Desperation in banks
• Now send their staffers to debtors’ companies to collect daily returns
• EFCC begins auction of debtors’ assets next week
• CBN governor risk sanction, if…
By HENRY UMAHI, VINCENT UKPONG KALU, OLAITAN ABUDIORE and VIVIAN ONYEBUKWA
Saturday, August 29, 2009


•Sanusi
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on This Section
With the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission breathing down their necks over non-performing loans, banks have started desperate moves to recover loans, including those which are not even due. Also, various banks have frozen the accounts of individuals and companies they lent money.

Saturday Sun gathered that ever since the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) sacked five bank managing directors as well as published the names of debtor companies and individuals, banks have set up a task force on loan recovery. This had become even more so since the EFCC is working on the theory that most of the loans were given to proxies of bank officials.

Sources revealed that in this loan recovery drive, many of the banks are using both orthodox and unorthodox methods. In the process, it was gathered that many of the bank customers have been embarrassed.
A source at First Bank revealed that since the CBN action, the banks have been calling people who borrowed money for various projects and putting pressure on them to pay back.

It was gathered that some of those contacted, in the last couple of days, are people who bought vehicles and property through loan facilities. In such loans, the borrowers transfer their salary accounts to the bank, from which monthly deductions are made, as soon as salary is paid. However, in their desperate moves, the banks seem to have forgotten the terms of agreement and are calling their clients and declaring the loans as non-performing. And these people have been embarrassed.

One of such clients, who pleaded for anonymity, told Saturday Sun that he got a call from the headquarters of one of the banks telling him that he had defaulted in payment and should act immediately.
According to him, “I told the lady that my salary account is domiciled in her bank and that I did this simply because of the car loan. I asked her if she had called my local branch, which facilitated the loan and find out the status of the loan and the repayment. She said she had not, demanding that I did that. I lost my cool, of course, and told her she did not know her job and that if she did, she would have called the local branch first before making such embarrassing call to me.”

When the bank’s client later contacted the branch manger, the woman was full of apologies, saying that the headquarters did not call them to find out the status of the loan. She confirmed that several of their customers had similarly complained about such calls from the headquarters of the bank. Saturday Sun gathered that other banks are equally doing the same thing.

Also to recover loans, banks now send their staffers to companies owing them, to physically collect daily returns.
It was gathered that officials of Zenith Bank now report at a fuel tank depot located in the Trinity area, on Oshodi-Apapa expressway, with armed policemen to ensure that payments are made into the account and that no cash is taken away.
Saturday Sun reporter gathered that the bank officials are now stationed at Zenon loading depot, at Ibru Jetty Apapa to recover their money. Payments are, therefore, made directly into Zenon bank account, domiciled in Zenith, by customers who come to buy products.

Sources said that a lot of customers, who made payments, could not, however, load their trucks for some days now. One of the customers, who paid N7 million, said she has not been able to load her truck for more than a week now. Effort to ascertain why Zenon stopped giving products to its customers at Ibru Jetty proved abortive. However, sources said that Zenith Bank seems to be in control of the products in order to recover its money.

Another customer, who pleaded anonymity, said the way things are, the bank now decides when products should be given to customers.
Sources at the bank said that they resorted to this tactics in order to forestall CBN hammer, especially since the apex bank is still auditing their bank. They also said that there was the need to recover whatever loan they could before the searchlight would be on the bank.

Meanwhile, banks are now freezing the accounts of companies they extended loan facility. Some of these companies, whose accounts are domiciled in the banks that gave them loan are finding it difficult to operate, in the face of non-access to their accounts.
Saturday Sun gathered that the new management in Oceanic Bank has stopped withdrawals from accounts of companies who have loan facilities. Such companies are not allowed to make withdrawals from the account, but deposits are accepted.

Sources said that the companies were not given prior notice of the action, which ensured that they were caught unawares. It was gathered that some of the companies were still making deposits into their accounts last week, not knowing that they would not make withdrawals.
One of the affected companies told Saturday Sun that such action would jeopardize the repayment of loan, as the operations of the companies are hampered. He said: “My affected account is the major one for the company. I cannot have access to money in the account to run my business. I don’t know how the bank expects me to service the loan when my business has been paralyzed. The goods I imported are at the wharf. I do not have money to clear them because I can’t make withdrawals.”

