On November 28, the Supreme Court opened cassation proceedings in a scandalous dispute between former business partners, which could be a turning point for the career and political biography of one of the closest associates of the leader of the Radical Party, Oleg Lyashko.
The panel composed of the rapporteur Dmitry Luspenik, as well as the «side» judges Boris Gulko and Yulia Chernyak requested the cassation proceedings, and also requested the positions of the parties on the litigation between December 5 and the last year between the influential «People’s Deputy Radical» Sergey Skuratovsky and one of the shareholders of the nationalized “Rodovid” bank, Sergey Dyadechko.
Business partners quarreled on the basis of financial relations «total weight» of more than $ 5 million.
How this dispute is connected with the peculiarities of the parliamentary campaign of 2014, the attempt on Dyadechko, Skuratovsky’s getting into Rada and the purchase of seats in the Lyashko’s party, “Strana” understood.
To the fatal acquaintance led the dominance of the homeless
The history of close ties between the banker Dyadechko and the deputy-developer, the former director of the PC «Green-Gray» has already been investigated on the pages of our publication a year earlier. Today we only recall that from the middle of the “zero” on a parity basis they were co-founders in a number of garden associations registered in the territory of the Kiev-Svyatoshinsky district. Where the «patrimony» of Skuratovsky is the village of Sofievskaya Borshchagovka, where in 2005 Dyadechko moved from Donetsk to live.
According to one version, a plot of 0.5 hectares of land became a banker’s rapprochement with the developer, who at that time held the post of head of the land commission of the Kiev-Svyatoshinsky District Council. This allotment was located next to the Dyadechko’s estate and was not used for the intended purpose by the tenant.
In fact, the territory turned into a dump and a place for assemblies of asocial elements, which brought discomfort to a financier who had moved close to Kiev from Donbass. In search of ways to solve this issue Dyadechko met Skuratovsky.
Skuratovsky was sitting on a gold mine. Dyadechko helped to open its valve.
This is how the beginning of their relations describes the banker, which later turned into a friendly and business relationship.
“At that time, the land commission of the Kiev-Svyatoshinsky district, in which Skuratovsky had a serious influence, was a real gold mine. The fact is that it was to him that all the heads of the village councils ran with the same question: “Let us kill a couple of hectares of land within the boundaries of our village, so that we can solder them, give out 25 hectares to the right people and be able to sell them in market». It was 2005-2006, a period of growth in Ukraine’s economy, a jump in the cost of land prices and rush”, — says Dyadechko in the commentary to “Strana”.
Skuratovsky did not provide the author of these lines with his interpretation of the acquaintance and the current dispute with the financier. On the eve of the release of the material, he contacted one of the instant messengers, where he promised to answer questions about the essence of his relationship with Dyadechko. When they follow, the editors will publicize the situation of a colleague of Oleg Lyashko.
Whatever it was, but ultimately Dyadechko managed to resolve the controversial issue with the neighbors in his favor. Since the same period, the collaboration between the director of the private company “Green-Gray” and the shareholder of “Rodovid” has begun. According to media reports, their spouses acted as founders of the garden associations “Zhuravlinoe”, “Medunitsa” and “Chista Krinitsya”, who became “collectors” of land plots on the territory of the Kiev-Svyatoshinsky district.
The global crisis knocked down the «Autonomous business» of Lyashko’s colleague
Dyadechko says that Skuratovsky was the ideologue and the engine of the process.
“He had the opportunity to acquire land at first cost, and selling at a normal margin is a normal business for members of land commissions. But since at that time Sergey didn’t have enough working capital to carry out transactions, and I only had more than $ 20 million by 2005 on declarations, we started a joint business”, — says the banker.
Dyadechko calls himself a «treasurer» of a number of joint projects with a deputy, where he exclusively allocated all the money.
In parallel, Skuratovsky tried to do his own «business on the land». The shareholder of the scandalous “Rodovid” indicates that the current people’s deputy-radical took all the risks in this regard.
“There was another deal when he offered some plots of land, but they did not seem attractive to me. Then Skuratovsky acted himself. He came back and asked: “Sergey, I urgently need $ 500-700 thousand: now they unravel such a section, I buy it off from the head of the village council for $ 800 per one hundred square meters, and I already have a buyer for 2300. I quickly arrange everything, resell, and I will return everything to you”. After that, he brought the received money in parts, and again took it — sometimes on receipt, sometimes on parole”, — says Dyadechko.
The banker explains his favor to Skuratovsky by the fact that by that moment he was in close contact with each other, he trusted the partner and was friends with him.
The namesakes invited each other to family celebrations, and at the end of 2006, Dyadechko’s company rescued Skuratovsky’s hotel in favor of “PUMB” bank from which he took out a loan for the construction.
According to Dyadechko, Skuratovsky did not return this debt in the amount of UAH 18 million even to him after twelve years. A black cat ran between companions exactly before the beginning of the 2007-2008’ crisis.
“Then we had a contract that he would return the loan to me within a year, but he has not yet been repaid… Skuratovsky’s total debt to me is 18 million UAH of the transfer to his “Green-Gray” accounts plus $ 3.5 million, which he took to buy land, where these plots ultimately remained at his disposal at the time of the crisis”, — the banker sums up the balance.
