Lawrence Duprey/Clico Thread.

[diamondtrim]

My word FS, espousing the vagaries of your profession, be it perceived or not, was not imagined to be a necessary inhabitor of this space. Nevertheless if you so desire then kudos to you.

It seems that we are both mired in professions of linear nature, For I, too, am a qualified financial adviser who has brokered many a deal that will very well supercede the Nigerian multi million pound transfers you seem to so skilled in.

I made my post in an effort to illustrate, in as basic a manner possible, the advantages and significant disadvantages of being greedy. to counter my post you seek to define what mutual funds etc are. Perhaps this was to increase the character count in your post.

Your assertion that "A company can't just say "we think we're gonna make 20% on this deal", it has to show how it arrived at that figure  etc" is not entirely accurate and again reveals your limited understanding of such endeavours.

Actually, this statement is accurate. A company does have to show how it reached those figures. What it can't show is that once the investment is funded, is that it doesn't adhere to its pre announced investment strategy

This very statement confirms my initial one that you werent entirely accurate. That you confirm my statement while simultaneously attempting to discredit it shows the bovine nature of your person.

Your finely qualified self, so experienced in multi million pound deals, should have garnered that greed being good is used in context. Perhaps you sought qualification in numbers and not letters, which allowed for your miniscule grasp and understanding of english.

"Paying oneself, as long as one is empowered to do so is not a crime" Actually, it kinda is. No director or executive should legally be empowered to pay themselves. All payments, including expenses, have to be signed off by a line manager or company secretary. In the Case of a company secretary, payments to themselves have to be approved by a director or chairman. These payments should then be justified at either a board meeting or a shareholders meeting and included in audited accounts. Without the above, these payments are classed as misappropriated funds, larceny or even theft.

Yet another example of your stupidity. There is no 'kinda' crime. Perhaps you kinda brokered multi million pound kinda deals. I agree with you that no director or executive should be empowered to pay themselves etc. have you stopped to consider, then realise, if not only by the testimony of Carballo himself, that this was indeed the case at Clico. Unfortunate it is, but true.

You riddle your responses with semantics and judgements loosely based on your supremely qualified self. Yet you consistently show that you know little more than what is made available for you to interpret.

I said at the very first post that CL were not properly supervised whether by the Central Bank or the Supervisor of Insurance (I paraphrase). Perhaps you missed that as well. Maybe it would have been better understood had I included it in a multi million pound prospectus.

The heads at CL did not steal. They TOOK. Took what they were allowed to. It is not fair to the policy holders, but they did what the wer allowed to do. Crime? No....or maybe, to those of us so finely qualified....a kinda crime.

Greed is good did indeed present itself as a line in the movie Wall Street. However it is a credo that transcends film. Like it or not, it remains true. I'd like to think that the vast majority of us do not consciously allow greed to guide us, but the fact is that it does. It may not drive us to do the immoral or illegal, but it definitely drives us.

Why did you, FS, 'qualify' yourself....to move from a $100 salary to a $1000 salary? Or merely to share this obviously unique achievement on the forum. Why do we invest? For our capital to remain the same? Why do we buy houses, cars, etc? Your tendency to look at things at surface value despite your multi million pound qualification is disturbing, yet understood. Greed is good....take it literally idiot..........smh

[congo]

Clico's failure rests on the weakness of the government and legislation of this country. The politicians fail the shareholders of this country. On one side Duprey paying for Panday's children education and giving gifts. On the other hand Monteil is Pnm treasurer. Everybody high up knew something was up with Cl financial but to afraid to go against Duprey and them. All of them culpable in this. No if's about it.

[Football supporter]

FS, how you could write all that given what is known today about de financial crisis over the last few years, the ponzi scheme known as "securitization" and de incentive structures for CEOs of financial corporations? you are out of date hoss.

These schemes are illegal, or at least immoral and there are supposedly implements in place to expose and prevent them. There will always be slick operators who present schemes to get rich quick and circumvent regulations. as they say, a fool and his money are easily parted. However, small investors should usually find they are protected when invested in pension funds, pooled investments, banks etc.

The incentives are another issue. Bonuses awarded by boards are completely legal. However, it is the duty of the shareholders of those companies to oppose these bonuses and, if need be, table a motion of no confidence in directors and elect new ones in their place. The problem with CLICO was that the Duprey family and their associates were the major shareholders and couldn't be removed. This should have raised concerns with investment houses, regulators etc.

[Football supporter]

Clico's failure rests on the weakness of the government and legislation of this country. The politicians fail the shareholders of this country. On one side Duprey paying for Panday's children education and giving gifts. On the other hand Monteil is Pnm treasurer. Everybody high up knew something was up with Cl financial but to afraid to go against Duprey and them. All of them culpable in this. No if's about it.

 

[Bakes]

Football Supporter.....your response betrays that which you so quickly attempted to impose upon me.....a complete and utter lack of comprehension. Further to that, you seem to possess an innate tendency to misconstrue the context of postings. Nevertheless, I will attempt to elude your obvious ignorance and seek to populate your mind with the explanation that so obviously sailed over a shallow mind.

Mutual funds, savings plans, endowments etc are all symptomatic of greed. Perhaps it is here that I lost you. Greed is good, for it is this greed which allows us to provide for our families and futures. If you Football Supporter, do not understand this, then not only are you below the intellectual poverty line, but you also suffer from an ailment that knows no cure - indefatigable idiocy. The problem arises when individuals become so greedy that mutual funds et al no longer satisfy them and they actively seek increased revenues by whatever means they see fit.

My feelings for JW are well known and I hide behind them not. We live in a capitalist society where greed is the name of the game and those who are better equipped to handle,and manipulate it are the victors. Like it or not, immorality is not a crime. Seedy business deals is not a crime. Corporate advantage is not a crime. Paying oneself, as long as one is empowered to do so is not a crime. What it is, however, is a shame. A blatant lack of respect and consideration for investors. How will you suggest one be punished for such indiscretions? Only morals can guide or lead to retribution. Clearly, the heads of CL do not have morals. As does JW. And I applaud them wholeheartedly.

I myself had funds invested in CLICO...not a significant amount by any means mind you, but enough to prompt a withdrawal of same funds upon hearing of the numerous acquistions by the CL Financial Group. Acquistions that due diligence on the part of any investor would have led to the more than credible hypothesis that so many ventures in such a short space of time would have been a strain on the liquid resources of CLF and as such would have made payments to investors upon maturity dates a bit difficult.


Your assertion that "A company can't just say "we think we're gonna make 20% on this deal", it has to show how it arrived at that figure  etc" is not entirely accurate and again reveals your limited understanding of such endeavours. For that I fault you not. A prospectus  shows past performance and future projected performance. It by no means guarantees any of the figures that are illustrated. Investore rarely, if at all, ask to see how and where funds were invested in years prior. If you Football Supporter, are a shreholder at a bank or credit union, do you question the validity of the published annual reports of the banks? Do you, Football Supporter question the accuracy of your credit union dividend cheque? Of course if an institution has been accurate in its projections over a specific period, it is easy to buy into the notion that they would perform similarly in the future.

I take pride in not only Trinis, but anyone's ability to ride the proverbial jackass until its dead.

Never in the course of human history has so little been said by so much.

FS, how you could write all that given what is known today about de financial crisis over the last few years, the ponzi scheme known as "securitization" and de incentive structures for CEOs of financial corporations? you are out of date hoss.

Shouldn't you be preparing your kindergarten lesson plans for Monday... or maybe arranging the toys in the romper room?

[Brownsugar]

Ah trying to find links or radio stations covering this thing but with no luck.  I can't leave mih desk to watch de TV in de kitchen and Gita Sakal supposed to start testifying today.  I curious as to what she have to say.....

I eh know what kinda search engine dey have here in work, but de thing giving me all kinda results when I search for this topic but not taking me to the website (I think one was set up for the COE).  Help a sistah out please.....and thanks.....

[Michael-j]

http://www.clfhcuenquiry.org/

[Brownsugar]

http://www.clfhcuenquiry.org/

Grazie, grazie.......all yuh better than bing, google et al.....