In a related development, the EFCC is intensifying its drive to recover non-performing loans owed banks. Sources revealed that the anti-graft agency has so far recovered more than N15 billion between when it gave a seven-day ultimatum and this week. The commission had given an ultimatum to bank debtors to pay up on or before last Tuesday or risk arrest and prosecution. Owing to the fact that some of the debtors made payments and were still making desperate efforts to make payments, the EFCC had stayed action on arresting them.

As at press time on Thursday, 68 loan defaulters were arrested by EFCC while a sum of N40 billion was recovered.It is expected that more arrests will be made by the anti-graft agency next week. Anybody arrested, it was revealed, would be made to surrender some assets or estate in lieu of the debt.

A source at the EFCC said: “Well, by next week it would be two weeks since the notice was given. That is enough time for those who want to pay in something to do so. By next week, we will go back to the original plan and that is to arrest these debtors and make them pay. Anybody we pick should be ready to give us the documents of his assets because our mandate is to recover the loan.”

The source revealed that such practice was not new in the EFCC, as all options that would lead to the recovery of money are used. He cited the case of Chief Emma Nwude, whose assets were confiscated and auctioned to recover the money he collected from people through false pretences.

While the EFCC is battling with loan defaulters and the arrested four bank chief executives, the CBN may be in the eye of the storm when the House of Representatives resumes plenary. Members of the House have revealed that the apex bank would be summoned to brief federal lawmakers on the action it took against the banks, especially on the source of N420 billion bailout given to Oceanic Bank Plc, Intercontinental Bank Plc, Union Bank of Nigeria, FinBank and Afribank, whose managing directors and executive directors were sacked two weeks ago.

Revealing this, the Chairman, House Committee on Appropriation, Hon. Ayo Adeseun, said that federal lawmakers had kept quiet on the development in the banking sector because of the recess. He revealed that as soon as the lawmakers resume sitting, the CBN Governor, Mallam Lamido Sanusi, would appear before the House to explain where he got money to bail out the banks.

Adeseun told The Sun editors that the lawmakers could not have stopped Sanusi abruptly. Doing so, according to him, could have amounted to causing more damages than the one he was trying to correct.
He gave assurance that the CBN governor still has some questions to answer later on the matter.
His words: “You would know that this episode occurred while the House was on break.

There was no way we could come back to start to address the issue. The other problem we have with the development is the fact that, given the sensitivity of the banking sector to the economy, if the process was underway and we got wind of it and we stopped it, the impact of that might have been even worse to the economy.

“But now that the deed has been done, we now have a responsibility, through the oversight function, to ask Sanusi to come forward and tell us what he did. Where did the CBN get N420 billion it gave out to whosoever it so pleases? Who appropriated the money?

“Those are the kind of things we will look at. If any one is found to have flouted the laws, he or she will be punished appropriately. We also hope this will also serve as a way of discouraging some activities in the future and serve as deterrent to others.
“Given what happened, and the speed with which it was done, without consultation, there was not much the parliament could do, except react afterwards

I have a lock box in my house.

Very soon banks will stop giving out loans what am i say they have already stopped giving loans to people to do business.
Na now proper alarm go chase people una no ver c nothing yet. 
You think you are safe check again.
Very soon you people will understand the implication of actions of the CBN.
Serious alarm.

Control the flow of cash and you control the masses

Art of war

They are killing Nigeria gradually.

Ask yourself what is the point in investing in Nigeria when one abgero will wake one morning and decides that he must take it by force.

Sanusi has an agenda
•Says his manners upset
By duro adeseko
Saturday, August 29, 2009


•Olu Falae
Photo: Sun News Publishing
More Stories on This Section
Presidential candidate of the All Peoples Party (APP) and the Alliance for Democracy (AD) in 1999, Chief Olu Falae is an experienced banker. He was the Managing Director of the Nigerian Merchant Bank.

Following the current uproar in the banking system after the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi removed the Chief Executive Officers of five banks, Saturday Sun sought his views on the action.

Falae slammed Sanusi over the use of language, style and approach and confessed that the way Sanusi carried out his first official function upset him.
He warned that the CBN and the banks have no business taking debtors to court but agreed with those who claimed that Sanusi has an agenda. According to Falae, the combative nature of Sanusi created the impression that his agenda may be personal or he might be acting out a group objective.

