Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

,

Does Leroy Parris Maintain a $5,000,000.00 Deposit with the Central Bank of Barbados?

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Dr. DeLisle Worrel
Dr. DeLisle Worrel

BU seeks clarification, in the public’s interest, on a 5 millions dollar deposit listed on an asset disclosure to the Barbados Court in an Affidavit filed by LEROY PARRIS to overturn an order freezing his assets and those of Branlee Consulting Services Inc. BU is unaware the Central Bank of Barbados is authorized to accept deposits from individuals. Last week David Ellis, a friend of Governor Delisle Worrell, asked the same question on national radio. To date the question, not surprisingly, remains unanswered.

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

195 responses to “Does Leroy Parris Maintain a $5,000,000.00 Deposit with the Central Bank of Barbados?”

  1. Vincent Haynes Avatar
    Vincent Haynes

    @David February 25, 2015 at 9:52 AM #

    No,not yesterdays but have heard it before…..he is applying theory to a complex practical situation……he will understand eventually ,he means well

    @Due Diligence February 25, 2015 at 10:21 AM #

    You can also add Guatemala,Guyana,Costa Rico,etc….if memory serves,over the last 30 odd years
    We have been loosing our way gradually over the last 40 odd years with sugar and many other areas.

  2. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    What a sanctimonious hypocrite Stinkliar is!

    Who call him into this call in programme today?

    This country’s economy is crumbling and he has time to leave Bay Street and go into Deacons to pontificate and LIE, LIE, LIE behaving like he is innocent when he is the biggest perpetrator of the vote buying business. He is a lying pig.

    Stinkliar said that there are always people lining up outside his office who want to have meetings with him. What happened? He by passed these investors to go on Brasstacks to make himself a bigger liar.

    He obviously thinks that by going bold with denials people would believe that he is innocent.

    Lord, look who we have leading us!

  3. Due Diligence Avatar
    Due Diligence

    Prodigal

    “He by passed these investors”

    What investors?

    Can the Minister “Show us the money”?

  4. David Avatar
    David

    Sinckler has denied vote buying!

  5. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    Why is Mark Williams being allowed to get on like he is on Brasstacks? Cant he get his point over without being so aggressive and loud?

    Oh my goodness, no class at all!

  6. David Avatar
    David

    Perhaps Mark Williams should have been asked to explain th Red Sea. It is fine to project a positive view of Deacons but there is a reality we all know.

  7. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    @ Due Diligence February 25, 2015 at 12:43 PM

    LOL!

    I dont know…………this is what the liar said in the House some time last year. He said that there are people pulling down Barbados and telling people not to invest yet everyday he goes to his office, there are people lined up waiting to see him who want to invest in Barbados.

    No lie, this is what the man said. The clown from St Lucy said the same thing last year at a meeting in the north.

    Apart from Sandals whom they had to throw a wash pan of freeness at, we are still waiting to see these lot of investors.

    The man cannot help lying!

  8. Due Diligence Avatar
    Due Diligence

    David

    Sorry, should have been more specific.

    Should have said.

    Can the Minister show us the investors who are lining up to invest money”?

  9. Hants Avatar
    Hants

    @David “230 Clico policyholders out of 20,000 are members of BIPA.”

    What is the reason for the lack of interest in BIPA?

  10. David Avatar
    David

    @Hants

    It might be the $300 membership fee?

    It might be an unwillingness to be labelled?

    Who the hell knows.

  11. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    Barbadians are too passive.

    Imagine there is evidence that two people masterminded a company into which they poured their hard earned money monthly, helped themselves handsomely to their monies as if it was their own and lived ostentatiously.

    One of the masterminders is dead and has left millions behind for his family, the other has so much stashed away that local banks told him they do not want it any longer while policyholders cannot have a cent to survive day by day.

    Yet they are sitting back as if they really believe that this evil, inept incompetent government who has lied to them ever since this tragedy began to unfold and continues to lie to them……that somehow, some way the morons will give back their monies. Bajans like to sit back, hide in their homes and expect others to fight their battles.

    Wake up policyholders, the dems will continue to string you out until they are out of office and would not have to deal with your dilemma.

  12. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ Hants
    What is the reason for the lack of interest in BIPA?
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    do you want the sociological / psychological explanation?
    …the epistemological analysis…?

    ….or will it satisfy you to explain that Bajans are a bunch of brass bowls…?
    Why do you think that BRASS Tacks resonate so well with us…?

