₦airaland Forum

Baba_Eleko: If only i can Tony Montana this girl punannyyyy. I too like her.

. Na wa 4 u ooo. U wan contact std?

Op, go 4 a professional certification. I will recomend ACCA over ICAN for the ffg reasons. ACCA is a 3 in 1 qualification. As u are doing ur ACCA, u are equally running a Bsc.(Applied Accounting) of Oxford Brookes University UK also, ICAN readily absorb u upon completion of ur ACCA, thus u have an UK university Bsc in applied accounting, ACA and ACCA. Also, ACCA gives u intternational recognition unlike ICAN

Try Zenith Bank bros. U will never regret u did

My brother, this is a case of gross negligience on the part of the Bank. Under Bank-Customer Relationship, A bank is to excercise due dilligence and care in the discharge of its duty, that is why Bankers are suppose to be professional. It is unfortunate that these days, we have more of Bank workers than Professionals working in Banks!

In the Case of GREENWOOD V. Martins (1933), A customer could however be held liable for contributory Negligience! but in this case i doubt it. The law in Banking is so protective of customers that it says where a Customer is under-credited, the bank runs a risk of nominal or substantial damages depending on weither the Customer is 'a person in trade' or not whereas if the customer is over credited and the money is spent by the Customer, the law says the Bank can not rely on the evidence that the Customer should have known through his Bank statement to institute action. The bank can only institute common law action against the Customer.

When money is paid in a Bank, the Teller is expected to excercise due care and dilligence by ensuring that all details are matched with the system and in case of dicrepancy, the teller should not post! He should pass the deposit slip to his superior officer, usually Cash Officer or Head of Operation who should make contact with the depositor to come back that same day to correct the error. Where the depositor refuses to show up, the money should be warehoused in the Bank's internal Account (GL) designated for that purpose untill the depositor comes back.

On arrival, the depositor who should have come back with the Customer's copy of deposit slip would be made to write a letter stating his intention about the transaction and requesting the bank to do so. The letter would be approved by the appropriate officer of the bank and then the fund removed from the Bank's GL and posted as requested by the depositor. In case the depositor wants his cash back, the Customers copy is retrieved from him and a Draft is raised for the payment.

A breach of this procedure is a gross negligience on the part of the bank!

Under Banking law governing Bankers-Customers Relationship, A bank owes its Customers duty of secrecy, even where the accounts has been closed. However, in the locus clasiccus case of Tournier Vs National Provincial Bank (1923) It was concluded that The Bankers' duty of secrecy is not absolute but qualified. In order words, there are instances whereby a Bank can justifiably disclose information about customers' account to third parties and these were identified to be only four circumstances

(a) By compulsion of Law: For Instance, the provisions of Anti-money laundering Prohibition Act requires Banks to make a report of Lodgement of fund in essence of N1mill and N5mill to individual and corporate organisation respectively to NFIU of EFCC and to make further reports of any transaction considered suspicious by the Bank as well as FOREX transaction of US$10,000.00 or its equivalent.

(b) By Customer's Consent: Where Customer expressly authorized the bank to provide information about his account to third parties. E.g Personal Representatives

(c) In The Public Interest: Where it comes to the notice of the bank that the account is been used to work against public interest. E.g Finance of Terrorism, Support for enemy country during war, perpetration of fraud, embezzlement of public fund etc.

(d) In the Bank's Interest: If a bank, for instance needs to recover a loan, it might need to divulge information about the customer's account to its solicitors to be able to recover its advances to the Customer.

Any disclosure made by the bank outside of the aforementioned puts the Bank at a risk of paying substantial damages to the Customer, depending on the level of reputational damages involved.

Now to your case, could it be said that the disclosure made by Diamond Bank was under any of the afore mentioned? It depends on the facts and the documents available for examination.

To the best of my knowledge, I am not aware of any law that mandates a Bank to disclose your transactions to your employer, hence, it would not have been done under compulsion of law!

