Where is the money CLICO paying Deloitte Consulting Inc coming from ?

$7.2 million in fees, Clico staff still getting paid but policy holders and shareholders at risk?

Something wrong!.

@Hants | March 14, 2012 at 7:34 PM |
“Where is the money CLICO paying Deloitte Consulting Inc coming from ?
$7.2 million in fees, Clico staff still getting paid but policy holders and shareholders at risk? Something wrong!.”

From the suckers called policyholders. Why do you think Chris frightened the policy holders into continue paying their premiums with threats of losing everything if they were to stop. The cash cow had fallen but still need fluid (policyholders premiums) intravenously so that the vultures could have a feast.
Ask yourself how come the two of persons allegedly responsible for “mis-selling” policies are still being paid fat salaries and perks. Even criminal charges have been brought against one of them and that person is still getting paid but with nothing to do except destroy paper trails and files. As you know this could never happened in Canada. That person would be asked to collect his final paycheck and the relevant security clearances changed accordingly.

Alleged rapist may be the more correct term. The 12 million may well be worth it if policyholders get back every since. But then again…there goes that star I was wishing on…..

David; You need to get a copy of the Deloitte preliminary Forensic audit report (as they still have to meet with the majority of the people they are hoping to meet) to really let the BU family see the quality of the work that appears to have merited a few million dollars.

!!
It all started up @ the University of Waterford…so stop in your tracks…please…. had it not been for the GREED exhibited by the Late Great and his greenverb accomplice, we won’t be having this conversation now.
Jordan’s vulturism is only after spotting a DEAD COW…if not he..the ants would come in from overseas and finish the job…Is time somebody spotlight the AUDITORS though….read up Enron Arthur Anderson and the Sabarnes Oxley Act…hints

BTW Onions;

Crumpton, Waterford what does it matter … You will never see a Messiah Street High involved in that shite.

David is the accountant let him respond … though I believe it has to do with the information that is made available to the auditors .

What also concerns me still is the possibility of the statute of limitation for the prosecution of the directors.
Also if it was the Government/Court that appointed the vultures and it was the Government/Court that knew the expenses involved then it should be them and not the policy holders who should be footing the bill.

This is a very interesting situation . As it now stands , according to the information posted , the judicial managers CERTIFY and PAY THEIR OWN FEES. How would a court confirm that the fees charged are reasonable? This information indicates that the sum of 7.2 million was certified by the judicial managers for work done over a 7 month period , May 2011 to January 2012. Before a lawyer can collect his costs , unless the parties agree to the sum , he has to appear before the Registrar and produce a bill of costs setting out the basis for his claim at a taxation ; a court never makes an assessment . Did these judicial managers go through a similar process to recover fees at the rate of over ONE MILLION DOLLARS A MONTH ? And was this sum not charged against a company that is virtually bankrupt ? In the circumstances therefore is it not reasonable to question the role of the ” judicial manager ” ? The name certainly seems to be a misnomer .
A previous posting drew wide discussion on the appropriateness of the appointment of Mr Toppin and / or Deloitte as judicial managers in light of the previous association Mr Toppin had with CLICO. This debate is bound to raise its head again . The FACTUAL POSITION HERE IS THAT MR TOPPIN IS A SIGNATORY TO CHEQUES PAID TO HIS COMPANY FROM THE COMPANY WITH WHICH HE HAD A PREVIOUS ASSOCIATION AND FROM WHICH , REPORTEDLY , HE DID NOT HAVE A HAPPY DISASSOCIATION . You can bet your last dollar that this scenario will come up for mention IN THE LAW COURTS .
This CLICO debate is now beginning to expand ; it must certainly move beyond the narrow discussion surrounding Mr Leroy Parris . An INTERIM payment of 7.2 million dollars for 7 months work is a HUGE AMOUNT OF MONEY. Suppose the judicial managers find themselves working for TWENTY MONTHS AT A SIMILAR RATE ? You do the arithmetic .

D&T are not only doing an audit, they are also managing the company, trying to a buyer and restructuring the operations amoung other things . They have staff to pay ,so dont think that is it Jordan and Toppin that are doing the leg work ,they will over see the process. All functions are billed based on the amount of time sent on each task. Time is money!!!

How do accountants manage anything …? How many people are involved to justify a million a month in costs? You should be talking in the order of two hundred people … Is this the case? If not shut ta f#ck up …!

@!!
There is no need to be foul-mouthed I did not make the rules neither did I appointed the JM . The JM are answerable only to the Courts of Barbados which appointed them on the recommendation of the Government of Barbados.Go to http://clicoinfo.com very interesting reading.!!

@ Watching.
I have checked the information which is indeed informative . It however gives no idea into the crucial question : how were the fees assessed? The lawyers will tell you that in order to settle their costs they have to serve a notice on the other side that they are taxing their costs and then the parties appear before the Registrar for argument on the taxation . In this situation it appears that the judicial managers have settled their own fees ; they have CERTAINLY WRITTEN THEIR OWN CHEQUES . Who has oversight over them ? Where are the checks and balances in this process of the judicial managers PAYING THEMSELVES ? Do you not agree that these are questions that are deserving of answers ? Certainly the CLICO saga cannot only be about how much money Mr Parris worked for . After all he was with the company for reportedly close to forty years . Do you think that with this level of fees being charged CLICO can ever rebound from its present predicament ? And is it not a function of the judicial managers to see that it rebound if possible ? Please enlighten ; don’t be side tracked by the abuse above.

