Connect with us

News and Report

Exclusive: Access Bank Goes After Late Sunny Odogwu’s Properties over 50b debt…. …..Insists on collecting every penny of depositors money owed it by Recalcitrant debtors!

Published

on

The no-nonsense managers of Access Bank led by Hubert Wigwe have gone after the properties of Late Chief Sony Odogu over a debt of 50Billion Naira.

We gathered reliably that the debt was originally over 26Billion but since 2015, it has spiraled up to 50Billion and the managers of the bank have commenced the process of getting every penny of the depositor’s funds from the Late Socialite family.

For some time now, the families have been playing hide and seek with the bank but at the weekend the bank moves to seize some of the assets in Ikoyi Lagos.

Access Bank Plc last week commenced the process of recovering the outstanding sums due it from a total of over N50 billion judgment debts in its favor against the late Chief Sunny Odogwu and two of his companies – Robert Dyson & Diket Limited and SIO Property Limited.

The said judgment debt was in respect of a property situated on No. 31 – 35, Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos State, known as Luxury Collection Hotels and Apartments (formerly Le Meridien Grand Towers).
The said property owned by SIO Property Limited of which the late Odogwu was the majority shareholder, was financed with a loan from the then Diamond Bank, which is now Access Bank.

Justice Saliu Saidu of the Lagos Division of the Federal High Court in suit number: FHC/L/CS/1633/14, had in November 3, 2015, found the late Odogwu and his companies guilty of breach of Bank-Customer Relationship and consequently ordered the sale of the property used as collateral for the loan sum of N26,229,943,035.22.

However, with a 20 per cent interest on the N26 billion judgment debt in the last six years the judgment was delivered, the total debt has now reason to over N50 billion.

The bank had in 2014, commenced legal action against the defendants at a Federal High Court, Lagos, following the failure of the defendants to meet their loan obligations granted in the financing of the Le Meridien Grand Towers, known as Luxury Collection Hotels and Apartments.

While Access Bank was the sole plaintiff; Robert Dyson & Diket Limited, SIO Property Limited, Odogwu, the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) the Registrar of Title Federal Land Registry and Leadway Trustee Limited were the first to sixth defendants respectively.

Plaintiff in arguing its case had placed plethora of evidence before the court on how it granted various credit facilities to the 1st and 2nd defendants to finance the construction of the Luxury Collection Hotels and Apartments.
Plaintiff added that the various facilities were at various times restructured to ease the repayment of the loan facility but the 1st to 3rd defendants continue to refused or failed to meet their obligations, stating that the project site located at 31-35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos and the Personal Guarantee of the late Chief Sonny Odogwu were used as collaterals for the facility.

Among the 20 reliefs sought by the plaintiff then was that whether having regards to plaintiff’s colossal investment/ financing of the sum of N26 billion in the 1st to 3rd defendants project and by the various agreements entered between plaintiff and the 1st to 3rd defendants to create a legal mortgage in favour of the plaintiff, a beneficial owner of the property on No 31 – 35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos State, and the breach of the terms of the agreement by the 1st to 3rd defendants, the plaintiff is entitled to leave of court to foreclose and sell the affected property.
“Whether having regard to the failure, refusal and or neglect of the 3rd defendant to execute the deed of personal guarantee as agreed as agreed with the plaintiff on November 19, 2010 as part security of the cumulative sum of facility advanced to the 1st to 3rd defendants for the project at 31 -35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos State which now stands at N26 billion as at September 30, 2014, order an order of specific performance can be made to compel the 3rd defendant to execute the said deed of personal guarantee in favour of the plaintiff within two days of this court.”
Delivering judgment in the suit, Justice Saidu held that the first to third defendants were in fundamental breach of the contract for the financing of the construction of the Luxury Collection Hotels and Apartments, having admitted “Indebtedness to the plaintiff in the sum of N10, 252,315,567.28 on the project finance facility as at December 20, 2011.”

The judge stated that where there was an admission of indebtedness by a party, the court could make an order for the sum admitted to be paid.

