In a federal court for the Southern District of New York, a multimillion-dollar fraud lawsuit has been filed against the businessman and former presidential candidate from Paisa, Santiago Botero.
In the process, initiated by two foreign firms, it is stated that the plaintiffs were allegedly induced through false financial information to acquire 100 percent of the shares of FinSocial. This is a Colombian company created by Botero for payroll and consumer loans.
The business
The transaction dates back to 2021 and was for about 36 million dollars. In total, they claim that the claimed damage exceeds 150 million dollars between concealment of information and false financial statements.
The investigative unit of EL TIEMPO had access to the lawsuit filed on July 8, 2026.
The document lists as plaintiffs the companies Christofferson Robb & Company LLC (CRC), based in the United Kingdom, and General Investments (Cayman) Limited, based in the Cayman Islands, against Botero, the Kandeo group, and Medici S.A.S, who were the shareholders of Finsocial at the time of its sale.
According to the file in possession of this newspaper, on March 2, 2021, a contract was signed to acquire 100 percent of the shares of the Fintech, and the operation was completed on July 13 of the same year.
According to the purchasing companies, who are also the plaintiffs, the sellers offered Finsocial as a solid technology company, mainly dedicated to the placement of payroll and consumer loans.
At that time, the owners were the Kandeo group, made up of the companies Kandeo Spain Peru and Kandeo Spain Latan, which owned approximately 70 percent of Finsocial’s shares, while Medici S.A.S., controlled by Botero, owned the remaining 30 percent.
In fact, the latter was still the CEO of the company at that time.
However, after internal audits, the plaintiffs claim that the financial statements presented were false regarding the company’s situation; resources were allegedly redirected, and false information continued to be presented after the purchase.
The allegations
First, there is talk of a bridge loan from the buyers to the fintech for 19 million dollars with the aim of generating new loans. At the time of loan approval, it was certified that the financial information was correct and that the loans provided as collateral were valid.
However, the lawsuit claims that the financial certifications were false and part of the portfolio offered as collateral was nonexistent.
In fact, they mention a loan disbursement request dated May 21, 2021, which includes a certification signed by Santiago Botero stating that the credit line would be used exclusively as working capital for the creation of legitimate loans. But they claim that the funds were immediately diverted to his personal network of companies.
Additionally, they mention that, through a Bancóldex audit report from February 2025, it was demonstrated that 98 percent of the loans in Finsocial’s portfolio used as collateral were more than 30 days overdue, and that about 84 percent of the backup capital (around 42 billion Colombian pesos) was never collected because they were fictitious or inactive loans.
The alleged star witness
The plaintiffs attach excerpts from an internal confession by former CFO Juan Manuel Puerto, whom they present as their star witness. In Puerto’s testimony, he allegedly stated that there was fraud and that the company’s books were “doctored.”
“Shortly after Botero resigned as CEO, his CFO, Juan Manuel Puerto (“Puerto”), admitted to Christofferson Robb & Company LLC (CRC) that FinSocial’s accounting books were manipulated and that Botero had been lying about the status of the guarantees provided by FinSocial to induce CRC to continue granting fraudulent and questionable loans in exchange for FinSocial credits,” reads the testimony attached to the lawsuit.
However, EL TIEMPO obtained the notarized statement of Juan Manuel Puerto at notary 35 in Bogotá, which presents a contradiction to what was attached in the lawsuit. In his statement, Puerto denies having admitted any illegality: “I have not stated that Mr. Santiago Botero ordered the ‘manipulation’ of FINSOCIAL S.A.S.’s accounting books.”
He also clarifies that he is not aware that Botero lied to induce disbursements and that he does not authorize anyone to characterize his words as a “confession of fraud.”
Another finding presented in the lawsuit is the so-called ‘security ring.’
According to explanations, Finsocial had a surety reserve fund, which was supposed to function strictly as insurance to cover losses in case the final debtors of payroll or consumer loans defaulted.
But when a Finsocial client was late in paying their installment, the company withdrew money from this reserve fund to cover the overdue installment and, instead of recording the loan as “in arrears” or “overdue,” the fintech used the fund’s own money to reclassify the loan as “current” in the accounting records.
This, according to the plaintiffs, allowed them to artificially inflate the value of their assets by approximately 51 billion Colombian pesos between 2019 and 2021.
The ‘Botero network’
Another point mentioned was alleged hidden capital transactions carried out between 2019 and 2021 between Finsocial and a network of Botero’s companies.
The official lawsuit filed in federal court states that, during that period, Finsocial executed transactions for approximately 57 billion Colombian pesos (about 16 million dollars) with companies wholly or partially owned by Santiago Botero. These transactions, according to the plaintiffs, were deliberately concealed as they were not disclosed in the financial statements provided to investors during the due diligence process of the acquisition.
These transactions were called ‘the Botero network.’
And after the acquisition of the company, it was also reported that there was massive fund diversion and asset concealment.
“Between January 2021 and August 31, 2024, under Botero’s direction, FinSocial disbursed tens of millions of dollars through transfers without any legitimate commercial purpose, including more than 50 million dollars directly to Botero and his affiliates, and millions more on credit cards to finance Botero’s personal expenses on luxury items, high-end restaurants, and ostentatious trips,” the lawsuit states.
The plaintiff companies are seeking damages compensation to be determined precisely in court, but they claim it exceeds 150 million dollars.
Botero’s version
EL TIEMPO contacted businessman Santiago Botero to hear his version of the facts, and he began by asserting that the lawsuit is a distortion of the facts and that an attempt is being made to frame him.
“CRC may have lost money due to the dollar issue, as they have costs in the openings where they have lost money. They want to somehow simulate that their fund was not wrong in the operation, that they were deceived, knowing that they simulated a company purchase with a debt fund that they could not do as an ‘equity’ fund (private equity fund), that is indeed illegal. They cheated, they made a model as if it were a loan,” Botero said.
When asked about the 19 million dollar loan made to Finsocial, he assured: “Those 19 million were part of the payment for the company purchase by themselves. Nothing false was done because we had high-level fiscal reviewers. They made a portfolio sale, themselves as an asset to pay us for the company, and if not, let them prove where they got the money to pay Finsocial’s shareholders.”
Regarding the so-called ‘security ring,’ Botero said it was backed by insurance: “What guaranteed the portfolio was insurance.” Not whether they paid or not. The portfolio was not inflated or anything like that. The reserve fund they claim later started to be missing through the cooperative model. The surety was 15%. And they needed to raise the interest rate. So, they lowered the surety from 15, for example, to five. Who made that decision? It wasn’t me. It was the CRC board of directors who made the decision because they wanted to raise the interest rate so there wouldn’t be usury rates.”
(Check here all the articles from EL TIEMPO’s Investigative Unit)
And when asked about expenses with Fintech funds allegedly to attend exclusive restaurants, he assured: “I had rights as the company’s manager, and they never questioned that. Whether I had rights or not, whether I paid for expensive restaurants or not. Those were the rights I had as the company’s manager at that time.”
Finally, he assured that he has not been officially notified of the process in the United States and that he is willing to file a counterclaim to defend his good name.
INVESTIGATIVE UNIT
u.investigativa@eltiempo.com
@UinvestigativaET
Follow us now on Facebook
