There has been some movement in the Ventus fiasco. I am on a road trip with the family this weekend, so here is a quick take on what has been published, and on what the lender groups are making of it. What is below is all fact-checked, but the ELI16 phrasing I left to AI (Claude Opus 4.6 is perfect for this, I’ll need to do an article about that some day…). Edited at a gas station while the kids took a pee break, browsed the snack aisle and tried to negotiate what they consider to be a fair distribution of Haribos.
What happened
Harju County Court commenced reorganisation proceedings for Ventus Energy Group OÜ on 18 August 2026. The official notice was published in Ametlikud Teadaanded on 25 August. The case number is 2-26-16225. The court appointed Kristo Teder, an attorney at Maria Mägi Law Office, as the reorganisation adviser.
The dates
Here are the deadlines from the court notice and the official announcement.
Portal claim view: available from today (28 August 2026). Log into the Ventus portal with your existing credentials. The portal is Ventus’s own site; objections go to the adviser through it. The notice says your claim was calculated as at 25 August, in agreement with the company.
Sources: https://www.ametlikudteadaanded.ee/ee/Saneerimisn%C3%B5ustaja%20Kristo%20Teder/saneerimismenetluse-teated/saneerimisteade/2026/8/25/2640998; Ventus Energy Group OÜ, Reorganisation Notice to creditors, 25 August 2026, copy on file with the author.
Claim objection window: 28 August through 14 September 2026. If you disagree with the listed amount, notify the adviser in writing through the portal, state what you disagree with, and attach evidence. If you do not object by 14 September, your silence is treated as agreement with the listed amount (§ 13(1)). If you object, the adviser checks your claim; if he disagrees with you, he passes it to the court, which decides within two weeks (§ 13(2), § 13(3)).
Sources: https://www.ametlikudteadaanded.ee/ee/Saneerimisn%C3%B5ustaja%20Kristo%20Teder/saneerimismenetluse-teated/saneerimisteade/2026/8/25/2640998; https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005
Draft plan notice: at least two weeks before the plan-adoption term (§ 20(3)). By my arithmetic from the 12 October deadline, that means around 28 September.
Source: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 20(3))
Plan adoption vote: by 12 October 2026. Court submission: by 19 October 2026.
The creditor notice says interest, default interest, and time-based contractual penalties stopped accruing on 18 August. The Act (§ 11(1)2) expressly covers delay fines and penalties that increase over time; the broader interest statement comes from the notice. Claims were calculated as at 25 August, in agreement with the company, which the notice describes as more favourable to creditors.
Sources: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 11(1)2); Ventus Energy Group OÜ, Reorganisation Notice to creditors, 25 August 2026
What people are saying, and what the Act says
Quotes below are from lender groups on Telegram between 24 and 28 August, translated where needed. No names.
Ventus, 25 August: “the court has approved our restructuring application and appointed a court advisor.” A lender, 26 August: “Following the approval of the restructuring plan…” The court approved nothing. Unless you count its finding on 18 August that Ventus is “not permanently insolvent, but likely to become insolvent” (§ 8(1)), which is all it takes to open proceedings. A plan is accepted by creditors by vote (§ 24) and only then approved by the court, within 30 days of receiving it (§ 28(2)). Neither has happened.
Sources: https://www.ametlikudteadaanded.ee/ee/Saneerimisn%C3%B5ustaja%20Kristo%20Teder/saneerimismenetluse-teated/saneerimisteade/2026/8/25/2640998; https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 8(1), § 24, § 28)
A lender, 24 August, after phoning the court: “the court confirmed it received the restructuring plan on 30 July.” What Ventus filed in July is a petition (§ 7). A petition can have a draft plan attached, and Ventus may well have attached one. It is still not the plan. The Act makes the adviser send the draft to every affected creditor at least two weeks before the vote (§ 20(3)).
Source: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 7, § 20(3))
A lender, 26 August: “Until 12 October to submit the plan. On 19 October, if there is a majority, the plan is approved and the liquidation of the assets begins.” Three errors in two sentences. 12 October is the deadline for creditors to accept the plan. 19 October is the deadline for handing the accepted plan to the court. Court approval comes after that. And nothing gets liquidated on a calendar date. An Estonian plan can only deal with what the Estonian company owns, and that is not power plants. It is shares in, and loans to, Latvian and Lithuanian companies run by the same people as before, some of them pledged to other lenders. The plants stay where they are (so mostly on balance sheets of companies in other countries), with whoever controls them.