“The following is very clear from the totality of evidence before me; that there are facilities granted and disbursed….the facts of these facilities were admitted in paragraphs 8, 10, 11, 13,14, 15, 16 and 17 of the counter affidavit.

“I have not seen anywhere in the pleadings of the 1st to 3rd defendants that they did not enter the contract as shown in exhibit DB3 with the agreed collateral being a third-party legal mortgage on the parcel of land located at No 31 – 35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos State”, the court held.

In addition, the judge said the first to third defendants have not produced before the court any evidence that any of the conditions for the grant of the facility was waived or demonstrated to the court how they liquidated their indebtedness.

“With all the facts before me, I am satisfied that the first to third defendants who have admitted indebtedness has not shown how the indebtedness was liquidated.

“There are four probable methods of answering an allegation of indebtedness which are to admit the debt, deny the debt, to counter-claim against the debt and to set off against the debt. From all the facts before me the 1st to 3rd defendants have only admitted the debt but have not shown how the admitted indebtedness was liquidated.

“When the 1st to 3rd defendants have failed to liquidate their debt, the court has a duty the duty to order specific performance on the part of the 1st to 3rd defendants to honour their pledge in the contract. The 3rd defendant had through the 2nd defendant pledged to execute a third-party legal mortgage in favour of the plaintiff as shown in the documentary evidence before this court.

“This court therefore has the power to grant an equitable relief of specific performance against the 1st to 3rd defendants to do what they have agreed to do by the contract”, he added.
Justice Saidu accordingly made the following consequential order: “Judgment is entered in the sum of N26, 229,943,035.22 jointly and severally against the 1st to 3rd defendants being the outstanding sum as at September 30, 2014 advanced by the plaintiff for the 1st to 3rd defendants project which sum has remained unpaid despite several demands.

“That leave is granted to the plaintiff to foreclose and sell the said property situated at 31 – 35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos and to deposit the proceed of the sales into the 1st defendant’s account kept with the plaintiff towards the partial satisfaction of the judgment sum against the 1st to 3rd defendants.

“That leave is granted the plaintiff with the supervision of the Court’s Registrar to sell property situated at No 31 – 35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos being the security for the sum of N26, 229,943,035.22 advanced by the plaintiff to the 1st to 3rd defendants for the development of the project called Luxury Collections Hotels and Apartments, the repayment of which facility, the 1st to 3rd defendants have failed, refuse otherwise neglected to make despite several demands.

“The 3rd defendant is hereby ordered to execute the said deed of personal guarantee of the sum of N26, 229,943,035.22 in favour of the plaintiff within 30 days of the judgment of this court.”

The judge in addition restrained the 3rd defendant from disposing, selling or alienating any of his personal assets, money, shares, stock and any of his negotiable instruments until the sum of N26, 229,943,035.22 owed to the plaintiff by the 1st to 3rd defendants is fully paid.

The court also ordered the sixth defendant to pay to the plaintiff the sum of N49 million being money it had and recovered for a consideration that as failed.

The sixth defendant was further ordered to surrender all the title documents in its custody in relation to the said property and other documentation connected and or pertaining to the extant transaction of which the plaintiff is the beneficiary.

Not satisfied with the Judgment of the Court, the Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/L/1151/2015, but while the case was pending at the Court of Appeal, the late Chief Sonny Odogwu died, and his numerous children attempted to dissipate the various assets charged to the bank including the property located at 31-35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos that the Court has ordered to be sold.

The bank was constrained to takes steps to restrain the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Odogwu from dissipating the various assets acquired by depositors’ funds which ultimately led to settlement discussions between the Bank and the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Sonny Odogwu and subsequent execution of Settlement Agreements.

Rather than comply with the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the beneficiaries of the estate and children of late Odogwu have willfully and persistently refused to comply with the terms of settlement reached with the Bank. They have resorted to dissipating the assets which were pledged to the Bank and have breached the consent judgment made by the Federal High Court.

