Connect with us

News and Report

Egyptian raises alarm over Unity Bank’s disclosure of customer information to third party

Published

on

An Egyptian has cried out over Unity Bank’s continued disclosure of a customer’s transaction details to him via emails since 2020.

The Egyptian third party, Adam Amin, told this newspaper that he has been receiving the said customer’s account transaction alerts in the last three years.

Mr Amin said that since 2021, he has been notifying the bank about the data breach but nothing has been done to correct it. The Egyptian added that he is worried about the safety of the customer, whose banking data may have been compromised.

In a detailed message to PREMIUM TIMES, Mr Amin explained that when he first received the mail detailing the customer’s transaction, he thought it was from scammers so he waited for some months before reaching out to the bank in 2021. He also shared copies of emails sent to the bank with this newspaper.

Despite lodging complaints at the bank, he told this newspaper that he still receives transaction alerts even after blocking Unity Bank’s mail address from his electronic mail account.

“I have engaged with them on WhatsApp several times since 2021, they were very nice and cordial,” he told PREMIUM TIMES.

“They promised to look into it but then I started to receive the emails again and went back to them and they say they will look into it. Then I followed up, a week after and they said it’s still ongoing. At some point, they told me it was done but I was still receiving the alerts.

“I started pressuring them, then they requested I email them and I did, finally they said the issue has been dealt with and then I am still receiving the statement. I messaged again and they stopped responding. I have unsubscribed and blocked them and these alerts still find their way to my mail.”

Efforts by PREMIUM TIMES to speak to the bank’s spokesperson, Matthew Obiazikwor, regarding the bank’s established protocol for addressing data breach incidents, were unsuccessful.

Multiple text messages and telephone calls placed to his known telephone numbers were not responded to.

CBN Regulation

The Central Bank of Nigeria on November 7, 2016, released the consumer protection framework to enhance consumer confidence in the financial services industry and promote financial stability, growth, and innovation.

Part five, section four of the framework says institutions must safeguard consumer data and assets, get consent for data collection, notify consumers of data exchange, keep accurate data, and review processing procedures regularly.

They are equally expected to: “Protect the privacy and confidentiality of consumer information and assets against unauthorized access, and be accountable for acts or omissions in respect thereof.

“Not transfer personal data of consumers to a third party without their express consent, except in compliance with a legal obligation.”

Previous Data Breach
On August 25, 2020, Bank Security, a Twitter handle focused on security threats in banks, reported that the database of Unity Bank was being shared online on hacker forums.

At least three other hacker forums reportedly shared the same database, according to Bank Security.

But the bank in a tweet assured its customers that it remains committed to safeguarding their personal details.

“Dear Customers, be vigilant, cyber criminals are always looking for creative ways to commit fraud.

“Do not fall for false data breach claims, unsecured and suspicious scam mails/texts/calls devised to mislead you into disclosing your personal details.

“Unity Bank places a high priority on the security and safety of our customers. Rest assured your banking information is well protected,” it said.

Tope Fasua, an economist, raised concern over the repeated attempts to contact the bank on the potential case of a mistaken email address in their system. He said that although the bank’s experience may have been a random incident, the lack of any resolution despite several attempts to rectify the situation is worrying.

“The danger is in the issues of loss of privacy on a transaction, apart from the fact that somebody else is seeing his balances, they could use it against him- fraudster piece information together these days, sometimes the banks will redact parts of the account number but the balance is there to see.

“A fraudster is looking for any useful information, the balance is one, also the full name, people who snatch phones these days are not after the phone per se, your phone in the wrong hands can get your BVN, NIN.

“You see the information is complete to get someone and even these days when they cannot take money from your account, they can use your bank details to borrow money from Fintech so it is really dangerous. As the person is getting the alert notification, he also gets important information from the bank to the account holder.”

A top bank official, who pleaded anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on the issue, said the data breach and alleged neglect of the complaints by the bank could endanger the account holder.

“The account holder could sue the bank because the person receiving the alert was fraudulent, he could use the information wrongly,” the official said.

“Emails are even worse than text messages, if you change your password, your email will be notified. The account holder could even be in grave danger if the person receiving his alert sees a huge transaction, he has his full name, and he could trace him on Facebook and rob him.”

Responding to the story, a representative from Unity Bank clarifies the real situation.

“The non-customer email account referred to in the report has been addressed since December 2022 upon receiving the complaint”.

The public is hereby advised that while this is a peculiar case, it is important to state that the reported transaction email error did not affect more than one customer.

The particular incident complained by Adams Amin, who has the email account, has been thoroughly investigated and this was due erroneous entry of email address which has now been corrected.

