Zhejiang Financial Assets Trading Center (referred to as Zhejin Center) has been embroiled in a scandal for over half a year, with creditors still waiting for a repayment plan. On June 5, some creditors went to the provincial-level reception point in Zhangjiaba to safeguard their rights, demanding the regulatory authorities to publicly disclose the audit report filed by Zhejin Center, explain the internal reporting and investigation situation, and question why the authorities allowed the issuance of over 200 products by Zhejin Center before its qualifications were revoked.
A video circulating online showed multiple police officers and security personnel guarding the entrance of the provincial-level reception point in Zhangjiaba, with over 100 creditors gathering outside. Activists shouted slogans demanding repayment and condemning corruption. Police officers stood on both sides of the reception office’s door. According to information provided by creditors, activists submitted three demands to the reception team, including requesting the Zhejiang Provincial Local Financial Supervision and Administration Bureau to provide the full text of annual financial audit reports filed by the financial bureau from 2021 to 2025.
A creditor of Zhejin Center, Mr. Yao from Hangzhou, told reporters that the Zhejiang Financial Assets Trading Center was approved for establishment by the Zhejiang Provincial Government office that year. Investors are not just demanding repayment this time, but questioning why the regulatory authorities failed to detect risks for a long time. Mr. Yao said, “This platform is not an ordinary private company. It has a background in local financial platforms, and its product issuance falls within the regulatory scope. Its government background led many to believe it was secure, otherwise so many people wouldn’t have invested in it.”
Mr. Yao mentioned that many investors are elderly, some have invested their savings over many years, and now all their investments are gone. He said, “Now that things have gone wrong, the government is shifting responsibility, and people’s money has gone down the drain. The authorities can’t just pass the blame with one sentence.”
According to online reports, creditors’ demands also mentioned that back in September 2023, a former risk control employee of Zhejin Center had filed a report in his real name against Ding Jianlin, the chairman and general manager of Zhejin Center, submitting three USB drives containing materials such as a recording from West Lake State Guesthouse, original drafts of falsified due diligence reports, and three scanned copies labeled as “approved by General Ding” for fund disbursement. Creditors asked the reception team to explain whether they verified the information at that time, how they dealt with it, and whether they disclosed the risks to investors.
Mr. Zhu, a lawyer in Hangzhou familiar with financial platform issues, told reporters that a few months ago he was commissioned by a client to represent them in this case, but the relevant authorities in Hangzhou pressured him. He said, “The pressure on lawyers made it inconvenient to take on this case. If the named whistleblowing and materials provided by creditors are true, whether the regulatory authorities received, verified, and took risk-handling measures is crucial. Now they (the authorities) are afraid of being implicated and don’t want lawyers involved.”
Zhejiang Financial Assets Trading Center Co., Ltd. was established in 2013. The Zhejiang Provincial Government office approved its establishment that year, positioning it as a platform for various financial asset transactions and related services, with a registered capital of 100 million yuan.
The website of the Zhejiang Provincial Committee Financial Commission of the Communist Party of China shows that on October 31, 2024, the Zhejiang Provincial Local Financial Supervision and Administration Bureau issued an announcement revoking the financial asset trading business qualification of Zhejiang Financial Assets Trading Center Co., Ltd., stating that as of the announcement date, there would no longer be financial asset trading venues in Zhejiang Province. The announcement also mentioned that the revocation of qualifications would not affect the center’s responsibility for handling existing business or the continued repayment according to contract terms by related financing subjects.
Mr. Wang, a rights advocate, said that half a year after the Zhejin scandal, what creditors find most unacceptable is the lack of a clear disposal plan by the authorities. He said that the authorities’ first move was to distance themselves from Zhejin Center: “We went to the reception point not to cause trouble but to seek answers. How will the assets be dealt with? When will the money be repaid? Currently, there are no clear answers. I’ve invested over 300,000 yuan, and some have invested millions. Now they haven’t given any substantial answers, just saying they are investigating and ask us not to cause trouble. How is demanding our money causing trouble?”
Mr. Wang stated that one of creditors’ demands is to clarify whether the regulatory authorities condoned Zhejin Center’s violation in issuing 223 products before its qualifications were revoked, as well as the related dereliction of duty.
Mr. Wang also mentioned that after the incident, the police warned and controlled investors through phone calls. He said, “Police officers called investors in the middle of the night, asking them not to participate in rights protection.”
In recent years, multiple local financial trading platforms, wealth management companies, private equity funds, and local financing products in China have faced a series of scandals. Investors struggle with repayment difficulties and are often threatened and controlled by police when seeking rights protection. Creditors of Zhejin Center believe that the issue is not just about corporate repayments but also encompasses regulatory filing, information disclosure, verification of named reports, and product issuance before qualifications were revoked. They demand the authorities to disclose relevant information, investigate the regulatory responsibilities, promote asset disposal and repayment work, instead of continuing to suppress investors under the guise of maintaining stability.