Former vice-president of the Referees’ Technical Committee (CTA), José María Enríquez Negreira, sent the first threatening burofax to FC Barcelona on December 3, 2018, in which he demanded that the club’s management not stop paying him “after so many years of relationships, so many favors and so many shared secrets.” At the same time, he stressed that he had always received direct “guidance” from various presidents, including “Mr. Laporta”, the club’s current president.
Enríquez Negreira approached the club through his lawyers a few months after the club, under the leadership of Josep Maria Bartomeu, made the firm decision to cut commercial relations with him. The former arbitrator demanded the continuation of cooperation, asked for the settlement of outstanding invoices and again referred to the services he had provided to Barcelona during his long relationship.
The legal representative of the former deputy head of the CTA sent this burofax to the club on December 3, 2018. This is the message preceding the first one revealed by The world in which he warned that he would “bring to light all the irregularities in which he participated and which he accredited”.
The first of the burofaxes to which The world also had access, begins with a reminder that the person who was just dismissed as CTA deputy chief (in June 2018) is “maintaining a service contract that runs until the end of the current presidential term.”
“Since 2003, the company Dasnil 95, run by Mr. Enriquez, has been providing technical consultancy services on behalf of the presidents Mr. Laporta, Mr. Rosell and Mr. Bartomeu with a fee for each presidential mandate (divided into annual installments and then monthly)” – lawyers wrote, while emphasizing that the payment for services was “approved against part of the budgets approved by the Governing Board”.
The letter further stated that “since 2003 [Negreira] adapted the company to the needs of FC Barcelona by hiring staff and training them for the exact needs of the club, which demanded that they work only in such a way that they could not provide services to third parties.”
“From the beginning until now, the truth is that the relationship has been more than good, and through working so closely with the president, the trust and confidence my client has enjoyed over the years has been noticeable,” he continued. “There were often crossings of trust lines and favors from the professional to the personal sphere,” he said without going into further detail.
“Therefore,” he continued, “given the existing good relationship, the non-payment of the invoices attached to this document for services from July to December inclusive, amounting to €267,047, was quite a surprise.”
After a first string of objections, Enríquez Negreira left the door open for Barça to rectify the situation: “I want to understand that this non-payment is due to some administrative error, which I hope will be resolved happily for the benefit of all parties.” Therefore, he appealed to the club “to settle the outstanding amounts within 10 working days”, to which he provided the account number.
“After settling the situation of non-payment, it is in my client’s interest,” emphasized the burofax from Negreira’s lawyers, “it is to continue offering his services in the usual way and in the usual form. However, if your intention is different, we call on you to terminate the cooperation by formally and credibly informing our client, as so far he has no formal or credible knowledge that FC Barcelona has resigned from his services, especially when they have been agreed directly with the president.”
For all these reasons, Negreira told the club that he hoped “all this is a misunderstanding” and confirmed that he had “firm belief that the relationship is going well, one way or another”.
“Otherwise, however, the attitude of FC Barcelona, and especially Mr. Bartomeu, will be incomprehensible, which will cause me deep disappointment after so many years of relationship, so many favors, so many shared confessions,” he wrote. Finally, Negreira’s lawyer strongly suggested “reaching a positive and constructive agreement” in order to “avoid greater evils and undesirable actions for both parties.”