Upon being contacted, Unity Bank instituted an investigation to verify the claims and in the course of the resolution, in the last quarter of 2022, Unity Bank and Adam Amin exchanged a series of emails. On December 14, 2022, Unity bank informed Adam Amin of the successful deactivation of the email, which led us to fully resolve the email notification error.

Currently, there is no email linked to the account, a situation in which our IT team has reconfirmed the non-availability of the account on our database.

News and Report

Absence Of Oba Otudeko, Bisi Onasanya, Others Stalls Arraignment Over N12.3Billion Fraud As Otudeko’s Lawyer Protests In Court

Published

on

By

The counsel for Oba Otudeko, Chairman of Honeywell Group, who is facing charges of a N12.3 billion fraud, appeared before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday to protest the charge.

Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that he was protesting because the charge had not been served on Otudeko or the two other individuals charged alongside him, the News Agency of Nigeria reports.

Olanipekun informed the court that, despite not being served with the charge, the defendants were shocked to learn about the planned arraignment through the media when the story broke last Thursday.

The 13-count charge was filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Oba Otudeko, former Managing Director of FirstBank Plc. Olabisi Onasanya, and former Honeywell board member Soji Akintayo.

Olanipekun is the counsel for the three defendants.

They were charged alongside the company, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

 

The EFCC alleges that the defendants obtained the sum under false pretenses.

 

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2billion, N6.2billion, N6.150billion, N1.5billion and N500million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

 

The 13-count charge, filed by EFCC counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, on January 16, 2025, further claimed that the defendants used forged documents to deceive the bank.

Specifically, count 1 accused the defendants of conspiring “to obtain the sum of N12.3Billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V-TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In Count 2, it was alleged that the defendants, on or about 26th day of November, 2013 in Lagos, “obtained the sum of N5.2 billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED which representation you know to be false.”

 

The 3rd count alleged that the defendants, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, obtained N6.2billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for and disbursed to Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In the 4th count, they were accused of conspiring to spend the N6.15billion, out of the monies.

According to the Commission, the offences contravened Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and was punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

Counts 5 reads: “That you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 11th day of December, 2013 in Lagos, procured Honeywell Flour Mills Plc to retain the sum of N1.5 billion, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretense and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.”

Meanwhile, Otudeko had reportedly fled Nigeria ahead of his scheduled arraignment on fraud charges.

 

According to TheCable Newspaper, Otudeko’s exit from the country is linked to the mounting legal pressures and financial disputes he is facing.

The newspaper reported that the businessman left the country via one of the land borders.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Loan controversy: Bisi Onasanya’s lawyer condemns media trial….Judge adjourns case to February 13

Published

on

By

In line with his resolve to defend himself and clear his name, Dr. Bisi Onasanya through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, at a session at the Federal High Court Lagos on Monday, January 20, 2025, demanded the service of proof of evidence and summons.

Onasanya, a chartered accountant and a former Group Managing Director of First Bank is defending himself against a controversial loan that allegedly occurred at First Bank 12 years ago. The retired banker is refuting the allegations alongside three others namely former Chairman of the bank, Chief Oba Otudeko, a former board member of Honeywell, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

At a hearing at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday, Fusika condemned the media trial his client had been subjected to, saying he was not formally invited by the EFCC or served a notice of the charge.

He expressed surprise at seeing news stories in major newspapers linking Dr Onasanya to a trial on loan controversy during his time as First Bank Group Managing Director without prior notification.

“My Lord, it is concerning that my client has been unduly exposed to media trial without being formally served. This is a procedural anomaly that undermines his right to a fair hearing and personal dignity,” Olumide-Fusika said.

The prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, denied any involvement by the EFCC in the media coverage of the case.

He stated that the commission had not issued a press statement and suggested that journalists may have obtained information through other means.

“My Lord, we disassociate ourselves from any media reports,” Oyedepo said.

The EFCC also applied for an ex parte motion to issue a bench warrant for the defenders’ arrest and sought permission to serve them through substituted means, alleging they had evaded service.

Olumide-Fusika opposed the motion, arguing that his client had always been available and had not evaded service. Demonstrating his determination to clear his name, the senior lawyer prayed to the court to have the EFCC serve the charge and the proof of evidence in the open court.

“This application is unwarranted and speculative. My client has neither avoided service nor absented himself from this matter. The claims of the prosecution are baseless. Since I am here and my client is ready to go ahead with this case, I ask to be served the charge and the proof of evidence here in the court,” Olumide-Fusika argued.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, who presided over the case, dismissed the EFCC’s motion for substituted service on Onasanya since he has accepted to be served in the open court.