For instance, under the consent judgment, the defendants were required to sell the property in Los Angeles, USA within 60 days from 30th of May, 2019 or otherwise assign their interest in the property to the Bank. The defendants have failed to meet this condition and have rather compromised their interest in the property without regards to the consent judgment.

Subsequently, the bank as beneficial owner under the Judgment has taken steps to sell the property situate at 31-35 Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos to a new owner.

Unfortunately, the beneficiaries of the estate of the late Odogwu and other unknown persons who have been parading the property have promised to disrupt any takeover of the property.

Based on the foregoing and in order to safe guard depositors’ funds, the bank is determined to recover the outstanding sums due from the defendants and enforce the judgment of the Federal High Court.

 

News and Report

Staff hack Sterling Bank system, steal depositors’ N1.2bn funds

Published

on

By

Sterling Bank Limited and its holding company, Sterling Financial Holdings Company, are currently battling a N1.257, 536, 572. 80 billion depositors’ funds which were stolen from the bank by some of its staff.

We gathered that the staff colluded with some fraudsters to hack the bank’s banking platform and stole the said fund.

The suspects, namely Victor Nwabueze (50), Favour Odey (22), Adekunle Daniel (34), Akachukwu Alagbogu, and Yetunde Oguntade (28)—were arraigned by the Police Special Fraud Unit (PSFU), Ikoyi, Lagos, before Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday.

The group faced a three-count charge of conspiracy, hacking, and money laundering under the Cybercrimes Act and Money Laundering Prohibition Act.

The prosecutor, Barrister Justine Enang, alleges that the suspects, in collaboration with internal staff of Sterling Bank, breached sensitive systems between November 3 and 4, 2024, using compromised data, including IP addresses and mobile equipment identities – 14984244, IP address 84252.113.3 & 88 transaction., to transfer funds to fraudulent accounts.

He informed the court that the alleged acts of the defendants contravened sections 27(1)(b); 14(1) of the Cyber Crimes (Prohibition, Prevention Etc.) Act, 2015 as amended in 2024, Read along with section 14(1) of the same Act.

Enang also told the court that the defendants’ act was contrary to and punishable under Section 18(2)(b) & (d) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.

The Charges Against The Defendants Read: “That you Victor Nwabueze Ogochukwy “m”, Favour Odey “f’, Adekunle Daniel “m”, Akachukwu Alagbogu and others now at large, sometimes on the 3rd & 4th November 2024, in Lagos State, within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Division of The Federal High Court, with intent to defraud, did conspire amongst yourselves to commit a felony to wit: internet fraud to the sum of N1, 257, 536, 572.50 (One Billion, Two Hundred and Fifty Seven Million, Five Hundred and Thirty Six Thousand, Five Hundred and Seventy Two Naira, Fifty Kobo) by false pretence and thereby committed an offence contrary to section 27(1)(b) of the Cyber Crimes (Prohibition, Prevention Etc.) Act, 2015 as amended in 2024, Read along with section 14(1) of the same Act.

“That you Victor Nwabueze Ogochukwu “m”, Favour Odey “f’, Adekunle Daniel “m”, Akachukwu Alagbogu and others now at large, sometimes on the 3rd & 4th November 2024, in Lagos State, within the aforementioned Judicial Division of The Federal High Court, did knowingly and without authority cause financial lost to Sterling Bank Plc to the tune of N1, 257, 536, 572. 80 (One Billion, Two Hundred and Fifty Seven Million, Five Hundred and Thirty Six Thousand, Five Hundred and Seventy Two Naira, Fifty Kobo) by suppressing one of the banking platform and Bance Application from their various customers’ account to different fraudulent accounts with the collusion of an internal staff/external parties for possible compromise on sensitive data and security system of the bank by using international mobile equipment identity 14984244, IP address 84252.113.3 & 88 transaction, thereby conferred economic benefits on yourselves by converting the money in question to your own use against the Sterling Bank Plc and thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 14(1) of the Cyber Crimes (Prohibition, Prevention Etc.) Act, 2015 as Amended in 2024.