    WUH?
    $300 for membership?
    shiite man …. BIPA like they want to continue where Parris and Thompson left off…
    LOL, like everybody want piece offa those policyholders…

    @ David
    Sinckler has denied vote buying!
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    ..did he?

    ..or did he say that everyone does it…? and that those raising the issue (presumably including the PM and AG) are just being sanctimonious?

  13. Sunshine Sunny Shine Avatar
    Sunshine Sunny Shine

    @Prodigal

    It is obvious that there is a lot of collusion going on amongst CLICO and the beneficiaries. If it is not standard practice for the CBB to accept cash deposits from private citizens how in the world is this allowed? It is allowed because the PM is Paris friend. Paris is under a cloud of suspicion yet the PM is Paris friend. A report that possibly has incriminating evidence to show the trail of the CLICO money is sealed because Paris was once the close friend of a now deceased PM and the good friend of the current. One dead PM was millionaire and give 10 million dollars to a company he had foreknowledge was collapsing. All we know so far is that the current PM is just Paris friend. As far as I am concerned the PM has placed himself under the cloak of suspicion as well since the Paris debacle and his friendship with him make him in my books, guilty by association. There is no way in the world after the amount of controversy stirred by the CLICO collapse and the lies told by the late dead crooked David Thompson that I as Prime Minister would want to be associated with the likes of Leroy Paris. This PM, however, could not careless thus he can declare without conviction that a fraud like Paris is his friend.

  14. David Avatar
    David

    @Bush Tea

    Was he not at pain to point out he secured a loan to finance his first campaign? What was he implying? Sinckler needs to be told it is standard fare for rookies to scramble for their own craw BUT when the rookies has climb the ladder and becomes influential then…

  15. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    Stinkliar needs to understand that everybody knows he is lying and no one is buying his BS.

    So all the tablets, backpacks, polo shirts with “Chris” and all the money he gave to the minibus men to dole out did not happen. I knew of an instance where someone trying to sell one of the tablets to a friend of mine and he refused …the seller wanted $700 for something he got for free.

    What a liar! There should be a law against Ministers lying to the public! Where is the honour among these men? Have they none?

    This is the season of Lent, cant Stinkliar hold off the lying? Give it up, moron.

  16. Prodigal Son Avatar
    Prodigal Son

    David,

    And you believe him?

    Do remember that Stinkliar was sent to St Michael North West to oust Clyde Mascoll…..Thompson’s arch enemy. It was revenge time and you really think that bearing in mind the close knit between Thompson, Stinkliar and Parris that all of CLICO’s policyholders’ money would not be put behind that campaign? Remember it was Stinkliar who took the letter to the GG which said that the MP’s no longer had confidence in Mascoll………even though Stinkliar was not an MP then!

    Give me a break, Stinkliar, you think people are slow like you?

  17. Concerned.. Avatar
    Concerned..

    Stinkler
    is such a nasty liar he came to Barbadians in December last year and told them that he had a meeting with the new company company Directors of the new company Newco Insurance that was formed to commence the business of Clico and that they were beginning to look at the start of this new company. This was immediately after the Judicial Managers said they would liquidate the assets of Clico..Do you guys know that the company Newco was only registered on the 21 St January, a complete month after he said that such a company exist.

  18. David Avatar
    David

    A reminder:

    https://barbadosunderground.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/thompson-clico-invoice1.jpeg

  19. David Avatar
    David

    Would have been fair and balanced for David Ellis and co to have invited Gregory Nicholls, losing candidate in North West, to gather his views on vote buying. Mr. Nicholls what did you intend to do with the $15,000 borrowed on election day?

  20. Walter Blackman Avatar
    Walter Blackman

    David February 25, 2015 at 7:47 PM #
    “A reminder:”

    David,
    I paid a little more attention to the invoice from Thompson & Associates to Clico Holdings, and became intrigued by a reference to “construction and financing agreements between CLICO Holdings and the University of the West Indies in connection with the construction of a teaching block at Cave Hill Campus.”

    Was this block fully financed by CLICO Holdings?

    Do you think that Sir Hilary, for one moment, ever stopped to reflect upon the fact that Leroy Parris in the form of CLICO Holdings could be using policyholders’ money to finance projects like the one mentioned?

    CLICO surely had some interesting and selective tentacles.

