15 December 2012, Sweetcrude, Lagos – The Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria, AMCON, has vowed to continue to take charge of assets of the Capital Oil and Gas Industries Limited, owned by Mr. Ifeanyi Uba.
AMCON’s Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Mustafa Chike-obi made the disclosure in Lagos, Friday, despite an order by a Federal High court for AMCON to vacate the premises of the oil company.
A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja on Wednesday, vacated its earlier order granting AMCON immediate possession of properties belonging to Capital Oil and Gas Industries Limited and its owner, Ifeanyi Uba.
However, Chike-obi who spoke during the presentation of the corporation’s full year audited group results for the year ended December 31, 2011 said: “We are still at the property and we intend to remain there until the Court of Appeal rules.
” So, if they want to delay, let them delay, but we are staying there. No matter how many obstacles are put on our way by the various obligors, AMCON would ensure that its debts are fully recovered.
“The judge made a surprising ruling which we have either appealed or we are going to appeal. He basically said we should go and talk to the guy (Ifeanyi Uba) and we have been talking to him for two years.
“He owes us for two years – N53 billion and interest has accumulated to N12 billion – and he hasn’t paid us a kobo and so I don’t know how much talk the judge wants us to do.”
AMCON’s 2011 financial statement showed that it recorded a loss after tax of N2.37 trillion.
It also showed that the institution acquired N4.23 trillion Eligible Bank Assets, while its total assets as at December 2011 stood at N1.88 trillion.
Explaining the loss, AMCON’s Executive Director, Finance and Operations, Mrs. Mofoluke Dosumu said: “The N2.37 trillion was spent in protecting depositors’ funds. N1.33 trillion was spent on the five banks that successfully had merger and acquisition arrangement and N762 billion was spent to fill the holes in the three banks wholly owned by AMCON.
“AMCON turned out to be larger than when it was set up. In terms of the protection of depositors’ funds in the intervened banks, it was 25 per cent larger than what was initially envisaged.
“In terms of the NPLs that we bought, it was four times larger. That showed you that what was declared as NPL initially on the books of banks, was not what we found when they started selling to us. We bought four times what we initially envisaged.”