Haril Global Solutions Ltd has dragged Globus Bank Ltd before a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, seeking an order for the payment of N10billion in general damages for an alleged breach of loan contract, etc.
In a suit marked CV/1456/2024, the Claimant told the court that the bank allegedly executed multiple transactions on its account without the company’s knowledge or authorization, thereby failing to comply with the terms and conditions of the loan agreement.
Pelumi Olajengbesi Esq., counsel to the Claimant stated that inspite of the fact that the defendant breached the contract terms with his client, the bank wrote to Access bank, Fidelity bank, and Wema bank, allegedly misrepresenting facts.
Due to the misrepresentation of facts, the respective banks, according to Olajengbesi, placed a “post no debit” on all his client’s accounts held with them.
“As a result of the ‘Post-No-Debit’ placed on the claimant’s accounts, the claimant has lost the business goodwill of her clients and has incurred a gross loss of Ten Billion Naira (N10,000,000,000.00) due to the inability to conduct business with all accounts held with the defendant, Access Bank, Fidelity Bank, and Wema Bank,” he stated.
The claimant’s lawyer argued that the bank’s claims of erroneous transactions are doubtful, as the bank had imposed restrictions on the loan facility from the beginning, preventing his client from solely withdrawing from the claimant’s overdraft account.
He added that the claimant had consistently maintained a Debt Service Reserve fee of not less than One Hundred Million Naira with the bank as a precaution against any default, which his client never committed.
A statement on oath, deposed to by one, Oluwaseun Onobun, a Director at Haril Global, hinted that on December 7, 2021, Globus bank sent a letter to his company offering an overdraft loan facility of N500,000,000.00 to augment the claimant’s working capital, with a tenor of one year.
The deponent averred that the express terms and conditions of the overdraft loan facility specified that the loan was provided at an interest rate of 16% per annum, and Globus was to maintain a Debt Service Reserve Account (DSRA) funded with at least two months’ interest cover for the duration of the facility.
Onobun disclosed that the offer letter was duly signed, signifying the company’s acceptance of the offer from Globus.
It was stated that the offer letter stipulated that if funds were withdrawn from the DSRA to cover a shortfall in debt service, the company was required to restore the credit balance of the DSRA to an amount equal to two months’ interest within two days, adding that failure to do so, would constitute an event of default under the facility.
He posited that due to the longstanding cordial relationship between the claimant and Globus Bank, and the fact that the claimant never defaulted on the contract terms, the defendant offered to increase the overdraft loan facility from N500,000,000 to N1,000,000,000 on July 14, 2022, to meet the claimant’s operational cash flow requirements for a year.
He added that after the completion of the initial one year loan arrangement and the smooth business relationship, the facility at various times was increased to N5,000,000,000, then to N7,000,000,000, and finally to N8,000,000,000 in August 2023.
He maintained that the claimant, from 2021 to 2023, when the overdraft loan facility was initiated and reviewed with increments, promptly paid all rates, charges, and interest, including N734,215,998.84 as interest on the facility between April 2023 and January 2024.
Onobun said, that “however, to the claimant’s dismay, on November 22, 2023, the claimant noticed a significant reduction in the overdraft with an available balance from over N4,000,000,000 from the N8,000,000,000 duly granted to a surprising N223,000,000.
In December 13, 2023, following inquiries, Globus Bank sent a doctored statement of account dated December 13, 2023, containing transactions the claimant was unaware of.
He stated that the claimant responded to an email from the defendant on December 14, 2023, seeking clarity and reports on the overdraft and collection accounts.
“At the referenced meeting, the defendant promised to restore the claimant’s Corporate Internet Banking profiles to enable the claimant to manage their liquidation, view their balance, and download statutory reports (the same reports the defendant refused to send to the claimant), but the defendant failed to do so,” he submitted.
He said that amidst these developments, Globus Bank continued collecting undue interest from the claimant despite the claimant being unable to conduct business due to restrictions placed on their account due to suspicious transactions.
The court has scheduled January 13 and 14, 2025, for the hearing of the case.