[dtool]

Just got this and with  the Clico enquiry thought you might find it of interest.
    Skip the first story and pictures....scroll down to the second set


http://monacorevue.com/events/sd1070528.html

[rotatopoti3]

Been there but not in that capacity....

[Flex]

MAD AT DUPREY
Policyholders: No-show by former CL chairman at enquiry a ‘travesty of justice’
By Joel Julien

CLICO policyholders are “mad vex”.

They yesterday described as a “travesty of justice” the decision of former CL Financial executive chairman Lawrence Duprey and group financial director Andre Monteil to not testify at the commission of enquiry into the failure of CL Financial and the Hindu Credit Union (HCU), and lack of sanctions against Duprey and the slap on the wrist for Monteil.

The enquiry’s evidence hearings officially ended yesterday, according to lone commissioner Sir Anthony Colman.

But Attorney General Anand Ram­logan yesterday said the Policyholders Group can rest assured that the commission is an “important step­ping stone in the pursuit of justice. Sir Anthony’s report would provide an important guidance to the State on the way forward. The journey has only just begun,” Ramlogan said.

In a news release issued yesterday, the Policyholders Group (CPG) stated: “CLICO policyholders are not only disappointed, they (are) “mad vex” since they feel as though they have now been cheated twice.

“The first time was when they were told by the Government that they could not get back their life savings, and now that they were being told by the pre­sident-appointed commission of enquiry that Mes­srs Duprey and Monteil, the two central figures who according to the commission would be key to assisting them in understanding what really happened to their (policyholders) money, have essentially thumbed their noses at policyholders and the citizens of Tri­ni­dad and Tobago by not only blatantly refusing to appear before the commission but have also bold-facedly and shamelessly refused to answer any questions sent to them by the commission’s attorneys,” the release stated.

The CPG said the non-appearance by Duprey and Monteil was not only a travesty of justice but added further insult to injury.

“This is indeed unforgivable and not just a travesty of justice but adds further insult to injury, some may even say amounts to a colossal waste of time, resources and taxpayers’ money. Accordingly, it also brings in to question the efficacy of the Commissions of Enquiry Act, in so far as the statute appears to be impotent to treat with persons who may wish to escape scrutiny and accountability,” the release stated.

 Asked whether the commission of enquiry was a waste of time, resources and money, Ramlogan said it was a “resounding success”.

He said the HCU matter was completely dealt with because Harry Harnarine gave testimony. He said he was waiting “with bated breath” on the report because he had “on his radar” the possibility of civil proceedings against many individuals and entities that may have committed civil wrong.

“I am in the process of preparing proceedings against the former HCU board. And on CLICO, I am examining what has emerged thus far and awaiting Sir Anthony’s recommendations to see whether there is action­able wrong-doing by the external auditors, the executive management and board of CL Financial, Clico and CIB”, he said. He added the fact that some persons had concerns and fears about giving evidence underscored the probing nature of the commission.

“It is my estimation that the criminal investigation would benefit in no small measure from Sir Anthony Colman’s report,” he said.

The CPG called for an amendment to the Commission of Enquiry Act “to address this unfortunate and unjust state of affairs”.

Criminal proceedings have been taken against those who failed to respond to subpoenas issued by the enquiry, excluding Duprey, who lives out of the jurisdiction.

Five more persons related to the Hindu Credit Union (HCU) aspect of the enquiry who failed to respond to subpoenas were added to the list of those who criminal proceedings have been taken against.

The five are former HCU financial consultant Jameel Ali, attorney Ashvani Mahabir, chief financial officer Gawtam Ramnanan and treasurer Yadwanath Lalchan and Dave Jagpat.

In the commission of enquiry into the attempted coup, the main protagonist, Yasin Abu Bakr, also did not testify. Ramlogan said Bakr’s appearance or non-appearance was for the historical record. Noting that no prosecution could have arisen from this commission, he said those who came before it gave “life and meaning to the untold events of July 1990”.

“I have no doubt that Sir David Simmons would prepare an insightful, analytical and useful report that would guide the Government”, he said.

—with reporting by Ria Taitt

[Jah Gol]

That's the way persons accused of white collar crimes in T&T behave.  They ignore, deny or simply subvert the law altogether. 

[asylumseeker]

That's the way persons accused of white collar crimes in T&T behave.  They ignore, deny or simply subvert the law altogether.

The same man who invented the term 'white lie' invented 'white-collar crime' ... ergo ...

[Bakes]

That's the way persons accused of white collar crimes in T&T behave.  They ignore, deny or simply subvert the law altogether. 

Except Duprey did none of those in reference to this particular incident.  The key word here is "accused"... followed closely by "law".  Until he has a legal obligation to show up, why should he?

[Jah Gol]

That's the way persons accused of white collar crimes in T&T behave.  They ignore, deny or simply subvert the law altogether. 

Except Duprey did none of those in reference to this particular incident.  The key word here is "accused"... followed closely by "law".  Until he has a legal obligation to show up, why should he?

I never disputed that he wasn't  obligated to attend I was pointing to a general culture of disregard for legal  proceedings of this type. I could add Panday, Monteil , Ish, Steve and Jack to the list of 'offenders' .

Even if he isn't legally obligated to attend considering all of the fallout caused by the demise of the conglomerate he appears to have no interest in even entertaining any examination of his stewardship of an organization that received a massive public bailout.

[Bakes]

I never disputed that he wasn't  obligated to attend I was pointing to a general culture of disregard for legal  proceedings of this type. I could add Panday, Monteil , Ish, Steve and Jack to the list of 'offenders' .

Even if he isn't legally obligated to attend considering all of the fallout caused by the demise of the conglomerate he appears to have no interest in even entertaining any examination of his stewardship of an organization that received a massive public bailout.

This is not a legal proceeding.  What penalties attach to the findings of this "inquiry"?  And again, why should Duprey leave his home and comforts in South Florida to fly to Trinidad to take part in this pappyshow?  If they have evidence on him let them subpoena/extradict him.

[Flex]

AG claim upsets Duprey’s lawyer - ‘Back off’
Anand: See you in court
By Raphael John-Lall (Guardian).

Attorney General Anand Ramlogan’s use of the term “wanted man” to describe former CL Financial chairman Lawrence Duprey is “illogical and inexplicable,” said Duprey’s attorney Lionel Luckhoo in a letter to the AG yesterday. Describing Ramlogan’s comments as “outrageous,” he warned that Duprey might have to consider seeking an injunction to stop the AG making “public statements with the weight of your office behind you that give the impression that you have already determined the outcome.”

However, in an immediate response Ramlogan said he was prepared to defend his claim and through his lawyer, Donna Prowell, told Luckhoo that he was ready to do to court if necessary. Luckhoo yesterday found it necessary to remind the AG several times of his constitutional role, summing up: “I am sure that you need no reminding that the role of the Attorney General does not stretch to being prosecutor, judge and jury.”

He also admonished Ramlogan: “You are to be reminded, Attorney General, that you are a leader in the legal profession and should be setting examples of integrity and rectitude. Your interference is contrary to those tenets of your role.” On Thursday, in a post-Cabinet news conference at the Diplomatic Centre, St Ann’s, Ramlogan had said Duprey’s failure to appear at the commission of enquiry, where he is the “central protagonist,” made him a “wanted man.”

Luckhoo complained: “The use by you of the pejorative phrase ‘wanted man’ is frankly both illogical and inexplicable. The phrase has of course been seized by many newspaper reports.”

Luckhoo, therefore, told Ramlogan he was issuing his letter to the media in view of the prominent coverage Ramlogan’s comments had received. He noted that no criminal proceedings had been instituted against Duprey. “There is at this stage an enquiry which should continue without any political interference and without seeking to pre-judge its results or compromise the constitutional fair-trial rights that are possessed by all in this country.”

He also accused the Attorney General of breaking the promise he made to the people of T&T when he took office, and of usurping the role of the commissioner of the enquiry. “You have arrogated unto yourself the role of the commissioner, who, it is hoped, would consider all the evidence and the submissions that he has yet to receive before making any public pronouncements, which is further hoped and indeed expected to be within his terms of office.”

Luckhoo also pointed out that it is the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) who exercises powers with regard to the institution and undertaking of criminal proceedings. “You will of course fully appreciate that...your office and function is separate and distinct from that of the DPP,” he said. He suggested that Ramlogan should follow the example of the DPP.

