Investor Loses S/120,000 in Schoolโ Project Investment, faces Lengthy Repayment Plan
A young woman, identified as Fernanda, alleges she lost S/120,000 after โขinvesting in a school project through the San Patricio consortium, and is now facing a repayment plan stretching until 2029. The situation has left her feeling betrayed and financially strained, compounded by similar experiences reported by other investors.
Fernanda initially invested withโ the consortium, expecting a return on her investment. However, afterโค several attempts to secure payment, she was told โbyโข Luisโ Fernando Taramona Espinoza, โa representative โof the consortium, โขthat payment by 2029 โฃwas the only solution offered.
The investor reports that even Taramona espinoza’s wife became involved, attempting โฃto persuade her to make further investments under theโ promise of recovering her initial funds – an offer Fernanda declined, โstating her โtrust had been broken. A subsequent virtual meeting with the consortium yielded the same outcome: a โcontract promising repayment,but lacking a notarial seal and therefore,no guarantee.
Over the past 10โค months,โ Fernanda has received no return โon her investment. โHer independent examination revealed others who claim to be owed โmoney by Fernando Taramona, not through the consortium directly, but via a loan company he owns.
Beyond the lost โคinvestment, Fernanda โestimates she has incurredโ S/10,000 in expenses related to legal fees, notarial letters, and conciliation attempts. She discoveredโข a pattern among other affected investors: initial returns were prompt, but subsequent investmentsโค were not โrepaid.
Fernanda has hesitated โขto file โan official claim due to unfavorable clauses within the original contract.โค She alleges the consortium informed her that her โค investment had been used to fund the legal defense ofโข Representative Taramona โคin unrelated matters.
A revisedโ contract offered a payment plan of S/1,500 per month until 2029, but Fernanda refusedโข to โขaccept it without a notarizedโค signature, fearing a โฃlack of legal recourse if payments were missed. Despite promises to find โaโค notary, โฃshe claims the consortiumโ ceased dialog.
When contacted by Laโข Repรบblica,Fernando Taramona,representative of the San Patricio consortium,stated the case is currently under “review โคand conciliation.” Heโข acknowledged a delayโ in fulfilling โpayment obligations, attributing it toโ aโข challenging economic climate impacting theโฃ organization.He characterized the situation asโ a civil contractual issue and stated โฃtheโ consortium possesses a contingency โขfund, but itโ is solely โfor operational continuity, not โคfor addressing investor repayment delays.