“That you Victor Nwabueze Ogochukwu ‘m’, Favour Odey ‘f, Adekunle Daniel ‘m’, Akachukwu Alagbogu and others now at large, sometimes on the 3rd & 4th November 2024, in Lagos State, in the aforementioned Judicial Division of Federal High Court, Lagos, did directly or indirectly converts or transfers, retains or takes possession or control of funds belonging to Sterling Bank Plc, knowingly or reasonably ought to have known that such funds is, or forms part of the proceeds of an unlawful Act and thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(2)(b) & (d) and punishable under Section 18(3) of the Money Laundering (Prevention and Prohibition) Act, 2022.”

While they pleaded not guilty, the prosecution opposed bail, citing the defendants’ potential flight risk.

Justice Lewis-Allagoa eventually granted bail at N50 million each, with one surety who must own landed property within the court’s jurisdiction.

Pending bail fulfillment, the accused were remanded in custody.

The case is adjourned to March 13, 2025, for trial.

Authorities continue to investigate other suspects believed to be at large.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Arik Air shareholders tackle AMCON over N455bn debt claim

Published

on

By

The shareholders of Arik Air, an indigenous airline currently under the control of the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, have debunked claims that the debt accruable to the airline’s owner, Johnson Arumem-Ikhide, has risen to N455bn.

The shareholders, through a statement signed by their representative, Godwin Aideloje, described as fallacy the debt record of AMCON against Arik founder.

Earlier, AMCON, through its Head of Corporate Communication, Jude Nwauzor, said the total debt of Arumem-Ikhide was N455.17bn as of December 31, 2024, in all his three investments.

AMCON also said that its intervention in the troubled airline in February 2017 saved the carrier from liquidation, insisting that it would ensure the recovery of the total debts owed to the corporation by various business organisations in Arik Air.

Giving the breakdown of the total debt, Nwauzor alleged that Arik as of December 2024 owed AMCON N227.6bn; Rockson Engineering, N163.5bn, while Ojemai Farms owed the corporation another N14bn, totaling N455bn.

Reacting to this, Arik shareholders refused to comment on the matter saying it was currently before the court.

“This is a matter before the court. Unlike AMCON who have no respect for the courts, we will not resort to subjudical remarks. We will not join the desperate attempt by AMCON to overreach the courts and desecrate our justice system.

“The fictitious claim of N455bn as alleged Arik Air indebtedness to AMCON by Mr Jude Nwauzor is a fallacy. It seems clear that AMCON is invested in dubious storytelling and falsehoods.

This allegation is defeated by AMCON’s claim in its Suit No. FHC/L/CS/175/17 with which it took Arik Air into receivership and gained full control and management of operations, assets, and liabilities of the airline,” they stated in the statement.

The shareholders recalled a Federal High Court judgement of March 31, 2023, ordering AMCON and its Receiver Manager to file a statement of affairs and audited financial reports with the Corporate Affairs Commission to balance and compare the books, Aideloje said AMCON refused to appear before a Financial Reporting Council to defend it positions.

The shareholders said rather than appear before the reporting council, AMCON uploaded the audited account of the business(es) on the Arik Air website, a document the shareholders have also dismissed.

During the press briefing, the Head of Corporate Communication at AMCON said considering the state of Arik Air’s insolvency at the takeover time, the airline would have been sold in its entity if not for the intervention of the Federal Government which directed that the airline should be managed.

But in the shareholders’ reaction, Aideloje stressed that “It is instructive to note the new version of the reason why AMCON took over Arik is a government mandate. What a preposterous statement from a Federal Government employee! This is a gross misrepresentation of the Federal Government as being in the business of arbitrary takeover of private businesses with a stroke of pen. This is indeed a disservice to the government and people of Nigeria by AMCON.

“We wish to state again that before the forceful takeover, Arik Air was recognized for its operational excellence and significant contributions to Nigeria’s aviation sector. Contrary to AMCON’s claims, the airline was meeting its financial obligations, as evidenced by remarks and recognition by global institutions; recently Afreximbank acknowledged legacy Arik as a model in Africa at a just-concluded International Aircraft Leasing and Finance Conference in Ireland Dublin a few days ago.”