“You might consider taking a lesson from another office-holder—the DPP—who apart from perfectly properly confirming that he has asked for an investigation, has sought to do all he can to protect the fair-trial rights of those under investigation.” Luckhoo also said his client Duprey had co-operated fully with the enquiry and it was untrue to state otherwise.

“It is incumbent on me to correct this view by stating unequivocally that my client co-operated with the enquiry process, save where same seemed to conflict with his fair-trial rights,” he added. He said Duprey was “astounded” by what seemed to be the Attorney General’s criticism of the police for failing to arrest Duprey. “So far as I am aware, the Police Service were not asked to effect service of a witness summons/subpoena,” Luckhoo said.

“Indeed they could not as Mr Duprey has been ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction for a number of years and has not been to Trinidad since the middle of 2009. “It would not then have been possible therefore to serve him with legal process within the jurisdiction and service abroad of a witness summons would never be an acceptable process for a commission of enquiry, as you will know!”

[asylumseeker]

What's the last thing upon which Anand has correctly pronounced?

[TdotTrini]

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2013-05-04/ag-responds-luckoo%E2%80%99s-letter

AG responds to Luckoo’s letter
Published:
Saturday, May 4, 2013
 
 
Dear Sir:
We act herein for the Honourable Attorney General, Senator Anand Ramlogan SC. Your letter of even date addressed our client has been passed to us with instructions to reply thereto.
 
 
Our instructions are as follows:-
1. Our client did in fact state that had Mr Duprey been served with the sub-poena to attend and give evidence at the Coleman Commission of Enquiry (COI) and failed to show, he would have been liable to the criminal process. In such circumstances, your client risked prosecution for a criminal offence in accordance with the Commissions of Enquiry Act, Chapter 19:01, Section 12 and would have most certainly been a wanted man.
 
2. Furthermore, it is common knowledge that your client was a material witness who was required to attend this COI. He was wanted by the Commission for this purpose. That you would take objection to the description of your client as the ‘central protagonist’ who was a wanted man in this regard is strange and illogical.
 
3. Our client rejects the assertion that his description of Mr Duprey as the ‘central protagonist’ amounts to an unlawful arrogation or usurpation of the role of the Commissioner. Mr Duprey was in fact the head of the CLICO empire. He was the executive Chairman of CL Financial and Chairman of CLICO. This description is therefore justified and fairly obvious to the average man-in-the-street.
 
4. Our client is well aware of the fact that the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP)  is constitutionally responsible for criminal prosecutions but wishes to draw your attention to the fact that the DPP has indicated that the COI has the status of a court of law and hence possesses the power to initiate criminal prosecution for non-attendance under section 12.
 
 
Whilst it is noteworthy that you remember our client’s enviable track record in defending the constitutional rights of hundreds of citizens from all walks of life, it is precisely this experience with the less fortunate in our society that has led to his personal and official concern about the failure and/or refusal of Mr Duprey to attend the COI.
 
5. With respect to your query about what Mr Ramlogan’s response would have been had he been Mr Duprey’s lawyer, we are instructed that he would have advised his client to return home to the country where he amassed his billion-dollar fortune and accept service of the Witness Summons.
 
 
He would have further advised him that he should appear and give evidence before the COI and allow himself to be cross-examined where appropriate. He would have also advised him that to do otherwise, would have created the impression that he was being evasive and un-cooperative and led ordinary people to wonder if he had something to hide. In short, he would have advised to face the music and clear his good name.
 
6. Our client is happy that you took time to visit his Ministry’s website. His commitment to ‘justice for all’ however, is buttressed by his duty to protect and act in the public interest.
 
7. As one of the Attorney’s representing Mr Duprey, you would have no doubt advised him that Sir Anthony Coleman QC had issued a Witness Summons to secure his attendance. We are instructed that this summons was also served on your client’s brother, Mr Peter Duprey by Constable Jason Marine #18444 on the 28th February, 2012 in an attempt to ensure that he is aware that his attendance was required.
 
 
It would be unfortunate if both your good self and Mr Duprey’s brother failed to bring the fact of this Witness Summons to his attention. You did not state clearly whether your client was in fact made aware that the COI had issued a Witness Summons to secure his attendance.
 
8. In light of your decision to release your letter to the media, perhaps you can clarify this important issue as there are many who would want to know if Mr Duprey was in fact aware of the Witness Summons and deliberately avoided or refused to come to Trinidad and Tobago to facilitate service.
 
9. That the fact that you are ‘astounded’ that the police was directed to serve the Witness Summons on Mr Duprey is perhaps a reflection on your lack of knowledge of the basic procedures utilised by all Commissions. We notice that you were careful to state that your client has “NOT been to Trinidad since the middle of 2009”.
 
 
We would be grateful if you could clarify whether this means that he has been visiting Tobago as we are instructed that there are rumours that he has been visiting Tobago in the company of some friends aboard a yacht.  Service of the Witness Summons upon him in Tobago, we are sure you would agree, would have been quite lawful as we are a twin island republic and the jurisdiction of the COI extends to Tobago.
 
In closing, we note that your letter does not purport to be a pre-action letter in accordance with the Pre-action Protocol Direction of the Civil Proceeding Rules (1998 as amended). Indeed, you do not allege defamation of any kind. Rest assured that our client stands ready, poised, willing and able to defend his statements. Mr Ramlogan has instructed us to accept service on his behalf of any court proceedings you may wish to initiate. Be guided accordingly.

[asylumseeker]

5. With respect to your query about what Mr Ramlogan’s response would have been had he been Mr Duprey’s lawyer, we are instructed that he would have advised his client to return home to the country where he amassed his billion-dollar fortune and accept service of the Witness Summons.

No need to reload ... gunshot. heheheh

[Flex]

$25b and counting
Cost to taxpayers of CLICO bailout and enquiry
By Asha Javeed (Express).

Sir Anthony Colman’s multi-company Commission of Enquiry (CoE), which principally focused on the illiquid insurance company CLICO and the Hindu Credit Union (HCU), has cost taxpayers $36.2 million.

However, Government’s intervention into the CLICO fiasco has cost taxpayers more than $25 billion.

The 24-month long CoE exercise, which came to an end last Thursday at Winsure Building in Port of Spain, had 85 sitting days, 23 parties, 77 lawyers, 57 witnesses, 50 subpoenas and five million pages of documents.

The Sunday Express obtained a break-down of the $36.2 million cost which comes from the budget of the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM):

Sir Anthony Colman’s fees—$6,852,937.44
Legal Fees—$22,240,363.77
Salaries—$1,804,149.11
Administrative Cost and
Incidentals—$5,370,854.67

The legal fees were divided among lead counsels—Peter Carter QC and Edwin Glasgow QC; Junior counsels—Marion Mac Gregor Mason, Gerald Ian Ramdeen, Shankar Bidaisee; Instructing attorneys—Celeste Jules and Varun Debideen; and special adviser Ian Marshall.

All parties to the CoE, who were mostly represented by senior counsel, would have been paid separate legal bills.

“While the CoE has been costly, it is significantly less than expected because I am a tough negotiator on consultancy fees,” said Attorney General Anand Ramlogan, in response to questions from the Sunday Express yesterday.

Ramlogan pointed out to the Sunday Express that the sum was inclusive of two major companies and was significantly less than the Uff Commission of Enquiry of 2009, which cost the State about $60 million.

The cost of the commission is exclusive of the Government’s bailout of Lawrence Duprey’s cash-strapped empire.

The Sunday Express obtained figures for the bailout which state:

Funds Disbursed:

1. CLICO bailout—$5.6 billion
2. Short Term Investment Products (STIPS)—EFPA, BAT and Mutual Funds—$11.365 billion
3. British American—$0.1 billion
4. CLICO Investment Bank—$1.87 billion
5. CMMB—$0.666 billion
Total—$19.6 billion

Contingencies:

1. CIB’s INCs—$2.16 billion
2. EFPA judgment dated March 2013—$1.3 billion
3. CMMB—$0.835 billion
Total—$4.296 billion

The Sunday Express understands that $2 billion has been re-allocated for the capitalisation of Atrius, the company which CLICO will be re-branded into in the coming months.

