SeABank (SSB) Ex-Branch Chief to Be Tried in Absentia Over VND14.2B Fraud

Overview

Hanoi People’s Court will hold an in-absentia trial on November 9 for Nguyen Thi Huong Giang, former director of SeABank’s Hai Ba Trung branch, and Le Anh Tam, former director of An Viet Uc Company, over falsified credit files that enabled the misappropriation of more than VND14.2 billion from the bank. The case concerns lending booked in 2010-2011, and both defendants fled before prosecution, prompting a wanted notice and a split of the case file. SeABank trades on HOSE as SSB.

Key Facts

• Trial date: November 9 at Hanoi People’s Court, conducted in absentia for both defendants.
• Nguyen Thi Huong Giang (born 1973), former director of SeABank’s Hai Ba Trung branch, is charged with violating lending regulations at credit institutions.
• Le Anh Tam (born 1981), former director of An Viet Uc Company, faces charges of fraud and misappropriation of assets.
• The alleged scheme involved VND29.5 billion in disbursed loans, of which more than VND14.2 billion was misappropriated.
• At the time of the conduct in 2010-2011, Vina Megastar Group owed SeABank’s Hai Ba Trung branch VND250 billion, with member companies owing a further VND150 billion.
• Collateral was fabricated: falsified steel purchase contracts and three-party warehouse lease agreements backed loans for goods that did not exist in storage.
• Hanoi People’s Court already convicted Vina Megastar chairman Nguyen Hoang Long and several accomplices in 2016; four bank staff were also jailed for lending violations.

What Happened

According to the indictment, Vina Megastar Group, chaired by Nguyen Hoang Long, carried VND250 billion of debt at SeABank’s Hai Ba Trung branch in 2010-2011, with member companies owing another VND150 billion. Seeking fresh capital to service those obligations and fund operations, Long met branch director Nguyen Thi Huong Giang to discuss continued borrowing. The two agreed to build fictitious credit files, directing company directors to sign backdated or blank steel trading contracts and three-party warehouse lease agreements.

The prosecutors’ office (Vien Kiem Sat) found no steel inventory ever existed in storage, yet the group used the contracts to sign asset mortgage and credit agreements with the bank. Giang, as branch director, did not require staff to verify or appraise collateral as regulations demand, and instead directed subordinates to draw up false collateral appraisal minutes, sign warehouse leases and inventory records, and submit credit files for disbursement without underlying security. The bank disbursed VND29.5 billion, of which more than VND14.2 billion was misappropriated. Long and several accomplices were tried and jailed in 2016; Giang and Tam fled, were placed on a wanted list, and their case file was separated and suspended until sufficient evidence allowed the court to proceed.

Market Context

SSB closed at VND16,650 on October 24, 2026, on HOSE. The trial relates to conduct from more than a decade ago, and the bank’s current balance sheet and loan book are not implicated in the indictment. Vietnamese bank shares have traded in a narrow band through 2026 as investors weigh credit growth against asset-quality concerns, and legacy legal cases at individual lenders typically move sentiment more than fundamentals when the amounts are small relative to total assets.

Strategic Significance

The financial scale here is modest: VND14.2 billion is a rounding error against SeABank’s loan book, and the bank has already provisioned for and moved past the 2010-2011 Vina Megastar exposure. The relevant signal for long-term holders is governance. The indictment describes a branch-level control failure in which collateral verification was overridden by a single branch director, a pattern Vietnamese regulators have targeted under stricter lending rules. How SeABank documents remedial controls, and whether the trial surfaces any wider lapse, matters more to the equity story than the loss itself.

What to Watch

• The November 9 hearing in Hanoi and whether either defendant appears or is represented.
• Any civil judgment on asset recovery tied to the VND14.2 billion loss.
• SeABank disclosures on legacy provisioning and internal control remediation.
• State Bank of Vietnam commentary on branch-level lending controls following the verdict.
• Third-quarter 2026 results for any residual charges linked to legacy credit files.