Thank you.

Basically, I see no reason why each investor should pay as high as 5000 for lawyers fees and other expenses as stated by the committee.Lets look at it from this point, Who is fighting who? is it the investors vs gov or nospetco vs gov? If its the investors, then on what ground against the gov because the money was frozen via nospetco.So dont be fooled, the issue is Nospetco vs Gov with outside pressure from the investors.

Chikena..another fraud.

THANKS

thanks

Verification/Registration Period: Monday 31st – Friday 11th February

Requirements

Name and Address of Investor:
Original and Photocopies bank tellers
Original and Photocopies receipts
Name and address of bank for collection of monthly returns
GSM and E-mail

Numbers to call for Enquiry

Prince E.O Matuluko
(Chairman Investors Forum)
08067199668

Mr John Igho
(Secretary)
08043784051

Mr Dasilva (Flagship)
(Treasurer)
08077638454

Comrade Badejo
(PRO
08025064226

NOSPETCO for sure has the database of all its investors….and a similar exercise was held in the

heat of the crisis sometime in 2008. I called one of the official phone numbers for NOSPETCO

and was informed that NOSPETCO has nothing to do with the Newspaper publication

and confirmed that they had all their customers database. So people please be sure of who is

actually calling for this exercise….for the purpose of emphasis, here is the number i called

08034141488 …… Alh Maiyaki…..NOSPETCO. Please anyone with more information should please

come up. Thanx

I have also advised that when there is life,there is hope.let all be hopeful that this current exercise will definitely lead to the much awaited positive results.

FOURTEEN investors of Nospetco Oil and Gas Limited, also known as “Wonder Bank”, have dragged the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the company to the Investment and Securities Tribunal (IST) in Lagos.
At the hearing of the suit two days ago, the tribunal awarded cost of N100, 000 against Nospetco Oil and Gas for failing to respond to the originating processes, forty days after it was served by the applicant’s counsel, Mr. Debo Adeleke.
Adeleke told the court that he served all the respondents on September 7, 2010, adding that forty days of service were enough for them to respond.
He, therefore, prayed the court to award cost of N500, 000 against the third respondent for delaying the court processes.
Adeleke stated that the reason for the setting up of the Investment and Securities Tribunal was to fast-track disputes arising from investments, adding that his clients have a lot of respect for the court. That, he said, informed their decision not to take the matter to the regular courts.
He informed the court that many of his clients had died of frustration arising from the said investment, while others had been impoverished because they invested their hard-earned money and were in dire need of justice.
He said that the deliberate and undue delays would frustrate the purpose of the Tribunal in the first place and the interest of his clients.
But counsel to the third defendant (Nospetco), Mr. A.B Bamidele admitted that while he sympathised with the applicants over the delay, the issue was beyond sentiments and argued that he had just been briefed by his client on the matter.
Bamidele, therefore, prayed the court to award a cost of N5, 000 only for the delay, stating that the N500, 000 cost being sought by the applicant’s counsel was outrageous, excessive and unacceptable.
Counsel to the second respondent, (the CBN), Ms. Loretta Onyenyeonwu admitted receiving the processes and expressed their willingness to commence hearing, while the first defendant (SEC) was not represented.
Giving its ruling, the chairman of the seven-man panel, Salihu Usman expressed displeasure that Nospetco was unable to file their papers long after they were served, adding that such attitude was a deliberate delay of court process.
The judge said that it was not the business of the court to know when counsels were briefed, but that the burden rests on counsels to advise their clients appropriately about court processes. He, therefore, awarded the cost of N100, 000 against the third defendant and ordered them to get their response ready by the next adjourned date.
The applicants had dragged the respondents to the IST praying the tribunal to declare that the refusal of the first respondent, (Securities and Exchange Commission) to direct the second respondent (the Central Bank of Nigeria) to release the salvaged fund to the applicants on demand was contrary to its statutory duty.
He said that it was its duty to protect the interest of the applicants in line with section 13 (i) and (k) of Investments and Securities Act 2007.
They were also seeking a declaration that the continued refusal of the second defendant to release the money in its custody to the applicants despite the repeated demand and numerous representations amounted to insensitivity to the plights of the applicants, legally indefensible and morally wrong among others.
In addition, the applicants asked for an order of the court compelling the first and second defendants to release without further delay all the amount of money frozen from the accounts of the “Wonder Bank” which is in their custody to them (the applicants) for immediate disbursement among themselves as well as N2 million cost of instituting and prosecuting the case among others.