In addition, the Government has made provisions of US$55 million for a judicial matter in the Bahamas and has spent US$24 million from the Caricom Petroleum Fund to assist the islands following the collapse of CLICO.

Those sums are also exclusive of legal fees in the CLICO matter.

Last October, Ramlogan revealed in Parliament that the Central Bank had paid some $82.8 million to US forensic investigator Bob Lindquist for investigations.

Ramlogan said Lindquist, between April 2009 to November 2010, received $46 million; February 2011 to August 20, 2011—$10 million; February to September 2011—$17 million; November 2010 to September 2011—$9.8 million; for the grand total of $82.8 million.

Now that the CoE has been concluded, Colman has three months in which to submit his final report to the Government.

Colman’s terms of reference include: “whether there are any grounds for criminal and civil proceedings against any person or entity; whether criminal proceedings should therefore be recommended to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for his consideration; and whether civil proceedings should be recommended to the Attorney General for his consideration.”

Last November, Colman’s Enquiry was almost derailed after DPP Roger Gaspard announced that a criminal investigation against former CLICO executives and several corporate entities aligned to the collapsed insurance giant had begun, almost three years after the Government had stepped in to bail out the company to protect the country’s financial system from systemic risk.

Gaspard had written to Colman expressing concern about how the public enquiry, which had been 19 months old at the time, could impact on the criminal investigation by the police.

“I am particularly concerned that an otherwise credible prosecution might be stopped by the court on the grounds that a defendant’s right to a fair trial had been fatally compromised by the publicity attendant upon your enquiry. As such, I shall be issuing a press release warning the media against the publication of any material which may jeopardise the police investigation and any potential criminal proceedings,” Gaspard had said.

Gaspard had also made a request to Ramlogan to have the CoE discontinued.

Despite Gaspard’s request, the enquiry continued, but witnesses attached to CLICO failed to turn up concerned that they would incriminate themselves.

Last week, former CL Financial chairman Lawrence Duprey and its former financial director Andre Monteil were among the list of no-shows at the CoE.

Questioned yesterday on whether Gaspard’s action had impacted on the integrity of the CoE, Ramlogan said: “The announcement by the DPP of a criminal investigation when the CoE was 90 per cent complete was significant. The Government thought it best to leave these concerns to the discretion of the commissioner. While the criminal investigation could have hijacked the work of the commission, it was too far advanced to be any detriment.”

As the Anti-Corruption Investigation Bureau and the Fraud Squad of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service pursue its criminal investigation, the Central Bank has already mounted and instituted civil proceedings against three former CL Financial executives—Duprey, Monteil and former corporate secretary Gita Sakal.

Asked whether the CoE still had value given the public’s dissatisfaction that key players have not yet been brought to justice, Ramlogan responded: “As AG, depending on the findings and the recommendations, it is my intention to pursue all options.”

He explained that when the Government purchased the rights of the depositors, the State stepped into their shoes and the State will pursue all avenues at its disposal to seek justice.

“While I have no control over the criminal process, I do have constitutional jurisdiction in civil law which I can invoke for social justice,” he said.

“Once I have the report, in the coming months I expect an avalanche of activity in the pursuit of justice.

“The collapse of CLICO has burned a hole in the Treasury the size of a national budget. When the Government assumed office there was a stony wall of silence and inaction with regard to the CLICO fiasco,” explained Ramlogan.

He observed that the DPP was never presented with any police investigation report and, in the circumstances, the Government appointed a CoE.

Apart from lack of witnesses, the CoE has had its fair share of challenges—attorneys objected to the releasing of certain documents forcing the commission to adhere to a confidentiality protocol, and the Ministry of Finance’s lawyers were changed mid-commission.

But the commission has produced startling revelations about a company which was funded principally by policyholders’ money—million-dollar salaries paid to executives; companies created by executives and hiving off millions in contracts; and blatant breaches in governance.

[Conquering Lion]

So Duprey, Sakal, Monteil & Co take money and like deyself................it wrong, it bad, shameful, sad, greedy, call it whatever is d best/worst adjective yuh could find.

Dey all operated within the parameters they were allowed. If d Central Bank guided by d big goat Ewart Williams and d Supervisor of Insurance refuse to check Clico, CLF and whoever else, den Duprey and he team shoulda take ALL d damn money!

If I wukkin in a company dat allowin me to approve payments to myself without secondary questionin...i takin more dan 30m. I takin all. It could have commission of inquiry from here to Timbuktu....we all know nutttin comin out of it. D only 'crime' dese ppl could be charged wit is greed and wickedness.....and d kinda money den gone wit makin it easy to live wit dem tags.

CL aint collapse overnight....when folks was reading how Duplrey makin all kinda fancy deal dey wasnt concerned with how he acquirin d funds to do it...nah...dey greedy too....so dey invest more and more in CL hopin to get piece of d pie. Dey wanna put in 1m to get back 1.5 and so on. Investors was greedy too....jus dat Duprey was smarter dan all ah dem

Dais y ah like Jack Warner and dem.....in trinidad d name of d game is greediest win. And jack and Duprey and dem is d greediest bitches in d world...dat is no exaggeration. So congrats to dem and all d greedy investors hull allyuh tail....allyuh loss d game.....yuh cyah be a greedy fish and wanna jump in a pond wit greedier shark

Herein lies the dilemma.....no one really wants to accept the plain truth for what it is. As 3Canal say.."If iz licks yuh like....den take licks!"  Nobody was complaining when they were sitting on a presumably nice (but false) portfolio and now complaining when the mark buss.....it's the same as in Madoff, but the only difference is in the USA there are laws, oversight and enforcement...especially when it comes to messing with other people's money. When mark buss THEY GOING AFTER THE MONEY!...plain and simple

In Trinidad a setta men pose up in dey suit and we asking ah setta questions, but nobody really going after the money. We talking vision 2020 but basic things like law enforcement, taxation and revenue collection lacking. That is why Duprey and company could do what dey like.

I hear people talking about govenment should protect the population and ensure things in place (which is somewhat true).......but was that not one of the reasons that Unit Trust Corp was set up in the first place? People get ketch in  their greed!

Duprey and dem know their people well..... (all talk, no action and easy prey to the next flashiest thing) so doh blame dem.....and if unreally want your money start protesting or using yuh voting finger

[Flex]

Duprey: I’ve not seen T&T in 3 years.
By DENYSE RENNE (Guardian).

Former CL Financial chairman Lawrence Duprey maintains he hasn’t been to T&T since June 2009. Duprey is also demanding an apology from Attorney General Anand Ramlogan for what he says is the misinformation Ramlogan is disseminating about his whereabouts. “I left T&T in June 2009 and I have never returned…June 2009, that's when I left,” he said.

Duprey, 79, was speaking exclusively with the T&T Guardian in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, USA. He reiterated the call he made through his attorney recently for an apology from Ramlogan over the suggestion he had been back in T&T during the period of the commission of enquiry into the collapse of Clico and its subsidiaries.

Duprey said he is now involved in consultancy, which sees him working in different countries worldwide. His consultancy involves restructuring societies. He said: “There’s a lot of work outside here, I don’t have to come back home, or what used to be home, and I don’t live in Trinidad…Don’t let anyone fool you. I have never lived in Trinidad.” He explained that life as an international consultant does not confine him to one location and he has always lived overseas.

Duprey was responding to questions posed by the T&T Guardian after statements by Ramlogan that Duprey was a “wanted man,” but had entered the country and slipped back out without being detected. Ramlogan’s statements came during a post-Cabinet press briefing on May 2. He told the media that Duprey had entered T&T and left without a summons being served on him to appear before the recently-concluded commission of enquiry into the collapse of Clico.

Duprey, through his attorneys Andrew Mitchell, QC, and Lionel Luckhoo, has also denied being on board a yacht in Tobago, or Trinidad, or in T&T waters. His lawyers say the rumours being perpetuated by Ramlogan detract from “the constitutional rights, justice, fairness and equality to all to which my client, in common with all persons, is entitled.” In an immediate response to Ramlogan’s claims, through Luckhoo, Duprey had denied being in T&T.

