BREAKING: Breaking: Mohamed Salah announces Liverpool departure at end of Season

Follow Us: Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube
LATEST SCORES:
Loading live scores...
Metro

Excessive Charges: Company Directors Drag Bank To Court

Aside debt recovery suit instituted by Sterling Bank Plc against a limited liability company, Pokat Nigeria Limited and four of its directors at a Federal High Court in Lagos, South West Nigeria, the company and its two aggrieved directors, Mr. Tokunbo Akinsola and Dr. Akin Olowokere, have dragged the bank before a Lagos High Court claiming N500 million as special damages.

The plaintiffs are also demanding for N318,192,688.26 and $50,000 that was wrongly debited to their account as well as an apology from the bank.

In a statement of claim filed before the court, the plaintiffs averred that sometimes in April 2006, Sterling Bank approved in favour of Pokat company a vessel lease facility of N218.4 million as well as letter of credit and overdraft facility of N25 million on stated interest and commission rates.

The security for the loan was made up of the beneficial ownership of the vessel to be financed and valued at $2.1 million, legal mortgage on Mr. Tokunbo Akinsola’s property at 91, Igando-Ikotun Road and Dr. Akin Olowokere’s property at Plot 51, Ubiaja Crescent, Garki II, Abuja.

Due to damage of the vessel, the company was granted permission by the bank to sell the vessel to reduce its liability and sometimes in 2010 the company requested its accountant to examine its account with the bank from 2006 to 2010 and reconcile same.

It was the accountant’s report that revealed that the bank breached the duty of care it owed the company as its bankers as it negligently misstated the company’s statement of account which occasioned its financial loss.

The plaintiffs accused the bank of over charging, misstating and collecting from the company, commissions on turnover and value added tax on transactions that are exempted from COT and VAT;

contravening the applicable Central Bank of Nigeria’s guide to bank charges 2004 in respect of restructured loan terms in that it negligently misstated and charged interest rate of two per cent per annum instead of 0.25 per cent approved by the Central Bank of Nigeria; the bank failed to provide the company with detailed information such as schedule of loan payment and debt notes or advices which would have enabled the it to know and monitor the various debit entries into its accounts.

In consequence of the bank’s action, the company averred that at the end of November, 2010, it had suffered and lost, specifically, N318,192,688.26, a breakdown of which is as follows: excess commission on turnover and VAT N2,281,291.84; excess interest N51,990,920.24; excess fees N12,242,500.00; excess interest on loan N1,900,576.30; excess matured commercial paper debited N165,016,501.65l; accrued interest on excess charges N84,760,898.23.

The plaintiffs then averred that notwithstanding these overcharges, the bank is wrongly claiming that their company is indebted to it and had threatened to sell their properties used as collateral for the loans, noting that unless the bank is restrained by the court, it may take extra judicial measures to sell the properties.

In view of these, the plaintiffs’ claim against the defendants are as follows: The sum of N500 million being damages for the bank’s negligent misstatements of the Pokat Company’s account with the bank; an order directing the bank to pay the company the sum of N318,192,688.26 and $50,000 found to have been wrongly debited to the company’s account with apology; an order of perpetual injuction restraining the bank and its agents from selling or appointing a receiver in any manner whatsoever dealing on interfering with the properties of the plaintiffs used as collateral for the loan.

The claimants also contended that even the vessel involved in this transaction was not registered in the name of the bank and the suit filed before a Federal High Court in Lagos is not an admiralty matter and has nothing to do with chartered party.

 

Comments