Oleksandr Pysaruk completely denies the NABU’s allegations of the ex-management of VAB Bank and Oleh Bakhmatyuk, its ex-owner, misuse of refinancing funds received from the NBU.
The National Bank ex-deputy chairman and the Raiffeisen Bank present chairman said this in an interview with EP, commenting on the high-profile case of Pysaruk-Bakhmatyuk. Writes CENSOR.NET. He said that the VAB bank received a stabilization loan absolutely legally, and spent it for its intended purpose – to pay funds to depositors during the financial crisis in the country.
“Here you need to understand the context when this all happened. It was October 2014, when the situation in the country was very difficult. The autumn of 2014 was, perhaps, the worst crisis period of 2014-2015. Due to the events in the east of Ukraine, the situation in the country was very difficult, – Oleksandr Pysaruk said. – Clients were nervous and took money out of banks, outflows were very large, banks’ liquidity suffered. The macroeconomic situation was very difficult: the budget deficit and the balance of payments deficit were extremely unsatisfactory. The National Bank’s reserves were almost over. It was not just a stabilization loan to maintain liquidity, it was a target loan to issue guaranteed deposits to the bank customers”.
According to Pysaruk, the bank spent refinancing funds under the NBU’s strict control and exclusively on payments to depositors, which refutes the NABU’s allegations of the NBU stabilization loan misuse. ” As a result, this loan was paid to all guaranteed depositors. Recently, the National Bank published this information and confirmed that within 18 days about 80 thousand people received the UAH 1.2 billion. The National Bank, in view of its operational capabilities, controlled the funds disbursement, receiving daily reports, – Pysaruk stated. – Within the National Bank power, there was a decision on the targeted issuance of UAH 1.2 billion for payments to guaranteed depositors, this has been done. This is a documented fact. You can read this in the NBU’s decree. The restrictions list for VAB was the longest of those I remember. There were especially many restrictions on operations”.
Recall, the Pysaruk-Bakhmatyuk case, reopened by the NABU in violation of applicable law, is about obtaining the NBU’s refinancing by the VAB Bank. The official expert evaluations of the collateral assessments, the Individual Deposit Guarantee Fund’s conclusions and the NBU’s statements refute the allegations publicly put forward by the NABU to Oleh Bakhmatyuk. In addition, Mr Bakhmatyuk, whose bank had been bank withdrawn from the market by the NBU decision, himself repeatedly proposed to repay the debt using restructuring mechanisms.