The AG’s attorney, Donna Prowell, then asked whether that meant Duprey had been in Tobago. Prowell, in her letter to Luckhoo, dated May 3, said there had been rumours that Duprey had been visiting Tobago with friends aboard a yacht. In that case, she said, a summons could have been served on him there.

In his second letter to the AG, Luckhoo explained: “When I stated that Mr Duprey has been ordinarily resident out of the jurisdiction for a number of years and has not been to Trinidad since the middle of 2009, it should be taken to mean not been to T&T or within the maritime jurisdiction of same since 2009.”

During the interview with the T&T Guardian, Duprey said he has been working in the Middle East and other countries since 2009. Documentation the T&T Guardian obtained corroborated his claim that he had not been in T&T since 2009. Ramlogan, through Prowell, also said a witness summons was served on Duprey’s brother Peter Duprey by PC Jason Marine on February 28, 2012. But Duprey’s lawyer says his client doesn’t have a brother named Peter.
 
Luckhoo, in a second letter to Ramlogan on May 7, and obtained by the T&T Guardian, said Ramlogan’s utterances and his labelling of Duprey as a “wanted man” remained “opaque and misconceived.”

Demanding an apology, Luckhoo wrote: “I am fortified in the expectation that your client shall ensure that investigations (concerning among other things ‘Mr Peter Duprey’) are concluded with the appropriate urgency—and that he intends to disclose the results of same to the public. When it becomes apparent that my client has not entered the twin-island republic clandestinely, I trust that yours will issue the appropriate apology to the police, the immigration authorities, and of course to my client.”

At the press briefing, Ramlogan chastised the police, saying that the Government would want answers “as to whether or not the Police Service acted quickly when they knew the commission had issued a summons (for Duprey).” The AG said immigration authorities ought to have been alerted so that Duprey’s name was red-flagged in the system.

Duprey, through Luckhoo, wrote to the AG on May 3, calling Ramlogan’s statements “illogical and outrageous,” and saying although there was an ongoing criminal investigation into the affairs of Clico, Duprey had not been charged and there were no criminal proceedings against him. Duprey also responded to the Clico Policyholders Group, which has suggested he return the Chaconia gold medal bestowed on him in 1999.

He was awarded the nation’s second highest honour by then President ANR Robinson for service in the field of business. “If they want it, take it...I don’t need it,” Duprey said. The policyholders, in a media release and letters to the editors of newspapers, called on Duprey to give up the medal because of his involvement in the collapse of the CL Financial group and his failure to attend the commission of enquiry into the collapse of Clico.

[asylumseeker]

He was awarded the nation’s second highest honour by then President ANR Robinson for service in the field of business. “If they want it, take it...I don’t need it,” Duprey said. The policyholders, in a media release and letters to the editors of newspapers, called on Duprey to give up the medal because of his involvement in the collapse of the CL Financial group and his failure to attend the commission of enquiry into the collapse of Clico.

He shouldn't have commented on the national honour ... at least, not in this manner.

[Flex]

Clico pays government $7 billion
By Suzanne Sheppard (Guardian)

Central Bank Governor Jwala Rambarran has announced a five-point plan to settle outstanding debts owed by the Colonial Life Insurance Company (CLICO) to policyholders and the government.

Speaking at a press conference yesterday, Rambarran said the resolution plan "will bring closure to this deep financial wound inflicted on thousands of CLICO policy holders and Central Bank is doing all in its power and more to ensure that such a financial trauma will never again be inflicted on you."

He said the company is now in a position to make its first payment of just over $7 billion to the T&T Government. This amounts to more than 40 per cent of CLICO’s debt to government.

This development comes almost six years after the collapse of the insurance empire in 2009 which prompted government to embark on a rescue plan involving billions of dollars.

Rambarran said government, which is CLICO's biggest creditor, received $4 billion in cash today, with settlement of the remaining $3 billion in lieu of cash through the transfer of three CLICO assets—Angostura Holdings Limited, CL World Brands Limited and Home Construction Limited.

In addition, CLICO's 1,500 short-term institutional products (STIP) policyholders will receive 85 per cent of their claims totaling $950 million in three months and will receive the remainider after the sale of Methanol Holdings International Limited (MHTL).

“These two payments are being made according to the terms of the CLICO Resolution Plan developed by Central Bank and finalised last week Monday after consultation with the Minister of Finance and the Economy, as required under Section 44F of the Central Bank Act.

“Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan was developed to repay all creditors and policyholders and to ultimately facilitate the transfer of CLICO’s traditional insurance portfolio to a suitable buyer by ensuring that enough appropriate assets are put aside,” Rambarran said.

He said CLICO’s December 2014 management accounts show that there are now sufficient assets to pay the company’s liabilities in its statutory fund. This is mainly due to the sale of its shareholding in MHTL last October ,which added just over $7 billion in cash to the statutory fund.

Rambarran said in the first phase of the payment plan, Government has been paid $4 billion in cash. STIP policy holders, who did not take up Government’s offer to be paid through bonds and shares in the CLICO Investment Fund, will be paid $950 million of the just over $1 billion owed to them.

“Government and these 1,500 policyholders will receive first priority for payment as their policy obligations are accorded legal protection through assets held in CLICO’s Statutory Fund. Of course, CLICO’s 100,000 odd traditional policyholders have equal protection through the Statutory Fund and our process has ensured that sufficient assets are available to meet their obligations,” he said.

The second phase will cover the remaining 15 per cent of claims from Government and the balance of non-assenting STIPs policyholders and will be funded from the proceeds of the sale of CLICO’s 57 per cent shareholding in Methanol Holdings (International) Limited (MHIL) for an estimated $2 billion.

In the third phase, will cover the company’s liabilities to non-Government mutual fund holders and non-residential STIPs policyholders.

Rambarran said CLICO’s obligations to the group that did not accept the Government’s voluntary offer amount to about $410 million. This payout will be funded by the sale of CLICO’s 7 per cent shareholding in Republic Bank Limited and the sale of other assets.

The Central Bank Governor assured that CLICO’s 18,000 assenting policyholders “will not be made worse off” for accepting Government’s offer and Finance and the Economy Minister Larry Howai will announcement arrangements for that group shortly.

He said in the case of British American Insurance Company Trinidad Limited (BAT), there is a broadly similar payment plan but because of financial constraints within the company, some assistance is required.

“As a result, Government will provide funding assistance to BAT to meet statutory fund and other creditor liabilities and to provide the necessary assets to enable the potential transfer of BAT’s traditional insurance portfolio to a suitable buyer,” Rambarran said.

Central Bank’s Resolution Plan for CLICO (full text)

Following is the full statement made by Central Bank Governor Jwala Rambarran on March 27, at a press conference at which he announced the three-phase plan for CLICO to repay ts debt to policyholders and to the T&T government.

Today is a significant day in the painful story that was the CLICO financial crisis.

For CLICO creditors and policyholders the end of this traumatic experience is finally drawing near.

Today, six years after CLICO collapsed, the company is in a position to make its first payment of just over 7 billion dollars to its single largest creditor: the Government of Trinidad and Tobago. This represents more than 40 per cent of CLICO’s debt to Government.

Today is also a turning point for the thousands of policyholders, who’ve endured unimaginable hurt and pain as a result of the CLICO crisis. CLICO is also in a position to pay out about 950 million dollars to policyholders. These two creditors are receiving an equal 85 per cent payout at this stage.

These two payments are being made according to the terms of the CLICO Resolution Plan developed by Central Bank and finalized last week Monday after consultation with the Minister of Finance and the Economy as required under Section 44F of the Central Bank Act. Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan was developed to repay all creditors and policyholders and to ultimately facilitate the transfer of CLICO’s traditional insurance portfolio to a suitable buyer by ensuring that enough appropriate assets are put aside.

They say timing is everything...and the question for many is why start these payments now? The answer is: CLICO is now in a position to make payments to its creditors in order to advance the resolution of the company. CLICO’s ability to meet its obligations to creditors and policyholders is based on its most recent Management Accounts as at December 2014 and our up to date understanding of CLICO’s Statutory Fund position.

