The article in question was published two Sundays ago and was captioned: “Clico (Guyana) has enough to pay-off policyholders and with the sub heading: ‘But Camp Street Building at risk of being sold off cheaply.’ According to the article, the building in question was at risk of being sold to the QAG for less than one-third of the value of the building. The article said that QAG was the lone bidder for the property and had made an offer of $500 million.
In a release, the Insurance Supervision Division of the BoG said “Queen’s Atlantic Group (QAG) has never tendered for any property advertised for sale by Clico (Guyana), nor was there ever a bid for the newly constructed Camp Street property by QAG.”
Meanwhile, the release also refuted the assertions in the article that the company had $2 billion from the sale of the Berbice Bridge bonds deposited in Clico (Guyana)’s account. According to the release, the “assertion that the sum of $2 billion was obtained from the sale of the Berbice Bridge Bonds is false.”
The release also defended the way the Clico matter had been handled and said that the measures taken were in the best interest of the policyholders. It said that the initial court proceedings by the Judicial Manager were done in the interest of the policyholders and that any subsequent delay in this process cannot be attributed to the actions of the Judicial Manager.
Kaieteur News in its article had quoted an anonymous source within the CL Financial as being critical of the manner in which the Clico matter had been handled locally. According to the article, the source said that the local company was the only subsidiary placed under judicial management while the administrative executives who put the company in the crisis were retained and paid salaries at the expense of policyholders.
According to the release from the BoG, “in striking contrast to the other Clico subsidiaries in the Region, Clico (Guyana) remains the only subsidiary that is involved in heavy litigation over its liquidation process through the apparent self- serving efforts of the purported representatives of Clico (Guyana) who clearly cannot be acting in the interests of policyholders.” It further noted that “the Government of Guyana has repeatedly reiterated its support and guarantees for CLICO Guyana’s policyholders. Any issue of payment in bonds or other deferred payments is a fiction.”
