Doubts Raised over Kailondo's US$930K Suit against GT Bank

The Late Dan Orogun (right) and George Kailondo

-- Who is behind the missing loan agreement documents between the late Managing Director Orogun and Kailondo?

Questions have been raised as to who is in possession of documents believed to be a Letter of Credit (LC) agreement and Offer Letter between the Guaranty Trust Bank (Liberia) Limited (GT Bank) (defendants) then managed by the Late Dan Orogun, a Nigerian, and the Kailondo Petroleum Company owned by Attorney George Kailondo (plaintiff), which could not be accounted for and leaving Kailondo to institute a US$930,000 criminal lawsuit against the bank.

About five years since Orogun died by drowning on Sunday, January 24, 2016 in a boating accident while visiting with Kailondo at a resort along the Robertsfield Highway, he (Kailondo), in his criminal suit, claimed that the bank management team, then headed by the late Orogun organized scheme or syndicate on April 23,2015.

Kailondo's lawsuit also claimed that the defendants debited the Kailondo Petroleum account#: 01126050025020000, an amount of US$3,469,352.26 with narration A/C Tfr, reflecting the settlement of Matures LC IFO Kailondo Petroleum.

But the suit alleges that, instead, the defendants presented a Swift Trf, reflecting that only US$3.3 million was transferred as the actual cost of the LC.

However, in response, the bank said, it has conducted a review of its internal records and has obtained confirmation requests from some of the parties to the LC transactions including one of its confirming banks, Banque de Commerce et de Placements (BFC) of Geneva, Switzerland. 

"Despite the diligent search, the bank had been unable to find copies of the LC Agreement and the offer letter in connection with charging Kailondo Petroleum’s account with the amount of US$50,000 as 2 percent commission on the value of the LC amount,” the bank maintained.

They further argued that, “While the bank believes that this transaction was legitimate and the charging of commission was not arbitrary but based on requisite authorizations at the time, the absence of the duly signed LC agreement and the offer letter Leave the bank with very little option but to reverse the transaction and credit Kailondo Petroleum account with the corresponding US$50,000 debited.”

However, the bank argued that the credit would be applied against Kailondo Petroleum’s indebtedness to the bank in partial satisfaction or offset its outstanding loan obligation to the bank.

Further, the bank said, it will continue to search its records and, in the event where the LC agreement and the Offer Letter authorization are found, they would communicate the information for appropriate action.

There is also another letter of credit and Offer Letter for the US$2.5 million between the parties dated October 29, 2015, which resulted in the debit of 2.5 percent (US$62,500) as commission charged against Kailondo Petroleum.

The bank claims that they have not succeeded in finding copies of the LC Agreement and the Offer Letter for the LC with respect to the Kailondo Petroleum in the amount of US$62,500, representing commission of the LC amount of US$2.5 million, which the bank said it was going to also search its records.

But Kailondo’s lawsuit alleges that “Defendants criminally made a withdrawal of US$168,352.26.”

Kailondo’s suit claimed that from January 8, 2016 up to and including March 28,2016, the defendants deducted from his company account US$50,000 via what is being described as “Reverse due to RTN CHK-Ecobank” without his prior knowledge.

“And having done such, the defendants entered into the said accounts, debited transactions of US$40,000 exercising authorized control over his monies, thereby depriving Kailondo of the gainful use of his property,” the lawsuit further claimed.

Kailondo also claimed that the actual amount criminally withdrawn from his account is US$930,500.