Sources: https://www.ametlikudteadaanded.ee/ee/Saneerimisn%C3%B5ustaja%20Kristo%20Teder/saneerimismenetluse-teated/saneerimisteade/2026/8/25/2640998; https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 24, § 28); ownership and pledges: https://www.karsten.me/money/ventus-energy-investigation/
Lenders, 25 to 28 August: “The funds in the wallet are not included in the amount to confirm, at least in my case.” and “My money frozen at Paysera is a claim; why is it not part of the restructuring?” “I will write to the nice Mr Teder about it.” Your claim in this proceeding is whatever ends up in the list of debts, and the list is what the portal shows you. Money Ventus holds for you is money Ventus owes you, whether it calls it a loan, a wallet balance or a cancelled withdrawal. If any of it is missing from your figure, dispute the figure by 14 September and attach your statements (§ 13(1)). Silence is agreement. Writing to Teder about Paysera gets you nowhere: he has no power over Paysera. His duties run to the Estonian company and to the claims against it (§ 16). The power plants and the project companies sit in Latvia and Lithuania, run by the same people as before, and the Act does not reach them.
That actually lays out a key problem with the whole process: Can a Latvian project company pay Timma a consulting fee above market rate while the Estonian proceeding runs?
Nothing in the Act stops it: the duty to report unusual transactions (§ 11(1)5) and the court’s power to throw out a plan over transactions that damaged creditors (§ 28(5)) both attach to the Estonian company, not to the companies it owns. Put the money in your claim, and put that question to Teder.
Source: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 11(1)5, § 13(1), § 16, § 28(5))
A lender, 27 August: “For the vote, the plan must already be drawn up. Why does the committee not know it?” Because the adviser prepares it with the company after commencement (§ 20(1)). It must list assets and debts, and it must state what the assets would fetch in bankruptcy and what they are worth if the plan goes through, pledged assets shown separately (§ 21(1)). Those two figures are the whole vote. It will also be the first set of numbers Ventus has ever had to show its lenders: the company has filed no annual accounts since it was founded, and whatever it attached to its petition went to the court, not to you. Ventus prepares the plan with the adviser, and Ventus’s interest is a low bankruptcy number next to a high plan number: the gap between the two is the sales pitch for a yes vote. Check both against what the project companies’ own filed accounts say they hold.
Source: https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/akt/501122025005 (§ 20(1), § 21(1))
Before you sign anything
Talk to a lawyer before you confirm a claim, vote on a plan, or sign a settlement. One consultation, in your own country, with someone who does investor and capital-markets work. In Germany that is an Anwalt für Kapitalmarktrecht, and unless you sign a fee agreement, the law caps a consumer’s first consultation at EUR 190 plus VAT (RVG § 34); BRÜLLMANN in Stuttgart, who have published their own Ventus assessment, offer a flat EUR 149 first opinion, VAT and expenses included.
Other countries have other rules, but the method is the same everywhere: call (best for initial contact), or write in your own words (not ChatGPT’s, if you want to be taken seriously), describe your position in a paragraph, ask whether they offer an initial consultation and what it costs. You are not choosing your lawyer for the whole proceeding. You are buying one opinion, paying for it, and deciding with it. Skipping a EUR 200 conversation before writing off tens of thousands is the one mistake going forward that is entirely yours.
Sources: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/rvg/__34.html; https://bruellmann.de/ventus-energy-group-situation-spitzt-sich-fuer-anleger-zu
Back next week
I will be back before the objection window closes on 14 September and will take the draft plan apart when it lands. Official announcements are at ametlikudteadaanded.ee (search for registry code 16964065).
The creditor notice names [email protected] as the contact for proceeding information. The official court announcement names [email protected]. The two addresses differ; neither has been tested.
For background on what led here: the original investigation and the earlier restructuring article.
Discover more from Karsten Philip Aichholz
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.