My fear is that you could have consented to the disclosure without your awareness as Loan forms are designed in such a manner to strip customers off their common law rights and since experience has shown that borrowers hardly took their time to study clauses on loan form for desperation, they tend to ignorantly sign off their rights. This means you need to review your loan agreement to be sure you have not expressly authorise the bank to contact your employer.

I doubt if the the disclosure could be justified by public interest since we have no evidence that you are a boko-haram or al-qaedia member or that you account is used to siphone public fund.

The bank might wish to edge on 'The Bank's interest'. They can only do this if they have made failed attempts to recover the fund and then have to resort to other measures when they discovered that the money was not likely to come back. Afterall, sanusi published the name of debtors of troubled Banks in the dailies.

So, examine these points and establish your position. cheers

Under Banking law governing Bankers-Customers Relationship, A bank owes its Customers duty of secrecy, even where the accounts has been closed. However, in the locus clasiccus case of Tournier Vs National Provincial Bank (1923) It was concluded that The Bankers' duty of secrecy is not absolute but qualified. In order words, there are instances whereby a Bank can justifiably disclose information about customers' account to third parties and these were identified to be only four circumstances

(a) By compulsion of Law: For Instance, the provisions of Anti-money laundering Prohibition Act requires Banks to make a report of Lodgement of fund in essence of N1mill and N5mill to individual and corporate organisation respectively to NFIU of EFCC and to make further reports of any transaction considered suspicious by the Bank as well as FOREX transaction of US$10,000.00 or its equivalent.

(b) By Customer's Consent: Where Customer expressly authorized the bank to provide information about his account to third parties. E.g Personal Representatives

(c) In The Public Interest: Where it comes to the notice of the bank that the account is been used to work against public interest. E.g Finance of Terrorism, Support for enemy country during war, perpetration of fraud, embezzlement of public fund etc.

(d) In the Bank's Interest: If a bank, for instance needs to recover a loan, it might need to divulge information about the customer's account to its solicitors to be able to recover its advances to the Customer.

Any disclosure made by the bank outside of the aforementioned puts the Bank at a risk of paying substantial damages to the Customer, depending on the level of reputational damages involved.

Now to your case, could it be said that the disclosure made by Diamond Bank was under any of the afore mentioned? It depends on the facts and the documents available for examination.

To the best of my knowledge, I am not aware of any law that mandates a Bank to disclose your transactions to your employer, hence, it would not have been done under compulsion of law!

My fear is that you could have consented to the disclosure without your awareness as Loan forms are designed in such a manner to strip customers off their common law rights and since experience has shown that borrowers hardly took their time to study clauses on loan form for desperation, they tend to ignorantly sign off their rights. This means you need to review your loan agreement to be sure you have not expressly authorise the bank to contact your employer.

I doubt if the the disclosure could be justified by public interest since we have no evidence that you are a boko-haram or al-qaedia member or that you account is used to siphone public fund.

The bank might wish to edge on 'The Bank's interest'. They can only do this if they have made failed attempts to recover the fund and then have to resort to other measures when they discovered that the money was not likely to come back. Afterall, sanusi published the name of debtors of troubled Banks in the dailies.

So, examine these points and establish your position. cheers

Ola, I have been reading your blind arguement since only to discover that u are so intellectually barren and ideologically impotent. How can you compare establishment of maiden lane-a financial vehicle to facilitate transactions by the federal reserve with running of Hotels, poultry keeping (perhaps the next one will be burukutu joint and barbing saloon) by cbn. Is any one talking about cbn's interest in Asset Management Company of Nigeria? No because it is in furtherance of the cbn duties of economic stability. Tell me with ur shallow brain hw keeping of hotel rooms and brothels sum up to performance of cbn function. Mr Ole.