 

Continue Reading

News and Report

Bisi Onasanya Refutes Allegations, Vows to Defend Reputation

Published

on

By

 

A former Group Managing Director of First Bank, Dr. Bisi Onasanya has dismissed allegations circulating on social media, suggesting his involvement in a purported commercial loan facility transaction controversy carried out 12 years ago at First Bank.

 

In a statement released to the press over the weekend, Onasanya, who spoke through his Communication Advisor, Mr. Michael Osunnuyi, described the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish the stellar reputation of the renowned retired banker and Chartered accountant.

 

 

 

“Our attention has been drawn to allegations and charge sheet circulating on social media suggesting Dr. Bisi Onasanya’s involvement in a purported commercial loan controversy at First Bank 12 years ago,” Osunnuyi said.

 

 

 

“While we have consistently chosen to ignore such baseless attacks for over ten years, the growing concern expressed by family, friends, and associates from across the globe compels us to address these unfounded claims.”

 

 

 

The Communication Advisor said that Dr. Onasanya served First Bank with dedication and integrity throughout his illustrious career.

 

 

 

“His stellar reputation of integrity, built over four decades of impeccable professional service, cannot and will not be tarnished by these false allegations and incorrect charges,” the statement noted.

 

 

 

According to the statement, the matter in question was investigated eight years ago by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC two years after Dr. Onasanya had voluntarily and meritoriously retired from the bank as the group managing director upon the completion of two terms in office. Since then, Dr. Onasanya has not been contacted on this matter and has remained willing to support and cooperate with the law enforcement if required.

 

 

 

“What is baffling,” the statement continued, “is that a commercial transaction which occurred in 2013 and was thoroughly investigated eight years ago, where Dr. Onasanya established his innocence and non-involvement in the commercial transaction controversy, has now resurfaced in 2025 in the form of criminal prosecution. This is beyond his imagination.”

 

 

 

It also noted that, to date, Dr. Onasanya has not been served with any charges, summoned, or formerly invited by any court or investigating agency regarding these claims since the matter was investigated and dispensed eight years ago.

 

 

 

However, he stated categorically that Dr. Onasanya is readily available anytime in Nigeria to have his day in court whenever he is summoned to defend his reputation and clear his name.

 

 

 

Osunnuyi further pointed out that the allegations appear to follow a deliberate pattern every year with identical language and content being disseminated across multiple media platforms. He urged the media to exercise caution and verify information before publication, stressing the serious implications of libel.

 

 

 

“We have noticed a pattern of identical language and content being circulated across various media platforms, suggesting a deliberate attempt to manipulate public perception. It looks more like a hatchet job by some unscrupulous people to continue to malign and tarnish the image of Dr. Onasanya. We strongly appeal to the media to verify the information they disseminate and act responsibly,” Osunnuyi added.

 

 

 

“Since voluntarily leaving First Bank and the banking industry in 2015, he has endured and ignored incessant and unwarranted attacks on his person,” Osunnuyi said.

 

 

 

“These persistent efforts to malign his character are deeply regrettable and baseless.”

 

 

 

The statement also clarified that Dr. Onasanya has never expressed interest in which person or group of persons in charge of the control or ownership of First Bank or any other financial institution, for that matter. Instead, he has moved on from banking and remained committed to making a positive impact in people’s lives and other sectors of the economy.

 

 

 

Dr. Onasanya expressed gratitude for the support of his family, friends, and associates, whose belief in his integrity has been a source of strength. He assured them that he remains focused on upholding the values and principles that have defined his career and life over the years and he would leave no stone unturned to defend his reputation and expose the truth regardless of whose ox is gored.

 

 

 

“We are confident that the truth will ultimately prevail and that justice will be served. Dr. Onasanya remains committed to upholding his unblemished record and will continue to cooperate fully within the ambit of the law to clear his name,” the statement concluded.

Continue Reading

Trending