Families in Rio Grande do Sul are facing financial ruin and abandoned construction sites after falling victim to a fraudulent scheme involving falsified reports and the misuse of bank financing.
The scheme involved the use of fake signatures on measurement reports, spreadsheets detailing work that was never performed, and photos of third-party properties used to trigger the release of financing installments.
In Gravataí, entrepreneur Marcela Bohnenberger Telles and her husband, Izael Mendes, discovered their home was abandoned and overtaken by weeds and infiltration. The couple reported paying between R$ 400,000 and R$ 500,000 toward the project.
The Mechanics of Deception
The financing model used by Caixa Econômica Federal releases funds based on the progress of the work, verified through reports submitted by construction companies. In the case of Telles and Mendes, the contractor Âmbar-Prumo submitted documents claiming the house was 84.39% complete.
However, an independent technical report revealed “glaring discrepancies,” suggesting the work had not even reached 40% completion. A forensic expert in graphoscopy and documentoscopy identified clear signs of fraud in the signatures of the reports.
Other families reported similar losses. In Canoas, Renata Gossling Fontes and Michel Lunkes Cezar financed over R$ 500,000 through Âmbar-Prumo. They noted the company offered a “complete package” that simplified the credit approval process with the bank.
Conflict of Interest and Institutional Failure
A second company, Vitruviana, was also implicated in similar allegations. Guilherme Junior Martins Both, who financed R$ 290,000 for a home in Porto Alegre, claimed that Pedro André Marchese Sessegolo presented himself as both the owner of the construction firm and a Caixa employee at the Alvorada agency.
Both reported that documents submitted to the bank claimed walls and panels were 100% complete and electrical installations were 75% finished, while in reality, none of these stages had been executed. The construction was abandoned seven months after it began.
Following complaints to the bank’s ombudsman, Caixa opened an administrative process and dismissed Sessegolo for cause last year. Internal emails revealed Sessegolo had requested colleagues at the agency to release installments for the construction company of which he was a partner.
Defense and Bank Response
The defense for Bruno Barbosa da Silva of Âmbar-Prumo stated that all works followed Caixa’s norms and that funds were released directly into clients’ accounts without third-party intervention.
Pedro André Marchesi Cecegolo is currently appealing his dismissal in labor court. His defense claims the allegations are a “coordinated attempt” by defaulting clients to turn a commercial dispute into an administrative scandal.
Raul Gomes, Caixa’s national superintendent of housing, stated that the responsibility for the work lies with the client. “In this specific modality, It’s the client who financially manages their work,” Gomes declared, adding that fraud committed by a contractor is a matter between the client and the company.
Potential Next Steps
The legal battle for the affected families is likely to continue as they seek to recover their losses. In the case of Telles and Mendes, the bank has announced intentions to auction the land and the unfinished structure to settle the outstanding debt.
Further administrative investigations into employee conduct may occur, as the bank stated it rigorously investigates any deviation of conduct among its staff.
Frequently Asked Questions
How was the fraud carried out to release the funds? The fraud involved submitting falsified measurement reports with fake signatures and using photos of other people’s houses to trick the bank into believing the construction had progressed. What was the role of the Caixa employee in the Vitruviana case? Pedro André Marchese Sessegolo acted as both a partner in the construction company and a bank employee, directing clients to his own agency and emailing colleagues to request the release of payment installments for his firm. What is the bank’s position on the responsibility for these losses? Caixa Econômica Federal maintains that the client is responsible for managing the construction and that fraud committed by a hired contractor is a private dispute between the client and that company. Do you believe financial institutions should be held responsible for verifying the physical progress of works they finance?