These numbers indicate CLICO now has sufficient assets to pay its liabilities in its Statutory Fund. The improvement in CLICO’s Statutory Fund position resulted mainly from the sale of CLICO’s shareholding in Methanol Holdings Trinidad Limited (MHTL) in October 2014. This sale added just over 7 billion dollars of cash to CLICO’s Statutory Fund. The bottom line is, the sale of the MHTL asset injected the funds needed to move CLICO’s resolution forward and to help define our resolution plan.

Central Bank’s Resolution Plan for CLICO has 3 phases.

We are sharing the details of this Plan with the country so you fully understand how the Plan will work... if you are a policyholder or creditor... how our plan will impact you.

There are at least five principles, heavily based in law we used to determine how we would proceed with the Resolution. The most important guiding principle of our Resolution Plan was to take action for the benefit of CLICO policyholders and creditors without reference to shareholder value. This is consistent with Central Bank’s duties upon assuming control of CLICO under Section 44D of the Central Bank Act. On this basis, Central Bank determined the categories of creditors to whom CLICO owes money and this dictates the order of priority in which payment will be made in these three phases.

The first phase I’ve just spoken about is payment today to Government and a payment to a specific group of policyholders. In this first stage, the first creditors to be paid as established by the Resolution Plan are Government and the group of policy holders who held Short Term Investment Products (STIPs) but opted, not to take up Government’s offer to be paid their money through Government bonds and shares in the CLICO Investment Fund.

Government and these 1500 policyholders will receive first priority for payment as their policy obligations are accorded legal protection through assets held in CLICO’s Statutory Fund. Of course, CLICO’s 100 hundred thousand odd traditional policyholders have equal protection through the Statutory Fund and our process has ensured that sufficient assets are available to meet their obligations.

Government will initially receive an 85 per cent payout of its claims on CLICO’s Statutory Fund. This will comprise a payment of 4 billion dollars in cash today and potentially around 3 billion dollars in lieu of cash through the transfer of CLICO’s shareholdings in Angostura Holdings Limited, CL World Brands Limited and Home Construction Limited. This transfer of these 3 CLICO assets to Government will be subject to an independent valuation pursuant to section 44D of the Central Bank Act.

The 1500 non-assenting STIPs policyholders are also first in line to equally receive an 85 per cent payout of their claims on CLICO’s Statutory Fund. This payment will amount to about 950 million dollars of just over the 1 billion dollars owed to them. CLICO will communicate its processing schedule for the payout to these policyholders next week. The first payout to the non-assenting STIPs policyholders is expected to take no more than three months.

The second phase of Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan will meet the remaining 15 per cent of the claims of Government and the balance of non-assenting STIPs policyholders on CLICO’s Statutory Fund. This payout will be funded from the proceeds of the sale of CLICO’s 57 percent shareholding in Methanol Holdings (International) Limited (MHIL). This sale which is expected to realize proceeds in the region of at least 2 billion dollars will be subject to an independent valuation and done in accordance with the MHIL Shareholders Agreement. This second payout will clear CLICO’s debt to all its Statutory Fund creditors and leave sufficient assets to fully and appropriately cover the needs of CLICO’s traditional policyholders. The timing of this second payout will of course be dependent on the sale of MHIL.

The third phase of Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan is the realization of other assets to meet all liabilities (outside of the Statutory Fund) to non-Government mutual fund holders and non-residential STIPs policyholders. These are persons who either had STIPs policies but were resident outside of Trinidad and Tobago and, therefore, not eligible for Statutory Fund protection, or persons who had invested in the CLICO mutual funds which, not being insurance policies, were also not eligible for Statutory Fund protection. In both cases, Government had made a voluntary offer to each group and as a result, outside of the Statutory Fund, the Government has a 2.1 billion dollar claim on CLICO from those that accepted the offer. CLICO’s obligations to the group that did not accept the Government’s voluntary offer amount to about 410 million dollars. The third phase payout is expected to be funded by the sale of CLICO’s 7 per cent shareholding in Republic Bank Limited and the sale of other assets. The timing of the payout will be dependent on the sale of these assets.

At this stage we would have accounted for all of CLICO’s Statutory Fund and Non- Statutory Fund creditors. Government would then be left with 5 billion dollars of Preference Shares along with approximately 1 billion dollars of accrued but unpaid dividends on these Preference Shares. The projections suggest the residual assets of CLICO would, when ultimately realized, likely be sufficient to fully repay this 6 billion dollar liability to Government.

As we’ve started the first phase of the CLICO Resolution Plan, we will also be moving ahead with the process to sell CLICO’s traditional insurance portfolio which comprises its life, group health and pension policies. CLICO’s traditional portfolio was independently valued and we are in the process of appointing an Investment Advisor to lead the portfolio sale. Appropriate assets have also been identified to enable the ultimate transfer to a suitable buyer.

Now that I’ve explained the three phases of Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan, there are two matters I’d like to address. The first matter relates to CLICO’s 18,000 assenting policyholders. These are the majority of CLICO’s policyholders who accepted Government’s offer. Government is committed, in principle, to making these policyholders whole, that is, they will not be made worse off under this Resolution Plan for accepting Government’s offer. The Minister of Finance and the Economy will provide details on this issue shortly.

The second matter relates to British American Insurance Company Trinidad Limited, commonly known as BAT. The Resolution Plan for BAT entails a broadly similar payment plan for the creditors of BAT, but owing to financial constraints within BAT, requires some assistance in order to achieve a more comprehensive outcome. As a result, Government will provide funding assistance to BAT to meet Statutory Fund and other creditor liabilities and to provide the necessary assets to enable the potential transfer of BAT’s traditional insurance portfolio to a suitable buyer.

I started off by saying today is an important day, a turning point in the story that was the CLICO crisis...Looking ahead Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan has now given it an end, it is an end subject to disposal of certain CLICO assets but we would like to assure the country, this plan will be executed in the manner outlined and this grueling six year journey will come to an end.

As I indicated before the most important guiding principle of our CLICO Resolution Plan was to take action for the benefit of CLICO policyholders and creditors and we wholeheartedly believe this will be accomplished.

It’s all a bit technical and complex, indeed the entire matter was unprecedented not only in Trinidad and Tobago but in the Caribbean. Let me then recap the broad elements of our CLICO Resolution Plan that you need to remember:

1.Government, as the single largest creditor of CLICO, will receive 4 billion dollars in cash today, and the balance of around 3 billion in lieu of cash upon the transfer of three CLICO assets, Angostura Holdings Limited, CL World Brands Limited and Home Construction Limited.

2.The 1500 non-assenting STIPs policyholders will receive 85 per cent of their claim or about 950 million dollars in 3 months, and the remaining balance after the sale of Methanol Holdings International Limited.

3.Creditors outside of the Statutory Fund such as non-Government mutual fund holders and non-residential Short Term Investment Products policyholders will be paid following the sale of CLICO’s RBL shares and other assets.

4.The policyholders who accepted Government’s offer of bonds and shares in the CLICO Investment Fund will be no worse off. The Minister of Finance and the Economy will provide details shortly on how these policyholders will be treated.

5.The claims of BAT policyholders will also be settled.

As I wrap up I want to repeat Central Bank’s CLICO Resolution Plan will bring closure to this deep financial wound inflicted on thousands of CLICO policyholders and Central Bank is doing all in its power and more to ensure such a financial trauma will never again be inflicted on you.

[Flex]

Central Bank: No Clico money for Duprey
T&T Guardian Reports.

Former CL Financial chairman Lawrence Duprey, former group financial director Andre Monteil and Gita Sakal, former corporate secretary, will not be paid under the terms of the 2015 Clico Resolution Plan until civil matters filed against them by the Central Bank are completed.

This was confirmed yesterday in a statement from the Central Bank in response to reports that $48.5 million is to be paid to former directors of the company.

The Central Bank said in June 2011, following a forensic investigation into the affairs of the collapsed insurance giant, a breach of fiduciary duty civil case was filed against the Duprey and Monteil and their companies “as they were considered to be the principal decision makers for the affairs of Clico.” Sakal was added as a defendant in March 2013.

“This is an ongoing matter and based on the advice of Queen’s Counsel, defendants in this civil claim, where they or their companies are policyholders/creditors of Clico, will not be paid under the terms of the 2015 Clico Resolution Plan, until the determination of the matter by the Court,” the Central Bank said.

