So today another Wirecard appointment in the Stadelheim underground hall with beautiful, sunny late summer weather outside during the break.

Yesterday there were two bank managers as witnesses who each gave Wirecard a credit line of €100 million. Of course, these 2 banks had relied on BaFin when granting loans, and the loans could be written off in a timely manner.

Today, senior public prosecutor Bühring is questioning the former chief accountant of Erffa all day about his statements of the last few weeks.

The Wirecard prosecutor goes into great detail about accounting issues and wants to know why/how von Erffa booked the TPA business exactly, accusing him of having booked without accounting.

Von Erffa usually explains that he carried out a difference booking and booked the balance confirmations, which were reconciled by multiple trustee and TPA statements.

The Wirecard prosecutor questioned the company in great detail yesterday, including about software contracts, value adjustments, group risk, escrow accounts and their bookings.

Erffa was questioned at some length about a transfer of originally 120 million from an escrow account, whereby 35 million was reversed in the third quarter. The booking appeared very inconclusive to the public prosecutor.

Von Erffa explained here that he had several sources of the balances, it was booked from account a to b, the trust account of Senjo had been reduced by amount x and at the same time the Wirecard receivables account of the TPA had been increased, he did not want to show this in accounting terms, but the final balance.

In addition, the physical posting record was made in the system on 31.12. and not on the day of the transfer, because Erffa did not receive any account statements.

This did not seem conclusive to the Wirecard senior public prosecutor, who then informed von Erffa directly, quote, "So Mr. von Erffa, the rudimentary accounting knowledge I have screams AUA".

Von Erffa went on to say that he "does not know and therefore cannot say exactly how Treuhändler communicated balances to us at Wirecard".

The chief prosecutor explained again that there was a deposit of "120 million, of which 35 went out again in the same quarter, i.e. there was an income of 85 million, why is this a negative cash flow" for von Erffa?

Von Erffa said that the term "negative cash flow" had been misinterpreted, he wanted to say that EBIT divided by cash flow was less than one, so there was more profit than cash in, a cash flow that was less than EBIT.

The Wirecard senior public prosecutor now questions von Erffa further regarding the MCA business and why this was not only carried out with oCap, but also with Payeasy.

Von Erffa explains that in 2018 this was "greatly hyped at the Annual General Meeting, there was a presentation by Investor Relationship, Marsalek was the promoter". This MCA was also set up at the bank and Steidl was responsible for the technology.

However, there were then problems because the bank under Rainer Wexeler decided to use a different IT system, so things were "postponed".

The Wirecard chief prosecutor goes on to say that von Erffa co-signed the contract, why was such a contract made with Payeasy, "why should they be able to do the same, why weren't other oCap financing contracts made"?

Von Erffa says, "Marsalek drove the MCA business, the product was explained very plausibly and what the subject of the meeting was. Mr. Holten and the CFO were involved". There were group meetings, things were presented by von Knoop, the aim was to generate income of 10 million per quarter. It was to be financed from securities that were released.

Von Erffa was also asked whether he knew that Payeasy did not yet have a Wirecard escrow agreement in 2018.

Von Erffa: "This had already been under consideration for some time. In the MCA train, the escrow account was then finally created, which had already been discussed beforehand".

Von Erffa now probably says the key sentence: "There was a compromise between security on the one hand and reducing security for a new business area".

Von Erffa goes on to say that "the whole MCA business was not part of the accounting" (!).

The Wirecard senior public prosecutor does not let up, he says with regard to von Erffa: "You co-signed the contract".

Von Erffa reiterates that the "contract was decided by the Management Board as a strategic interest, this was not my responsibility, my signature was based on the instructions of the Management Board".

According to von Erffa, there were also "two different points in time at which we received the contract", and the product itself was also reallocated in the third quarter.

With regard to backdating the contract, von Erffa said that he had "signed it, I cannot say exactly when the date was subsequently added by my assistant". This was done largely independently without any special checks on his part, provided he had signed it once.

It continues with the Wirecard fiduciary accounts, where von Erffa largely had a list from Mr. Franke.

The senior public prosecutor accuses von Erffa that "this is not an accounting document, they book some things 1/2 year later, have to ask several times, then make bookings half a year later without having any receipts".

Von Erffa explains that there were processes, this was due to the balance confirmations that he had received from two sides: TPA and the trustee, on the basis of which the closing balances were posted; "we had had a closing balance exactly as previously discussed, this was also not reminded by the auditor".

The Wirecard chief prosecutor now accuses von Erffa: "You were the head of accounting".

Von Erffa calmly states that he had always consulted with the CFO on matters important to the balance sheet and that he was "head of accounting, but not head of the accountants".

The presiding Wirecard judge sometimes jumped in and accused von Erffa that "everything was done on demand, including the balance confirmations" and that von Erffa "wanted to talk his way out of his responsibility here".

Von Erffa repeatedly emphasized, as he had before, that he never had any doubts at the time that the transaction really existed.

There was a pronounced lack of understanding and an immense lack of experience among Wirecard's legal representatives from Germany when it came to considering business models that operate in highly turbulent environments, which are aimed at an early, FUTURE-FOCUSED EXCLUSION OF COMPLETELY NEW MARKETS.

This seems to be a result of the fact that people in Germany and #Europe in particular have largely slept through the IT revolution of the last 30 years.

There were a number of other, not unimportant Wirecard facts in the questioning of the former chief accountant of Erffa by the two prosecutors from Munich yesterday.

If required, please 📨 DM.