agency agreement on August 2, 2002.

Atlántico
On April 27, 2004, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Atlantico to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on May 10, 2004, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm S.C.I., S.A. de C.V., by subscribing an agency agreement on June 4, 2004.

On November 10, 2006, IPAB subscribed an agency termination agreement with the liquidating attorney-in-fact, whereby from that date IPAB performs the functions of liquidator through its own personnel.

BNP
On October 22, 2001, at the request of the bank’s shareholders, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to BNP to organize and operate as an affiliate full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on November 8, 2001.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm Canizzo, Ortiz y Asociados, S.C., by subscribing an agency agreement on December 12, 2005.

In accordance with the provisions of LPAB Article 57, Item I, in force at the time, on July 6, 18, and 28, 2006, BNP’s final liquidation balance sheet was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation and three other daily newspapers, two with national circulation and one local.

In August 2006 BNP’s final liquidation balance sheet was entered in the Public Registry of Property and Commerce of the Federal District, thereby concluding the bank’s liquidation and extinguishing the corporation.

Capital
On October 3, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Capital to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 5, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.) by subscribing an agency agreement on October 5, 2001.

Industrial
On August 22, 2002, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Industrial to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on August 26, 2002, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm S.C.I., S.A. de C.V., by subscribing an agency agreement on August 26, 2002.

On December 14 and 26, 2006, and January 5, 2007, the bank’s final liquidation balance sheet was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation and four other daily newspapers, two with national circulation and two local.

On February 21, 2007, the final liquidation balance sheet was entered in the Public Registry of Property and Commerce of the State of Jalisco, thereby concluding the bank’s liquidation and extinguishing the corporation.

Pronorte
On October 3, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Pronorte to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 5, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.) by subscribing an agency agreement on October 5, 2001.

After finishing the sale of assets and managing the bank’s affairs through to their final conclusion, on July 11 and 25, 2006, and August 8, 2006, the bank’s final liquidation balance sheet was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation and three other daily newspapers, two with national circulation and one local..

On September 8, 2006, the Tax Administration Service cancelled the bank’s Federal Taxpayer’s Registration, thereby concluding its liquidation and extinguishing the corporation.

Quadrum
On February 28, 2002, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Quadrum to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on March 4, 2002, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm KPMG, Cardenas Dosal, S.C., by subscribing an agency agreement on March 4, 2002.

Sureste
On November 28, 2002, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Sureste to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on December 2, 2002, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm SCI, S.A. de C.V., by subscribing an agency agreement on November 29, 2002.

After finishing the sale of assets and managing the bank’s affairs through to their final conclusion, on July 19 and 31 and August 10, 2006, the bank’s final liquidation balance sheet was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation and four other daily newspapers, two with national circulation and two local.

In September 2006 the Tax Administration Service cancelled the bank’s Federal Taxpayer’s Registration, thereby concluding its liquidation and extinguishing the corporation.

Unión
On September 28, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Union to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 1, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.) by subscribing an agency agreement on October 1, 2001.

In November 2001, and in June and September 2002, various judicial actions were exercised against Union, which resulted in attachment of a large part of its assets. The economic difficulties brought on by the attachments and the legal contingencies Union faced led IPAB to file for its bankruptcy in the District Courts on December 19, 2002.

On March 4, 2003, the Twelfth District Court in Civil Law Matters for the Federal District issued a ruling granting the bank’s bankruptcy filing, in accordance with the provisions of LCM Article 249. Thus, in accordance with regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the functions of receiver in the bank.

On September 30, 2003, IPAB signed an agency agreement with D&T Case, designating the firm as its attorney-in-fact to act as receiver in Union to take the actions corresponding to the receivership in Union’s bankruptcy proceedings.

Obrero
On September 28, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Obrero to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 1, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.), by subscribing an agency agreement on October 1, 2001.

In November 2001 and in June and September 2002 various judicial actions were exercised against Obrero, which resulted in attachment of a large part of its assets. The economic difficulties brought on by the attachments and the legal contingencies Obrero faced led IPAB to file for its bankruptcy in the District Courts on December 20, 2002.

On September 30, 2003, IPAB signed an agency agreement with D&T Case, designating the firm as its attorney-in-fact to act as receiver in Obrero to take the actions corresponding to the receivership in Obrero’s bankruptcy proceedings.

Cremi
On September 28, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Cremi to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 1, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.), by subscribing an agency agreement on October 1, 2001.

In view of the number, cost, and nature of Cremi’s legal contingencies, IPAB filed for its bankruptcy in the District Courts on March 30, 2006.

On May 17, 2006 the Eleventh District Court in Civil Law Matters for the Federal District issued a ruling granting the bank’s bankruptcy filing, in accordance with the provisions of LCM Article 249. Thus, in accordance with regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the functions of receiver in the bank.

On March 15, 2007, IPAB signed an agency agreement with D&T Case, designating the firm as its attorney-in-fact to act as receiver in Cremi to take the actions corresponding to the receivership in Cremi’s bankruptcy proceedings. By mutual agreement between the parties, the agreement took effect June 7, 2006.

Oriente
On September 28, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Oriente to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 1, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.), by subscribing an agency agreement on October 1, 2001.

During the liquidation process, several judicial actions were exercised against Oriente, which, added to the bank’s large number of creditors, led IPAB to file for its bankruptcy in the District Courts on August 11, 2006.

On November 27, 2006, the Fourth District Court in Civil Law Matters for the Federal District issued a ruling granting the bank’s bankruptcy filing, in accordance with the provisions of LCM Article 249. Thus, in accordance with regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the functions of receiver in the bank.

Interestatal
On October 3, 2001, the SHCP revoked the authorization granted to Interestatal to organize and operate as a full service bank. The revocation was published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 5, 2001, and consequently the bank was placed in a state of dissolution and liquidation, without the need for a resolution by the Shareholders’ Meeting.

Under regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the function of liquidator in the bank. To exercise such functions, after a competitive selection process, IPAB granted power of attorney to the firm D&T Case, S.A. de C.V. (D&T Case), an affiliate of Deloitte & Touche, S.C. (now Galaz, Yamazaki, Ruiz Urquiza, S.C.) by subscribing an agency agreement on October 5, 2001.

During the liquidation process, several judicial actions were exercised against Interestatal. These contingencies led IPAB to file for Interestatal’s bankruptcy in the District Courts on August 22, 2006.

On December 7, 2006, the Eleventh District Court in Civil Law Matters for the Federal District issued a ruling granting the bank’s bankruptcy filing, in accordance with the provisions of LCM Article 249. Thus, in accordance with regulations in force at the time, IPAB assumed the functions of receiver in the bank.