In court, since 2015, he is trying to get him to return a small part of the debt, amounting to $ 536 thousand. This is the only tranche in confirmation of which Dyadechko has a partner’s receipt. He says that the director of “Green-Grey” at the office of “Rodovid” Bank in Sagaydachnogo Street in the fall of 2006 wrote it with his own hand.
“In general, loans were different — he took, once wrote receipts, returned something, there were many different operations… Then hard times came, the market collapsed due to the crisis. For those lands that we have remained in joint ventures, I have no complaints about him. But according to the history of debts, I want to return everything”, — explains Dyadechko. And he adds that until the fall of 2014, Skuratovsky recognized his obligations to the financier.
New life of a radical developer and court cases
The scandalous relationship of partners came to a new level after the fall of 2014 when Skuratovsky went through the lists of political forces of Lyashko to parliament.
“I called him from the French number, and he picked up the phone. I congratulated him on his election to parliament, and reminded him of his debt, — the creditor of the “radical” says. — He apologized and again asked for a reprieve. He said that he made a lot of money for getting into the lists at the elections to the Lyashko’s cash box and going to parliament. That he knows how quickly all this will be earned and promised to return everything from the profit of the construction, which he started in Sofia Borschagovka. After which he finally left the connection”.
Dyadechko sued Skuratovsky to court. The open-ended “decisions” allow us to follow the course of consideration of his claim.
Initially, the situation was in favor of fellow of Lyashko. So, on April 13, 2016, the Obolonsky District Court refused to meet the requirements of Dyadechko, referring to the omission of the limitation periods (the civil code sets aside for this procedure no more than three years). Then this decision resisted the appeal, but it was “torn down” by the “decision” of the Supreme Court of Justice in civil and criminal cases in June 2017.
The case was sent for a retrial to the Obolonsky court, where Skuratovsky never appeared at the sessions. His side was still in the position that the banker’s claims were not enforceable due to the omission of limitation periods. And additionally, they said as a witness to Nikolai Vinnik, the ex-director of “Shevchenkovskoe” private enterprise and former colleague of Skuratovsky in the deputy corps in the Kiev-Svyatoshinsky district.
He showed that as of September 2006, there was a close business relationship between Dyadechko and Skuratovsky — they were closely involved in business. At the same time, the money, about the receipt of which Skuratovsky wrote a note, were allegedly transferred not to the current associate of Lyashko, but just to the director and owner of “Shevchenkovskoe” private enterprise. They say that Vinnik was supposed to buy land plots with an area of 27 hectares from the owners of the land shares that were leased to the “Shevchenkovskoe”.
The man told the court that in the fall of 2006, he was indeed brought more than $ 500,000, which was distributed to the owners of the shares on the district’s lands. In the future, these plots passed into the hands of new owners, but who was the buyer Vinnik found it difficult to say. And he assured that, according to Skuratovsky, a certain “banker” should have become the owner.
Obviously, this financier should have had Dyadechko in mind, but the witness did not state this directly. And he summarized that, in general, Skuratovsky patronized the conduct of the transaction, and Vinnik had never seen Dyadechko. And since then, considerable time has passed, and a number of details today he can no longer remember.
The banker side also stated its witness to the court. His consultant Angela Kolomiets said that until 2014 Skuratovsky admitted that he had debts to Dyadechko, and in total she counted at least ten tranches when the current people’s deputy borrowed money from a banker (and in total owed him $ 3.45 million). Dyadechko stood on the same. He also tried to achieve the initiation of a criminal case of fraud by the people’s deputy, but the Pechersk district police department refused to register the relevant proceedings.
As for the expiration of the statute of limitations on the debt case, the banker side appealed to three positions.
First, Dyadechko’s lawyers argued that they were in no hurry to sue Skuratovsky because he recognized the obligations, and even returned a small part of the funds in different periods. And in general, the period of filing a lawsuit has not expired, as the ally of Lyashko has nevertheless given some money. On this account, the court was notified of the receipt of the transfer of money by Sergey Ivanovich of December 8, 2009 — by $ 2.5 thousand, on February 28, 2012 — by another $ 5 thousand, and on April 18, 2014 — by $ 2.9 thousand.
Secondly, as another reason for missing the deadline, Dyadechko’s side told the story of the attempt on his life, which is why he left Ukraine for more than six months in 2012.
The most significant point on which the position of the financier is built, was the very promissory note written by Skuratovsky in 2006.
The promissory note of Skuratovsky about getting money
According to the arguments of his side, it was seized among other documents of Dyadechko during a search at a branch of his Donetsk “Ekoil” company in 2009. And after the start of the “Russian spring”, in 2015, it was handed in to the lawyer of the financier Oleg Chebanenko in Mariupol by one of the investigators of the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
Having heard the positions of the parties, on April 11, 2018, the Obolonsky District Court decided to collect $ 525.6 thousand from Skuratovsky. The People’s Deputy filed an appeal, but lost it — the relevant decision was made on October 30 by the Kiev Court of Appeal.
It is expected that the cassation instance should put a legal point in the history. The assessment of the political motive of the scandal that the developer of his former partner essentially accuses that he became a parliamentarian for money will make a voter in the upcoming elections.