The Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) has explained why it revoked the house sale contract involving Senator Bunza, insisting that the decision was based strictly on his non-compliance with the terms and conditions of the offer, not politics, discrimination or absence of a title document.

Speaking during a media interaction in Abuja, the Managing Director of NDIC, Mr. Thompson Oludare Sunday, said the property was sold on an “as is” basis, a condition clearly communicated to the buyer at the point of offer.

“When you buy a property as is, you take it with all its defects,” Sunday said. “It is similar to buying at an auction. You cannot complain afterwards about defects that were disclosed from the beginning.”

He explained that the property in question was a mortgaged property belonging to a debtor of a failed bank under an equitable mortgage arrangement, meaning the title document was never perfected or handed over to the bank before NDIC assumed control.

“In this case, the title document was not among the assets taken over by the NDIC. Our examiners only record what they physically see when we assume control of a failed bank. We cannot release a title document we do not have,” he said.

According to the NDIC boss, the fundamental reason the contract was revoked was Senator Farouk Bello Bunza’s failure to fulfil the terms and conditions of the offer within the stipulated timeline, which automatically terminated the contract.

“The issue is not the title. We have sold properties without a title before. The real issue is the outstanding sum. Nobody prevented him from paying. If the conditions stipulated had been fulfilled and payment completed, this matter would not have arisen,” Sunday stated.

He disclosed that the senator requested a 36-month repayment period, which NDIC rejected in favour of six months, citing the Corporation’s obligation to depositors of failed banks.

“We cannot tell depositors to wait three years for their money. Our duty is to recover assets quickly and pay depositors. That is why the 36-month proposal was unacceptable,” he said.

Sunday also addressed claims that NDIC was attempting to resell the property to a politically connected individual from the South-West, describing the allegation as baseless.

“NDIC advertises its properties openly. Anyone from any part of the country can buy. If we intended to sell to a preferred buyer, we would not have offered it to him in the first place,” he said.

He further revealed that an earlier letter suggesting the release of the title document upon payment was written by junior staff without authorisation and was promptly nullified.

“That letter was outside the powers of those officers and contrary to the NDIC Act. Internal disciplinary processes were immediately initiated,” he added.

The Managing Director noted that Senator Bunza had completed transactions on one other property sold by NDIC, underscoring the absence of bias or discrimination.

“He bought two properties. One was concluded, and he has taken possession. This clearly shows there was no victimisation,” Sunday said.

While affirming Senator Bunza’s right to seek legal redress, Sunday emphasised that the NDIC remains committed to the realisation of assets in the best interests of depositors and other creditors. Accordingly, the property will be advertised for open bidding, providing Senator Bunza with the opportunity to participate alongside other prospective bidders.

He reaffirmed NDIC’s commitment to transparency, integrity and the protection of depositors’ funds, stressing that the Corporation would not compromise due process under any circumstances.

“Our responsibility is to the law and to depositors. We cannot bend the rules or create documents that do not exist,” Sunday concluded.

Earlier, Sunday explained the circumstances surrounding the aborted sale of a prime Banana Island property belonging to the defunct Heritage Bank, saying that the Corporation’s actions were guided by law, transparency and the need to protect depositors and creditors.

He said the media briefing was convened to clarify public misconceptions and set the record straight on the transaction involving Senator Farouk Bello Bunza.

According to the NDIC, Senator Bunza entered into a purchase agreement with Heritage Bank in January 2024, five months before the bank’s licence was revoked by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

He said the property, located at Plot 55, Federal Government Layout, Banana Island, Ikoyi, was priced at N4.5 billion, payable over 36 months, of which about N833.3 million had been paid before the bank was taken over by the NDIC in June 2024 following its liquidation.

He said following a statutory review of all contracts of the failed bank, the Corporation discovered that the terms of the sale were unfair and prejudicial to stakeholders, particularly as the property was a mortgaged asset tied to a debtor with outstanding liabilities of about N35.79 billion.

He said a fresh valuation carried out as at January 2024, when the contract was executed with the failed bank, put the property’s worth at N7.005 billion, prompting the NDIC to re-offer it to Senator Bunza at that price in consideration of his prior payments, rather than immediately rescinding the contract.

He said that the offer was, however, rejected by the senator, who insisted on the original terms.

He further explained that a subsequent downward revaluation to N4.76 billion was influenced by land reclamation activities that diminished the property’s beachfront value, although the offer came with strict conditions, including formal acceptance, execution of a deed of undertaking and a clearly defined payment schedule.

He said: “Despite making a substantial instalment payment, Senator Bunza failed to formally accept the offer or comply with other mandatory conditions, leading to the automatic termination of the contract under its terms.”

He insisted that the transaction remains cancelled due to the senator’s non-compliance with stipulated terms of the offer and refusal to accept official correspondence, adding that all monies paid, amounting to over ?2.6 billion, would be refunded.

He said that the NDIC acted within the provisions of the NDIC Act and other enabling laws, insisting that its asset disposal process is open, professionally driven and aimed at maximising value for depositors and creditors of failed banks. (The Guardian)

Update news