but why are my thread being deleted for goodness sake. I need to know. tks

In the first instance, this thread is uncalled for. However, there is no crime in asking for prayer for somebody. But beyond this, The court should be allowed to determine the matter in Akingbola's case. Like other Bank's chiefs (apart from Ibru is has been convicted) Akingbola is still an accused person who in law is deemed innocent untill otherwise proven. His accusations premise on financial crime and this requires a huge verifiable evidences on the part of the Government agent (EFCC) to nail him. The CBN Governor says they have enough evidences to nail the Bank Chiefs. Thats a good one. Let him use them in the court. But the truth of the matter is that you can not be the accuser and the judge at the same time. On the other hand, Akingbola claims his removal was illegal and politically motivated. Whichever, however, whaterver might be the truth, i personally agree with the opinion of the MD designate (AMCON)-Obi (a first class mathematics graduate of Lagos and the son of the late Prof Chike Obi) that "[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][/font][/color][b][/b]What happened to our Banking system was nothing new. It was not unusual and our case was not the worst case in world. There are several ways the issue could have been dealt with but the Nigerian authority decided to act in the way that they did"
[color=Black]
In adittion, below are the claims of Akingbola in his letter to The Minister of Justice stating his own side of the story in the saga


Erastus Akingbola

By Erastus Akingbola

The Honourable Attorney-General & Minister Of Justice Attorney-General’s Chambers Federal Ministry Of Justice, Abuja.

Dear Sir: 1. About two and a half years ago, Dr. Bukola Saraki requested that we merge Societe Generale with Intercontinental Bank (IB) Plc.

We conducted a due diligence exercise and noticed N30bn negative capital – so the board of IB Plc turned it down. Dr. Saraki was very unhappy.

2. When time came for the renewal of Gov. Soludo’s appointment as CBN Governor, Dr. Saraki blocked it with late President Yar’Adua and brought him Lamido Sanusi. Being my customer, Dr. Saraki confirmed this personally to me.

3. Lamido Sanusi was appointed CBN Gov. on 4th June, 2009, and on the 18th June, - after just two weeks in office – he sent CBN examiners to five banks including IB Plc. This was quite unusual, as the CBN had just completed a comprehensive examination of IB Plc as part of normal protocol. The result of this was good.

4. The new examination finished in mid-July, and we were expecting their report. Suddenly, they returned claiming that several accounts, which they had verified and agreed with us as “performing”, were now reclassified “non-performing”.

5. Despite these manipulations, IB Plc’s ratios were alright. Unusually, the CBN examiners returned on four separate visits to reclassify even more accounts as “non-performing”. These even included what we regarded as our best accounts.

6. This prompted me to ask some of the examiners what was really going on. They confided that the new Governor was bent on removing certain bank CEOs, and wanted to show that IB Plc was too exposed to bad loans. They said he formed a team in CBN reporting to him directly. Each completed examination report was turned down if it was not damning enough and they were ordered to go back until they achieved certain ratios.

7. One of the examiners showed me a report on IB Plc, which was favourable. This has been rejected by the CBN Governor, as it did not justify or warrant my removal.

8. Quite disturbed by this development, I decided to speak to Dr. Bukola Saraki, since he recommended Malam Lamido Sanusi’s appointment. He told me that the CBN Governor was unhappy with myself and Mrs. Ibru (of Oceanic Bank) because according to him, we had contributed N6bn to the Senate to block Lamido

Sanusi’s confirmation as CBN Governor. I refuted this allegation telling Dr. Saraki that my religion would never allow me to do such a thing, as no human can undo what God has ordered in Heaven.

9. I immediately booked an appointment to see Lamido Sanusi in the CBN and questioned him regarding the N6bn Senate bribery allegation. He said he had put that behind him, as “not all king makers in council will support the choice of a new Emir”. I once again reiterated my innocence, based on my religion, that the God I serve will never permit me to try to block someone else’s good fortune.

10. Later, I mentioned to Alhaji Aliko Dangote the strange repeated CBN examinations and the allegation by Lamido Sanusi. He promised to speak to him and ask him about the matter.