Can you explain to ordinary Nigerians in a language they will understand, what exactly is happening in our banking industry?
I will explain as much as I can. But I cannot pretend that I understand fully what is going on at the present time. What I understand is happening is that the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has decided to remove from office the CEOs of a number of banks plus the executive directors of some other banks. It is on the grounds that under their watch or tenure their banks became distressed in the sense that the banks gave a lot of loans, which are not performing. This means repayment are not coming to the banks and the banks don’t have enough cash with which to run its affairs and make fresh loans to other people. That in summary is what I think is going on.
The Banking Act empowers the Central Bank to remove from office banking executives who in their opinion, when such fact is well established, is responsible for the distress of their institution. That is what it seems the Central Bank is doing.

Would you say the action of the CBN governor is justified?
I am yet to see the report on which the CBN governor has relied to take his decision. Until I see the report and study it, I cannot say whether I agree with him completely, partially or not at all. I am not in a position to take issues with the substance of his action. But I have a lot to say about his style.
Traditionally, Central Banks are very conservative and sensitive institutions. In well developed capitalist economies like US, UK, Germany, Japan and France, if there is an unguarded statement of the governor of the Central Bank of for instance the UK, the Bank of England can upset the pound sterling in the exchange market. It can affect the stock exchange because the market takes the point that whatever he says must be the intention of the financial authorities regarding the future. Whether interest rate would be raised or remain as they are, could arise from his words. Traditionally, whoever is governor should be extremely careful, cautious and watch his language.

But I was taken aback when our new CBN governor who I like because of his performance at the National Assembly when he was interviewed for confirmation. He had impressed me. But the very combative way he carried out his first major assignment shocked me. He said he would take on some people in the banking sector. He is a public officer. He is not a politician. Therefore, in performing official duties in a very neutral way – he should be professional. There should be no emotion. He should not display either anger or joy about what he is doing. It is not a personal thing. You are doing your job like a public officer, which is what he is. But for him to permit himself to threaten some people is unfortunate. That is capable of prejudicing the quality of his decisions. People will wonder whether he is being professional or maybe in the course of his career, he might have come across some of these executives. Maybe they have had a clash before and now he is in position of a public office he wants to get back at them. It is unfortunate. His action may be absolutely right. But the way he has carried it out in my view has prejudiced that action. It has made people question the sincerity and the legitimacy of his decision.

Secondly, he said he preferred to sell institutions. Again, he is not the one to decide what happens to those banks. It is a collective responsibility. The shareholders have a stake in this matter. The NDIC that insures deposits has a stake and then the Board of the CBN. He is not the board of the CBN. He is the governor. It is the board, in consultation with these people who will decide what happens to the banks. He said it as if he owns the CBN. He has all the powers that the banking Act conferred on the CBN. He is not the CBN. He is the governor. He is very important in CBN, but he is not the whole of the CBN. His language makes me very convinced about his perception. This is my view about his style, language and approach. I cannot comment extensively on the content of what he said because I have not seen the report.
There is another aspect I want to comment on. They talk about debtors being taken to court. Again, I don’t understand what is going on. A debtor can only be taken to court if he broke the law in the process of contracting the loan. That is if he committed a criminal offence. Owing money itself, no matter how long it is, is not a criminal offence.

A loan is a contract between the bank and its customers. The bank is expected to take every step to ensure that under the worse possible scenario, the interest of the bank would be protected. In other words, if a company borrows N1 billion from a bank, the bank is supposed to take enough collateral to cover the principal amount and the projected interest. So, even if the company goes bankrupt, that is the worse scenario. Yes, the account may be non-performing because the company is not doing business. The economic meltdown may be affecting the company. So, they cannot perform, they cannot service their loans. It is outside the contemplation of banks making loans. In fact, the ultimate profit of companies is what you call the doomsday scenario.

Under the doomsday scenario, the money of the bank plus the interest will come back in full. Once that is achieved, I don’t know what is the meaning of taking debtors to court unless, of course, they broke the law in the process of borrowing the money. The last time I heard of debtors being taken to court and being sent to jail was in 17th Century England when debtors were sent to prison and some of them were sent to what they call the new colony in Australia and New Zealand. So, the question of taking customers/debtors to court because they owe money is to me totally ridiculous. As I said, unless, crime was committed in the process of borrowing the money. Borrowing the money no matter how much and for how long does not amount to criminal offence for which a customer can be taken to court.