“In respect of the other former directors and officers of Clico, where Central Bank and Clico have not, based on forensic findings and legal advice, contemplated or initiated any litigation against such persons, to date, there would be no legal basis on which Clico may now withhold payment to them as policyholders/creditors at the point of liquidating its debts to creditors from its own assets.”

The bank said under the terms of Government’s bailout of Clico in 2009 and 2011, related parties, including directors and officers of the company were not to be paid with public funds, on the principle that they may have contributed to the financial collapse of the institution.

The statement continued: “The decision to withhold payment from these former directors and officers of Clico, who are policyholders, resulted in them remaining creditors on the books of Clico. Clico, by law, has to treat with all classes of creditors as part of its resolution strategy.”

The bank said under the 2015 Clico Resolution Plan, the company is making payments to its policyholders and creditors entirely from the proceeds of the sale of its assets. This follows monetisation of the company’s Methanol Holdings (Trinidad) Ltd (MHTL) shares and the eventual sale of other Clico assets.

The Central Bank said: “Unlike Government’s bailout, the 2015 Clico Resolution Plan is not funded by Government. No Government funds are being used to make payments to creditors and policyholders of Clico including related parties, under the Clico Resolution Plan.

After Central Bank assumed control of Clico in 2009, an investigation was conducted into the affairs of the company by forensic accountant Robert Lindquist. The Central Bank said it has forwarded reports of all forensic findings since 2010 to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the police who have commenced criminal investigations.

[Flex]

$36 million payout to 4 former CLICO directors.
By Asha Javeed (Express).

Four former directors and their companies, who were classed as “related parties” when Colonial Life Insurance Company (CLICO) went bust in 2009, have already been paid $36,188,690.90.

They are Ian Garcia and his company Events Unlimited; Clinton Ramberansingh and his connected parties (Bianca Ramberansingh and Martina De Silva); Vishnu Ramlogan; and Nigel Salina and his company Nigel Salina and Associates.

The directors were among ten identified to be paid $48.5 million.

However, their connected parties will take the final sum that CLICO has to pay to $63,207,849.78.

All their policies will be paid with interest.

The directors include people who were summoned to the Sir Anthony Colman-chaired commission of enquiry into CLICO to be cross-examined on how the company had found itself in an illiquid position but opted to pay the $2,000 fine instead of giving evidence.

On May 1, Salina, who had long lobbied the Government for the money he invested in the company but had made himself available to the Colman Commission, received his money, which amounted to about $2 million.

Salina had four policies—two in US dollars and two in TT dollars.

On May 4, former financial controller and chief marketing officer Garcia and his company Events Unlimited received close to $16 million.

Garcia, who never appeared before the Commission, had five policies—three in TT dollars and two in US dollars.

One of his policies, worth $6.4 million, was in his company's name, Events Unlimited.

Garcia and Events Unlimited were publicly named in the commission of enquiry by CLICO's attorney Neal Bisnath.

Bisnath had said Garcia was one person who benefited financially from his job at CLICO by creating a company (Events Unlimited) and awarding it work from CLICO.

Bisnath had explained how CLICO had made a US$3 million draft to Events Unlimited which was authorised by former CEO Karen Gardier (who is also identified to be paid) and Garcia.

Bisnath had said the US$3m payment was wire transferred to a US account of Events Unlimited and then US$1 million was returned to open an EFPA (executive flexible premium annuity) policy.

The Express verified that the documents on that transaction remain available on the commission's website, but that policy has now been cashed out.

On Tuesday, Ramlogan collected his $3.5 million from CLICO.

On Wednesday, the Central Bank issued a statement which said that the directors are being paid as creditors, and not directors who may have helped the company to collapse.

“In respect of the other former directors and officers of CLICO, where the Central Bank and CLICO have not, based on forensic findings and legal advice, contemplated or initiated any litigation against such persons to date, the Central Bank said there would be no legal basis on which CLICO may now withhold payment to them as policyholders/creditors at the point of liquidating its debts to creditors from its own assets,” the Central Bank has said.

The Central Bank only initiated civil proceedings against former CL Financial (CLF) chairman Lawrence Duprey and former CFO Andre Monteil, but joined former CLF corporate secretary Gita Sakal months after.

Permell: Govt must tell all

So why has the Central Bank, which was managing CLICO under Section 44D of the Central Bank Act, not taken civil action against the directors for breach of their fiduciary duty when all the documents were publicly available after the commission of enquiry?

That's what Clico Policyholders Group (CPG) chairman Peter Permell wants to know.

He said the Central Bank's statement on the former directors “suggests that there is some trepidation as it relates to potential litigation that could be taken against CLICO by these former directors if the Central Bank were to withhold or delay payment”.

Permell said he remained perplexed about public statements made by Finance Minister Larry Howai and Central Bank Governor Jwala Rambarran, a former employee of CLF subsidiary, CMMB.

“We are even more concerned that the PP Government has now apparently amended the well-established 2009 Government policy that the 'CLICO bail-out' is a guarantee to pay strictly third-party policyholders and creditors of CLICO. And as such by definition excludes former directors and senior managers of CLICO, their immediate family members and private companies. In fact, it appears that the floodgates have now been opened to include all former directors with only one minor exception i.e. persons who are subject to civil proceedings initiated by the State. It therefore begs the question who, when and, most importantly, why.

“As indicated previously, we take some comfort in the honourable Finance Minister's statement that an investigation into the matter is currently taking place. Since it's our considered opinion that former directors should not be paid at this time and if any of them were paid they have no right of confidentiality by virtue of their related party status,” Permell said.

“We therefore call on the Government upon completion of their investigation to not just tell the country who is not being paid, but to disclose all former directors who may have already been paid or are about to be paid and the quantum of such payments.”

The related parties payout is included in the $950 million which was allocated to pay 1,500 policyholders who were entitled to it now that the company has turned around.

CLICO was bailed out by the Government after it collapsed in January 2009. It is estimated that CLICO has cost the State about $25 billion inclusive of the commission. While CLICO has yet to fully repay the State, it had started making payments to its policyholders.

[Flex]

Central Bank fires Yetming
By COREY CONNELLY
T&T newsday
Sunday, June 7 2015

The Clico Policyholders Group yesterday called for a forensic audit into an alleged payout of millions of dollars to former Colonial Life Insurance Company (Clico) directors and their respective companies following the sudden firing of the insurance giant’s chairman Gerald Yetming and managing director Carolyn John on Friday.

In a move late Friday, which is likely to send ripples throughout the financial sector, the Central Bank gave the pink slip to Yetming and John and appointed Wendy Ho Sing as executive chairman “with immediate effect.”

Ho Sing is the senior specialist adviser to Central Bank Governor Jwala Rambarran. She previously served as Deputy Inspector, Policy and Market Conduct and Deputy Inspector of Financial Institutions at the Central Bank.

In an unsigned e-mail sent to media houses on Friday, the Central Bank said it had terminated the appointments of Yetming and John “after Clico failed to follow direct instructions issued by the Bank on March 26, 2015 setting out the protocols for all disbursements to policyholders and creditors under the Clico Resolution Plan.”

“These instructions included obtaining approval from the Bank for all payments prior to disbursement,” the Central Bank said in the e-mail.

The Bank said further that the two executives were fired pursuant to its powers under Section 44 (D) of the Central Bank Act.

The section states, in part, that “where the Bank is of the opinion that an institution is not maintaining high standards of financial probity or sound business practices, that the Bank “investigate the affairs of the institution concerned and any of its affiliated institutions and to appoint a person or persons for that purpose.”

It also states that the Bank should “take all steps it considers necessary to protect the interests and to preserve the rights of depositors and creditors of the institution.”

Yesterday, the Clico Policyholders Group was guarded in its response to the firing of Yetming, a former Finance Minister, and John.

“If what is being alleged is true, that Clico failed to follow direct instructions issued by the Central Bank on March 26, 2015 with regard to obtaining approval from the Bank for all payments prior to disbursement, which obviously would include former directors of Clico and their connected parties, it would appear that the actions of the Central Bank to terminate the appointments of Clico’s Chairman Gerard Yetming and the company’s managing director Carolyn John would be more than appropriate in the circumstances. Since clearly, these are very serious allegations that warrant firm and decisive action,” the group’s chairman Peter Permell said yesterday in an email to media houses.