11. Surprisingly, Alhaji Dangote returned to say Lamido Sanusi revealed that he was told of the alleged bribe by Dr. Saraki, and that I even lobbied him to be the CBN Governor.

12. Apparently, it was Dr. Bukola Saraki inciting Sanusi against me, as a way of removing me and taking over IB Plc.

13. It has now become evident that both Dr. Saraki & Malam Sanusi used the opportunity of the worldwide financial crisis of 2008- 2009 to jump into certain banking institutions and take them over. The crisis had been acknowledged and was being well managed by Professor Chukwuma Soludo, the former CBN Governor.

The ENTIRE industry was affected, as others worldwide.

The Nigerian economy was hit by four economic catastrophe namely:

a. The oil price drop from $147 per barrel to $30. All oil importers refused to sell in a hurry at this new low price, so banks had to give them time for the price to improve.

b. The worldwide stock market collapsed and this led all foreign investors in the Nigerian stock exchange to hurriedly sell their shares. This further depreciated the Nigerian stock exchange index, also having an adverse effect on the banking industry.

c. The CBN, in response to crashing oil price, devalued the Naira by 40%. This meant importers with unsettled bills had to source more Naira to buy Dollar, and thus, put a strain on bank customers and the loan portfolio of the banks.

d. The sudden devaluation of the Naira by 40% caused a panic among overseas banks that had dollar placements with Nigerian banks. They immediately gave notice and withdrew their funds. IB Plc lost $1.2bn in this way.

Rather than the new CBN Governor to perform the role of ‘lender of last resort’, he used the crisis to take over banks for his mentor.

All these banks had prominent Nigerians waiting to buy them at “knock-down” or give-away” prices. However, the media altered the equation.

14. On the 14th of August 2009, without any discussion, Malam Sanusi issued me a letter of removal as CEO of IB Plc. He also removed all executive directors of the bank with armed police men.

15. The letter (copy attached), said that based on the examination he ordered on the 18th June, 2009, it is in the public interest for the CBN to intervene by taking over the bank.

16. Till today, no report of the examination has been made available to me, the management, or the Board of the bank. We had no opportunity to learn how the CBN came to its decision, nor were given an opportunity to respond to the examination report, as is the usual process.

17. My removal by Malam Sanusi was done in flagrant disregard of the legal provisions regarding the removal of bank directors (i.e. Section 35 of the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act, Cap. B4 Laws of the Federation, 2004) as there was no lawful special examination ordered into the affairs of Intercontinental Bank Plc, as required by law. Since no order for special examination of the bank’s affairs was signed by Malam Sanusi, as required of him by the law of this country, his order for my removal is, improper and unlawful.

18. The current CBN examination of May 2010, now says there is a N95bn loan over-provision, which means IB Plc was deliberately marked down previously.

19. Two lorry loads of police were sent to IB Plc to remove me. It was like a bad movie, a big surprise that a person can be driven away from a business he had started and nurtured for over 21 years in one hour. And without any opportunity to contest it.

20. I was surprised that the next morning (Saturday), all the papers carried personal interviews with Malam Sanusi, in which he accused all the CEOs of various misdeeds. This showed that it was pre-planned and well-rehearsed.

21. On the evening of 19th August, I received a call that Malam Sanusi under the powers that the late President had delegated to him, had ordered the EFCC, the Police and the SSS to arrest me. I also learned that two lorry loads of personnel were en route. I hurriedly left the house, though I could not believe that all this had transpired in the last 72 hours.

22. I then recalled a professional disagreement with Malam Sanusi while he was CEO of First Bank. Back then, I had discovered that his staff members were de-marketing IB Plc and I wrote to him concerning this. .

23. My immediate conclusion was that Dr. Saraki and Malam Sanusi wanted to take over IB Plc by fraudulent means, and that if I went into their custody, it could result in my death, in order to silence any opposition to their plans.