We have to be careful to qualify our statements so that we don’t send the signal to the rest of the world who we are inviting to invest here. Because the impression is that if you invest in Nigeria and your company owes money you can go to jail. That is the impression they will get. But surely that cannot be the case. Banks can take you to court on a civil suit. Some companies have gone to court and some gone to newspapers to show that the CBN got it wrong.

I heard of a stock broking firm, which was reported by the CBN to owe N3. something billion to Afribank or so. They have said today, that look, we are a stock broking firm. They were handling the offer for sale of the shares of an oil company that wanted to buy a firm. But pending conclusion of the share issue, they managed a loan with the bank for their customer. So, it is their customer, that owes the bank and not the firm and that the share issue is going on. People are paying right now. All their pay is going into an account. This company is not the borrower, does not owe a penny to the bank, but is being portrayed by the CBN as the company owing the money. When the CBN makes such documentary mistake of portraying an intermediary as the principal, what does the rest of the world think? It is either we don’t know what we are doing or that we are just full of mischief.
So, all in all, I think the way the whole matter has been handled appears embarrassing. But as I said, until I see the report, I cannot make a full comment.

Do you think the CBN Governor is executing a northern agenda as some accuse?
I have read that. But, there is no basis for making such assertion. Yes, he said he will sell these banks but he has not said to anybody from the North. You cannot impute that motive that since he said he would sell, he was surely going to sell to certain people in the country. But given the political situation in the country, all kinds of theories are bound to be proposed to explain his combative and aggressive nature in carrying out his duty. The way he has done it gives the impression that there is much more to it than meets the eye. As I said earlier, the impression he is creating is that he has an agenda. It is either his personal agenda or a group agenda. But the way he has done it and the kind of errors that are coming out show that it was a hurried job. What is the rush about? You won’t take your time to study situation properly. Nigeria didn’t start today and it will not end tomorrow. So, those are the reasons people are beginning to wonder whether he is implementing an agenda other than the banking agenda.

What do you say about the N420b bailout the FG pumped into the five banks?
Of course, yes. Look, we live in the world and in the last six to nine months, the Americans, the British, the Germans, the French government have been pouring trillions of dollars and pounds into their banks.
We are part of the world. The former governor of the CBN gave the impression that Nigeria was immune from the economic meltdown. How could it be so? Nigeria is a trading country. Our most important commodity – oil is traded. So, if anything happens to our customers, we would automatically be affected. The countries that buy Nigeria’s oil are in economic trouble. It is either they can’t pay as much as before or they can’t buy at the old price or both. In either of both cases, our revenue collapses. The things we need to do, we will not be able to do again. That is part of the trouble we are now trying to cope with. So, it is not routine but it is what governments do when their financial system is in crisis. Others have done it and they are still doing it.

Let me advise that the money put in may not be a dead loss.
Those bad loans of today can still be made to perform tomorrow. The loans can also be sold to other financial intermediaries for a proportion of its sale value. So, part of the loan will still come back. When it is replaced, it is written back into the books and the Federal Government can get part of its money back. In the case of America, the crisis was triggered by the mortgage crisis. In America, 70 per cent of lending is for housing because everybody lives in his own house and everybody borrows to build his own house. So, anytime anything goes wrong with the mortgage industry, the banks are in difficulty. So, what happened was that President George Bush said only bankers know how to manage banks and that government has no business regulating banks. It was an extreme capitalist position to take – to leave the banks totally without regulation. You have to protect the depositor against the greed of mankind. But Bush didn’t believe in that and left the banks alone. What happened?

They over-lent. There are cases of people who wanted to buy houses worth $100,000 who were persuaded to borrow $120,000. So, they took this cheap credit and having over-borrowed, most people could no longer service their mortgages. The payments were not going back to the banks and since the banks were not receiving money, there was nothing with which to make fresh loans to other businesses and other mortgages. To protect themselves, the American banks put some of the mortgages on their books and sold them to European banks. For instance, a mortgage of $100,000 may be sold to a German bank for $80,000. The German bank will pay $80,000 to American bank today, hold the paper in the hope that the borrower will repay the money a few years down the road and gain $20,000. So, it is a good profit. But by buying those non- performing mortgages in America, America was spreading the crisis throughout Europe.