The judge consequently ordered that the EFCC serve Olumide-Fusika the charge and proof of evidence in open court.

The EFCC complied with the directive, and Olumide-Fusika who confirmed the receipt of the document extracted a confirmation from the prosecution counsel that the proof of evidence submitted is exhaustive and there wouldn’t be an addendum. The defence counsel said EFCC’s confirmation should be on record, insisting that his client was ready to defend himself and clear his name.

Justice Aneke adjourned the case to February 13, 2025.

It will be recalled that Onasanya, through his Communication Advisor, Mr Michael Osunnuyi, had earlier dismissed allegations, describing the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish Onasanya’s stellar reputation for professionalism, integrity and humaneness.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Abuja-Lagos Super Highway Project faces threat as two consortiums engage in battle for FG’s nod

Published

on

By

AEC Unity Network Limited, the officially recognised concessionaire for the Abuja-Lagos Super Highway and High-Speed Train projects, has denied any association with an entity known as AEC-Geofocus Consortium (Geofocus).

AEC Unity Network clarified that Geofocus has no role in the planning, financing, construction, or operation of the 470-kilometer superhighway and high-speed rail projects, which are part of President Bola Tinubu’s Renewed Hope agenda to boost national infrastructure.

In a statement released on Sunday, the company emphasised that it is the sole concessionaire authorized by the Federal Government of Nigeria, having received approvals from the Federal Ministry of Works, the Federal Ministry of Finance, and the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC).

Barrister Ayodeji Ademola, legal consultant for AEC Unity Network, said in the statement that AEC-Geofocus has no basis whatsoever to make any claim in relation to the Super Highway project, having not been part of its conception from the onset.

In the statement, AEC Unity Network reaffirmed that it is the sole concessionaire authorised by the Federal Government of Nigeria to design, finance, construct, operate, and maintain the 470-kilometer superhighway and high-speed rail linking Abuja and Lagos.

According to the statement, the company’s approvals are from the Federal Ministry of Works, the Federal Ministry of Finance, and the Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission (ICRC).

The reaction by the AEC Unity Network may have been informed by media publications credited to one Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris, who asserted that AEC-Geofocus was in charge of the project for the federal government.

Idris, who claimed to be Director of Operations for AEC-Geofocus, had in the publication described the company as a consortium of engineers, planners, and investors that had successfully attracted $16 billion from Middle Eastern investors, with additional interest from European financial institutions and the World Bank.

He had also claimed that the financial framework was designed to minimize government expenditure, safeguard public funds, and prevent cost overruns through an efficient risk-sharing mechanism.

Idris had assured stakeholders of a grand project flag-off before February 2025, reiterating AEC-Geofocus’ commitment to delivering world-class infrastructure.

“The $16 billion project will be led by AEC-Geofocus, a consortium of engineers, planners, and investors, and plans have been concluded to commence it by February this year, 2025,” Idris had asserted.

He said that the Lagos-Abuja corridor, spanning approximately 500 kilometers, will connect Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Osun, Kwara, Kogi, and Niger states before reaching Abuja, under a design, Build, Finance, Operate, and Maintain (DBFOM) model.

But in its sharp reaction, AEC Unity Network expressed surprise at the emergence of AEC-Geofocus out of the blue to make claims on a project it was never part of.

Part of the statement read: “We emphatically state that AEC Unity Network Limited has no relationship whatsoever with AEC-Geofocus Consortium or Geofocus. Any claims made by Geofocus regarding involvement in the projects are ‘spurious and false.’”

“We categorically state that AEC Unity Network Limited has no relationship whatsoever with Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris or Geofocus.”

“These fraudulent claims are completely at variance with our proposed infrastructure plans and are intended to confuse and defraud unsuspecting stakeholders,” the statement added.

The statement by Engineer Mutiu Yinka Idris, who claimed involvement in the projects on behalf of Geofocus in several media outlets and amplified on social media, is baseless and an attempt to mislead the public.

The company warned investors and the public to disregard any media advertisements or reports from Geofocus, describing them as unauthorized and misleading.

AEC Unity Network stated that its project is still in the planning stages, with no concurrent developments on the same corridor by any other entity.

To prevent confusion and potential fraud, AEC Unity Network urged local and foreign investors to verify information only through its official channels and avoid engaging with Geofocus on matters relating to the Abuja-Lagos Super Highway and High-Speed Train projects.

This infrastructure initiative, which includes a direct expressway and rail connection between Abuja and Lagos, is expected to enhance transportation efficiency and foster economic growth.

AEC Unity Network reiterated its commitment to transparency and professionalism, urging the public to engage only through its official channels for accurate information about the projects.

Continue Reading

Trending