@Watching
!! | March 15, 2012 at 12:34 AM |
How do accountants manage anything …? How many people are involved to justify a million a month in costs? You should be talking in the order of two hundred people .
*****************************************
Have you gone stark raving MAD?…..Do you know how much is a million dollars far the less $7mil.?..Come on man stop robbing the F___ing poor people pensioners.
And to think you say it so caviler…What is going on in Bdo’s anyway ? Is this Alibaba’s Den of F__ing Thieves or wat ?
Now this only happens when a Govt is caught in co-hoots with the criminals, there is no longer any sense of clean hands or decent souls.
Ring Bell..Ring Quick !

I guess people are seeing what the DT and LP were getting and decide they want some of the fatted calf too

@ David.
This revelation cannot make practical economic sense . Can you as a service to the BU family investigate and report on : 1 . the remit of the judicial managers . For example , is it part of that remit to try to rescue CLICO or salvage as much of the company’s assets as possible for the benefit of the policyholders ? 2. How are the fees of the judicial managers settled . Certainly a manager’s fees must bear some relationship to the company’s capacity and/or ability to pay those fees AND REMAIN IN BUSINESS. Do you consider that CLICO IN ITS PRESENT PREDICAMENT CAN PAY THESE KINDS OF FEES ? If it cannot , what then can be said of the judicial managers who PAY THEMSELVES these kind of fees ? ARE THEY ACTING IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMPANY ?
In a previous posting our ” MILLER ” had occasion to quote ss 95 and 96 of the Barbados Company’s Act to draw attention to the duty of the directors of a company to act in the best interest of that company ; WHAT , David , IS THE DUTY OF THE JUDICIAL MANAGERS ? IS IT NOT A SIMILAR DUTY? Logically speaking IT CANNOT BE OTHERWISE . How then would this fee structure which the judicial managers have set FOR THEMSELVES comply with that general duty of care ? i hope David that you are in a position to help us make sense of this madness . In the meantime , peace my brother .

@ Watching | March 15, 2012 at 12:07 AM |
“D&T are not only doing an audit, they are also managing the company, trying to a buyer and restructuring the operations among other things. They have staff to pay so don’t think that is it Jordan and Toppin that are doing the leg work ,they will over see the process. All functions are billed based on the amount of time sent on each task. Time is money!!!”

So what is the Thornhill man doing? Why is he still being paid with excellent perks from a bankrupt company which is only staying above ground by the goodwill of the policyholders and their monthly premiums? Is the man Brewster still there in charge of a sales and marketing department that is virtually closed because the company cannot write new business to keep the pyramid going? Where is the money coming from to pay his big salary and commissions? The poor suckers called policyholders will be further sadly disappointed. I can see some of them requiring counseling and psychiatric care rather soon.

@An Observer

Good questions, as you know BU depends on sources.

@ David.
Yes , David , the metaphor is indeed a card game metaphor.

Mona Lisa why u doan give back the people dey F—ing money or HUSH….is people like u who sink the DLP….(thanks)

@Miller

You always ask the hard questions. For a fact there is no provision for CLICO and so far not aware of provision for Barrack. If such is the case it may suggest recourse maybe the NIS. The government has the option though of a sup :-).

My first visit to this blog and an instant loss of respect given the title.

If ‘David’ had ever had a meaningful interaction with someone who’s gone through the horror of rape, he wouldn’t even think about making that comparison – let alone actually putting it in the title…and twice @ that!

Amazing based on the sequence of the numbers of these cheques written to JORDAN and TOPPIN it seems that this account is used merely for the purpose of making money available to TOPPIN and JORDAN.

Does any of this concern BIPA in the least ?
Or are they only concerned with slaugtering of Leroy Parris ?
While they neglect the part played by The Clico Board of Directors Leslie Haynes etal and the Auditors who funnily enough had a senior partner sitting on the said Clico Board of Directors, totally amazing.

D&T needs to do some public relations in this affair otherwise the Barbadian public will slaughter them over these fees since most persons are not aware what is entailed in doing an audit or what is judicial management.

@What will they think of next ? | March 15, 2012 at 9:50 AM |
“…and the Auditors who funnily enough had a senior partner sitting on the said Clico Board of Directors, totally amazing.”

Are you serious or just gassing off?
This is a very grave matter. If you are implying that a partner of an audit firm responsible for the “independent ” auditing of a company sat on the Board of Directors of the same company, then this is a solid basis to sue the partner and by extension the other partners of the same audit firm.
What a “marry” go round to see “shaw’!
Please tell us that you are gassing.

To suggest that a PWc Partner sat on the board is being mischievous. Anthony Ellis was retired.