So, when the crisis came banks in Europe, America were all affected.
What did the American government do? They decided to make the fund available. They bought over those non-performing mortgages. As the economy improves and those who borrow earn better income, as they start servicing their mortgages, the American government can actually sell back those non-performing assets and to pay up. What is $100,000 today, they could sell for $120,000 in two or three years and still make profit. They will not only recover their investments but also make profit. It is economically possible both in America and here as well. My answer is: Yes, when the banks are in trouble, the government is the ultimate guarantor of the integrity of the financial system. If the banks collapse, the consequences would be so disastrous. For example, hundreds and millions of Nigerians would be wiped out. Many hundreds and thousands of companies depend on these banks to run their businesses. The effect of the collapse of such big banks will be enormous. It will be so disastrous that no government can allow it to happen. That is why America, despite its ideological version not to interfere was obliged indeed compelled to make billions of dollars available to save the banks.

What caused the distress in these banks?
First, we are part of the international economy as the rest of the world is distressed. Those who are buying oil from Nigeria were to various degrees also distressed. They agree to buy our oil at reduced price. What happened? The price of oil has come down from $140 per barrel and it came as low as $40. So, you can imagine the huge difference in the amount of loss from oil export. This money was going to the banks in Nigeria so; the sharp reduction in oil export has affected the banks. It has affected their deposit base. Every government takes its money from Abuja and puts the money in these banks. But what they are getting is far less than before. Some of them have committed themselves so much so that when the reduction from government revenue came, they were caught napping. The first problem is that the international crisis has directly affected government revenue and through that has affected the banks that were taking deposits from the government. That is the direct effect of the meltdown.

Secondly, banks created some of the problems. Some were created by the Obasanjo government. For no justifiable reason at all, President Obasanjo, thinking that he was the Messiah of Nigeria decided that all banks must have a capital base of N25 billion and they must acquire it within 18 months. Whether your capital base was two billion or five billion or 10 billion, you must raise N25 billion over the same period of time. At the time, I asked: Why 18 months? Why not 28 or 78 months? How did you get to 18? Nobody answered my question. So why N25 billion? Where did it come from? Nobody answered the question. Thirdly, why should all banks have the same capital base? Are all men of the same height or weight? Why should all banks have the same size? Nobody answered my question. That was what brought this crisis. For every bank to survive the Obasanjo sledge hammer, they were all running around finding means of meeting the N25 billion deadlines. Part of the strategy they used was to revalue their physical assets and properties and it is legitimate. If you built your headquarters 20 years ago and in your book it is worth N50 million and as of today, the prize is N250 million, you have every right to revalue it and say it is N250 million. So, that is part fulfillment of the N25 billion. But Obasanjo’s expectation was that they bring in new cash. These physical assets as part of the N25 billion is legitimate. Physical building is part of assets. But he didn’t think about that. But that is not the major problem. The major problem was that despite all the re-evaluation, the Nigerian capital market is not wide enough, not big enough to provide enough capital for all the banks to be able to raise N25 billion in 18 months.

So, what were they to do?
Already some of them had subsidiaries. When I was at the Nigerian Merchant Bank, we had one. We called it Merchant Securities. You buy shares and sell shares for your clients. There are legitimate reasons banks have subsidiaries – especially stock broking subsidiaries. Now in trying to fulfill Obasanjo’s order, to raise capital base to N25 billion in 18 months, many of them knew that there was no way they could get that money, and they did not have the courage to go to him and say Oga, there is no way to raise that money. What did they do? Some of them took part of the money -depositors money and gave to their stock broking firms. They used depositors’ money with them and gave to their subsidiary to buy shares from the parent company. That is part of the gimmick used.

So, they could say they bought N3 billion shares. If the parent company had N18 billion before, they are looking for N7 billion and three had come from their subsidiary and they are now looking for only five. But that is fictitious. The stock broking firm is not the beneficial owner of that share because the money is a loan from the parent company. It is a gimmick for what we call “Warehouse Holding Shares.” You offer a share to the public – N2 billion. Applications are more than N2 billion. You say the share is over subscribed and everybody claps. Everybody rushes for your share. You must be a good company. But the application that came was N1 billion even though you want to sell N2 billion. What do you do with it? You ‘warehouse’ it.
You get a stock broking firm and say you get these shares and lock them up. They are “ware housing”. You don’t own them but keep them until the market improves. When people want to buy shares you can start releasing them gradually. That is what we call “ware housing.”