Permell said there appeared to be more to the issue than what was being presented by the Central Bank.

“We hasten to add that based on additional information reaching us, there appears to be much more to this story. And as such, not only would we prefer to wait until we have heard from all the parties involved before making a definitive statement on the matter, we are calling for an immediate forensic investigation to determine if these payments were above board,” he said.

Permell said the onus would be on Ho Sing to initiate the forensic audit.

“Ho Sing would have to bring in a firm ...somebody who has the necessary skills to do such an investigation,” he said.

The Central Bank’s decision to fire Yetming and John came days after Finance Minister Larry Howai told journalists he was unaware that million of dollars had been allocated to pay several former directors at the financially-strapped Clico and their respective companies as was alleged in financial circles within the past week.

In the same breath, he had acknowledged last week that all of the Clico payments would be made above board.

Over the past days, reports have indicated that four former directors and their companies were paid TT$36.18 million. The Bank, according to media reports, had said that the directors were being paid as creditors and not directors who may have helped the company to collapse.

Rambarran subsequently said in an interview that the former directors and officers of Clico who were not facing any legal action could have been paid.

“When I came into office in 2012, around December of 2012 the Commission of Inquiry was unfolding. Based on what was coming out from the Commission of Inquiry and looking back at some of the evidence we had from the forensic investigation, we again went back to the Queen’s Counsel and said ‘Are there any other persons who we should contemplate litigation against and the Queen’s Counsel came back and said, ‘Yes, we have grounds to contemplate litigation against Ms Gita Sakal (CL Financial corporate secretary),” Rambarran had said on a television programme.

Yesterday, Permell was adamant that the issue needed to be fully ventilated. “We want to hear from everybody,” he told Sunday Newsday.

“We want to hear from the chairman, we want to hear from Carolyn John, the managing director. What you are talking about here is the payment of millions of dollars to former directors who, based on the Central Bank’s statement, did not get authorisation for.

“It means that Clico would have gone ahead in the absence of clear guidelines as to how these payments should be made and paid those. It begs the question, why? What is the motivation for paying these people?

“Why would you disregard the Central Bank’s instructions — assuming that is what transpired, at this stage we are only hearing one side of the story. So I am saying, I want to hear from all of the parties involved and only then can I make a determination of what transpired here.”

He added, “There seems to be some cognitive dissonance on my part to what he (Rambarran) was saying prior to this release that we saw and what is being said in the release.”

Permell, in the email, also took issue with the fact Ho Sing will essentially hold two portfolios. “Additionally, it has not escaped our attention that the Central Bank appears to have taken a decision to merge the positions of Chairman and Managing Director into one, that of Executive Chairman,” he said.

“On the face of it, this appears to be somewhat retrograde and not consistent with tenets of good corporate governance as witnessed when Mr (Lawrence) Duprey previously held the position of Executive Chairman at Clico. In the circumstances, we shall be grateful if the Central Bank could kindly explain this move.”

Yetming could not be reached for comment yesterday as he was said to be out of the country.

[Flex]

Ex-clico ceo GETs $17.3m
By Asha Javeed (Express)

Two days before the chairman and managing director of CLICO were fired for not following instructions with regard to payouts, its former chief executive, Eugene Dziadyk, was paid $17.3 million for his policies.

Dziadyk, a Canadian actuary who had three US currency polices, was paid on June 3.

Unlike other policyholders, like former director Nigel Salina who had a two per cent interest on his policies, Dziadyk had 12 per cent interest on the three policies.

For his three investments valued at of $499,919.15, $1,083,051.82 and $1,086,935.36 in 2007, he was paid $3,239,842.96, $7,018,970.63 and $7,044,138.85 respectively.

The $17.3 million represents 85 per cent of the money owed to him with the interest.

The payment was made even after Finance Minister Larry Howai called for a report on the matter.

At the Sir Anthony Colman's Commission of Enquiry, it was revealed that Dziadyk had benefited from an interest credit of $63 million on an account.

As a CLICO director, he penned a letter which is available on the Commission's website, retroactively increasing the interest rate of his Executive Flexible Premium Annuity (EFPA) — which he opened in 2004 at CLICO — from 12 per cent to a whopping 75.48 per cent.

“In accordance with the amendment to the above policy dated March 17, 2004 and approved by Mr Duprey, an interest rate of 75.48% shall be credited to this policy covering the period March 17,2004 to April 24, 2007. This policy may be surrendered without penalty,” the letter stated.

The letter which was dated April 24, 2007 was also the day Dziadyk had a meeting at the Central Bank to discuss liquidity issues and the inadequate response of the Central Bank among others.

Special arrangement for Dziadyk
 
Henry Hamlet, a Clico department manager who gave evidence at the Commission, testified on the special arrangement.

As a result, Dziadyk's account grew from US$2.3 million to US$12.5 million.

Hamlet had said Dziadyk took out about US$10 million (TT$63 million) from the account which was left with a balance of US$2.1 million.

That balance left in the account with the interest is what Dziadyk was paid on June 3.

Dziadyk's payment takes the sum paid to former directors of the company to $53.3 million.

Four former directors and their companies who were classed as “related parties” when CLICO went bust in 2009, have already been paid $36,188,690.90 million.

They are Ian Garcia and his company Events Unlimited; Clinton Ramberansingh and his connected parties (Bianca Ramberansingh and Martina De Silva); Vishnu Ramlogan and Salina and his company Nigel Salina and Associates.

The directors and their connected parties are among ten identified to be paid $63,207,849.78 million on their policies with interest added.

On May 1, Salina received his money which amounted to about $2 million. Salina had four policies-two in US dollars and two in TT dollars.

On May 4, Former financial controller and chief marketing officer Ian Garcia and his company Events Unlimited also received close to $16 million.

Garcia, who never appeared before the Commission, had five policies—three in TT dollars and two in US dollars.

One of his policies, worth $6.4 million was in his company's name Events Unlimited.

Financial benefits for Garcia

Garcia and Events Unlimited were publicly named in the CLICO Commission by CLICO's attorney Neal Bisnath.

Bisnath had said at the CLICO enquiry Garcia was one person who benefited financially from his job at CLICO by creating a company (Events Unlimited) and awarding it work from CLICO.

Bisnath had explained how CLICO had made a US$3 million draft to Events Unlimited which was authorised by former CEO Karen Gardier (who is also identified to be paid) and Garcia.

Bisnath had said the US$3 payment was wire transferred to a US account of Events Unlimited and then US$1 million was returned to open an EFPA policy.

On June 2, Ramlogan collected his $3.5 million from CLICO.

The directors include people who were summoned to the Commission to be cross examined but opted to pay the $2,000 fine instead of giving evidence.

Rambarran, Yetming Faceoff

The payment issue had led to a face-off between Central Bank Governor Jwala Rambarran and former CLICO chairman Gerald Yetming.

Rambarran, a former employee of CL Financial's CMMB, is being advised by Ram Ramesh, his former boss and former adviser to Duprey when the company sought a bailout from the Government.

Last Friday, hours after he defended the directors' entitlement to be paid, Rambarran fired Yetming and managing director Carolyn John.

Yetming said the reason he was fired is “a blatant lie”.

Rambarran had written to Yetming on Friday evening stating: “The bank has re-evaluated its strategy for the future conduct of the affairs of CLICO and in this regard the bank is constrained to discontinue your appointment as chairman of the board. We wish to record our gratitude to you for your contribution to the management and affairs of CLICO.”

However, the Central Bank had said in a release on Friday night: “The Central Bank took this action after CLICO failed to follow direct instructions issued by the bank on March 26th, 2015 setting out the protocols for all disbursements to policyholders and creditors under the CLICO Resolution Plan. These instructions included obtaining approval from the Bank for all payments prior to disbursement.”

Wendy Ho Sing, the former inspector of financial institutions, has been named as executive chairman with immediate effect.

[Bourbon]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/8ps20yaVyro" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/8ps20yaVyro</a>