24. Mr. Mahmoud Lai Alabi was appointed by the CBN as the new CEO of IB Plc. Mr. Alabi is an employee of Dr. Saraki as chairman of Songa Farms and several development funds in the state. On resuming, his first task was to write off Dr. Saraki’s loans to the tune of N8.115bn (Papers & letters attached). He also wrote off loans totaling N32bn to friends of Dr. Saraki and Malam Sanusi.

All this, in a bank that they were meant to be rescuing. All these written-off loans had been classified as “good” and “performing” by the CBN examiners, and had been secured with properties in Ikoyi (Lagos), Victoria Island (Lagos), and Abuja. The

CBN examination report of May 2010 complained about this massive loan or “cash gift” to Dr. Saraki. Next, he recruited former Societe Generale staff as Executive Directors and loan managers (for example, Mr. Gbenga Alade). Mr. Alabi proceeded to sack the entire senior management of IB Plc and replaced them with former Societe Generale staff. It is clear, from these actions, that I was removed to smoothen the takeover of IB Plc for Dr. Saraki.

25. As at the time the shareholders’ appointed management was ousted by Malam Lamido Sanusi, IB Plc was not owing the CBN one kobo on the discount window. Also, IB Plc had Inter-Bank takings of N73 Billion. However, as at today under the CBN’s appointed management, IB Plc is now owing the CBN N100 Billion and owing other Banks N300 Billion, making a total deficit of N400 Billion after the purported intervention by the CBN.

26. It is rather curious that:

a. All the banks are yet to receive any examination report from the CBN to show areas of deficiencies.

b. The CEO and entire senior management were removed without the Board or shareholders being informed.

c. Without any criminal charges or reports, the CEOs were arrested and locked up – to prevent them from speaking to the media.

d. It was after locking them up that the EFCC started searching for possible offences (in my case, it took 4 months of searching for any offence to pin on me).

e. Mr. Alabi, the new CEO of Intercontinental Bank Plc, is an employee of Dr. Saraki (chairman of Songa Farms in Kwara). In fact, Dr. Saraki is running IB Plc by proxy.

f. Within two months of his appointment, Mr. Alabi wrote off N7bn of Dr. Saraki’s loans – the companies are Linkers, Dicetrade, Skyview Properties, and Joy Petroleum.

g. As the appointment of each senior management of IB Plc was being terminated, Mr. Alabi was recruiting and replacing them with former Societe Generale staff, in order to complete the take-over. For instance, the Executive Director of risk management brought into IB Plc (Mr. Gbenga Alade) is a former Societe Generale staff member.

h. Dr. Saraki has now used his political power to take over IB Plc after his failed peaceful merger attempts.

i. Malam Sanusi claims to have injected N100bn, (which is less that 10% of the IB Plc’s value), and as such now owns it 100%. This is a bank with a balance sheet of N1.6 trillion; 330 branches; 2 foreign subsidiaries; 10 well-established subsidiaries; 12,000 members of staff; and paidup capital of N230 billion. Where is the justice?

j. When Malam Sanusi initially injected N100bn into IB Plc, he wrote to the Board that it was a seven-year loan (copy attached). Why is he now trying desperately to sell the bank within a year of the loan?

27. I am appealing to the Attorney General and Minister of Justice to institute an independent investigation into the “so-called” banking reform of Malam Sanusi and the fraudulent N32 billion loan write-off.

28. I am also appealing to this government which believes in the rule of law to reverse the fraudulent take-over of Intercontinental

Bank Plc and return it to its Board, management and shareholders.

29. All the allegations against the banks’ CEOs should be independently investigated by the Attorney General’s office for fairness.

30. Even with the deliberate damage being done to the banks and their stock prices on a daily basis, if we are given six to nine months, the banks will be restructured to the normal, favourable and fair positions.

signed


ERASTUS B. O. AKINGBOLA