After the share issue when there is under subscription, in the case of this N25 billion order, they did it before the share issue. “Warehousing” is what is unsold. But on this occasion, they now waited for the exercise and got tons of their shares “warehoused” with their subsidiaries with the note they gave to them. So, when private people want to buy, they have not enough shares to buy.
What happened was that those who could not get shares to buy because of this gimmickry, the moment the exercise was completed and the share was listed on the stock exchange, they rushed there to buy? It was artificially contrived through “warehousing” of shares.

Many executives of the banks have bought shares of their banks – large chunks of shares from their banks knowing that they are going to manipulate the price so that price will rise quickly after the consolidation. So many of them probably bought shares for N20, after consolidation, price rose to N35. So, they now move quickly to sell what they brought for N20 for N35. They made a kill. This is because they planned it. So, all of them started selling their shares. Something must be wrong. That is why the share prices started to come down because there is over-supply of shares in the market. The big boys who bought with the anticipation of increase in price after consolidation started to offload their shares.

Category two are subsidiaries that were given loans to buy big tones of shares, which they do not own. They have to sell the shares. They too start to sell. The market becomes more and more tightened. Because price of shares has collapsed, the stock broking firm that bought shares of the affiliate companies cannot sell them. If they sell them, it will be at a huge loss. That huge loss would be passed on to the parent company that gave them the loan. This has further worsened the condition of the bank.
These are the major sources of the problems at the banks. I am not talking about fraud or insider trading or reckless lending.

What is reckless lending?
A banker is confronted with a proposal. He looks at it. There are lending criteria. All right? He looks at the industry itself – if it is a good industry, very bright. He looks at the company what is the track record. Look at the management – competent, honest, people you can do business with? Then, the particular proposal before you, is it viable? Is it profitable? Finally, the security is it acceptable, is it adequate? If the answer is yes, then give out the loan. But anything can go wrong. The best projection can go wrong. An oil company before the crash in the price of oil, the banker would have taken a sound decision. Matters are taken out of your hand by international development in the oil industry. That is not your fault. If you are using your knowledge of the situation in your bank to buy the shares and manipulate it, it is called insider trading. It is a criminal offence. Anybody who did that is committing an offence.

Also, if you have company that come to borrow money, and you grant the loan, you know you’ve broken the law. It is not done. It is in the Banking Act. The money you are lending does not belong to you. It belongs to the public - the depositors who trust you and put N10 million, N3 million as deposits in your bank. You are managing the fund in trust for them. The equity of the owner is a very tiny fraction of the money being loaned. Ninety per cent belongs to the public. So, you have a duty to ensure that before you lend his or her money to somebody, you will make sure that it will come back. Are you sure you take paying to ensure the management is as tight as it should be? Everybody loves himself more than he loves any other person.

So, you are likely to make very easy loan to yourself to cut corners. It is not likely that the loan will go back when you lend to yourself than when you lend to some other person. That is why lending to your company is forbidden. So, if your company wants to borrow money, it should go to another bank. Once it is established that you give loan to your company, it is a criminal offence. That is why I say I can’t make a blanket statement on what is going on. Each case must be dealt with on its own merits and in the light of the facts available.

What does the situation portend for our banking industry and the economy?
Banking is a very sensitive industry. What is happening is a major setback for Nigeria. You don’t need tumultuous change and upheaval all the time. When that happens, the investing public, both in Nigeria and abroad will tend to lose confidence in the banking sector either as depositors or borrowers. In the days of Sani Abacha, Banking executives were arrested and detained in Alagbon Close. When I was detained, there were many bank executives who were with me at Alagbon. I thought that will be the last time that will happen. But it came back right again to completely destabilize the banking sector. The vibration of this action will be with us for a very long time. The international community is watching and they are skeptical about Nigeria. They know we are not democratic and that the next election will be like Armageddon.” I don’t know if there will be too many companies that will want to invest in Nigeria.

@ Bombay,

Please stop assailing us with your terrible English. Go back to high school and work on your grammar.