  21. David Avatar
    David

    @ Walter

    Interesting observation you know.

    Sir Hilary was a Clico Board member at one time.

  22. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    David, were there accompanying docs which provide the details of these charges ?

    That is, was this invoice only this page?

    And the CLICO officers signed off on this. No wonder the situation devolved as it did.

  23. Enquirer.. Avatar
    Enquirer..

    University had 15m in EFPA at Clico and Parris didn’t want them to move it cause he fired the agent that sold it so he could get the commission annually. That was why he took a million from Clico to build that building. find out when the University withdrew the money from Clico did this help trigger the local collapse. There were other directors who encouraged their friends to pull out as well..

  24. Simple Simon Avatar
    Simple Simon

    @David February 25, 2015 at 9:52 AM “Did you listen to PW expounding on the fall of King Sugar in Barbados yesterday?”

    I like Peter. I think that he is a good guy and a smart guy, he certainly knows his politics but he knows nothing about agriculture. A typical town boy who does not understand the CULTURE part of agriculture.

    I don’t have a lot of hope for sugar agriculture myself, but we must not give up on agriculture, which is essentially a way of life, a CULTURE which is about having food to eat.

    If we depend entirely on others to feed us those others can decide whether we live or whether we starve to death.

  25. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    David; re. your 7:47 pm post.

    I hadn’t seen the invoice before. WoW!!!.

    Those guys really did not expect anyone to double check that transaction.

    Assuming that the signature approving the invoice is Parris’

    Even if there was not a clear stench of money laundering in the invoice it could not withstand scrutiny. It has an obvious typographical error where US$900,000 is converted to BB $1,400,000 even though the final figure of BB $1,800,000 is correct. An invoice for such a sum should not have that type of error. It is a clue that it could not have been above board. Surely the huge value of the invoice would have demanded that everything in it was correct and it should have been sent back for correction. But then I suppose it was only being used to extract some money from CLICO.

    If that invoice is typical of how Parris and David Thompson associates conducted business it shows that they had little regard for CLICO’s money and only Heaven knows how many similar invoices might have been raised by that Duo.

    I wonder who signed the covering note for the invoice and who signed the resultant cheque on behalf of DT Associates? DT or MT or MK or OS or GP or AD?

    I’m willing to bet that the associates did not see the invoice nor the cheque.

    David;
    Yuh have a copy of the front and back of the cheque?

  26. Walter Blackman Avatar
    Walter Blackman

    Enquirer.. February 25, 2015 at 9:17 PM #
    “University had 15m in EFPA at Clico and Parris didn’t want them to move it cause he fired the agent that sold it so he could get the commission annually. That was why he took a million from Clico to build that building.”

    Enquirer,
    By the time the EFPA came on the scene, CLICO’s reputation had already taken a battering. Who could have been so reckless to put $15m of UWI’s money in such a high-risk venture, with red flags flying all over the place?

  27. Enquirer.. Avatar
    Enquirer..

    Check and u will be able to find out the facts..Wasn’t head on the Board and EFPA was since 1998 when Clico was as its peak..

  28. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    “If that invoice is typical of how Parris and David Thompson associates conducted business it shows that they had little regard for CLICO’s money and only Heaven knows how many similar invoices might have been raised by that Duo.”

    And that is the kind of estimable gentleman our dear beloved PM continues to praise and protect from the arms of the law.

    Shouldn’t this matter be of major concern for Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth 11?
    Why is her Prime Minister sullying the good name of her realm?
    What are the leaders of the Commonwealth saying about this bold faced nasty act of corruption and disrespect for the law of the land of a fellow member state?

  29. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ David
    No wonder they have to seal the audit….even at the risk of looking like the mafia.
    When the authorities are the major crooks in town, it is worse than the mafia….
    It is only a matter of time now…

    Focus needs to be on those who were DIRECTORS.
    These people enjoyed the perks and bribes and betrayed the policy holders…
    ….now walking bout playing that they were ignorant….

    @ Simple Simon
    You need to understand that the concept of “being able to feed one’s self” is mostly a ‘man’ thing. Women always know that they can depend on a partner to look after their needs in exchange for “loving favours”.
    Women also tend not to be too worried about ownership of assets – as long as the benefits of those assets are available to them….
    Bushie is therefore not surprised at Wickham’s attitude to agriculture …or to the sale of national assets to foreigners…

    REAL MEN protect their home, food, drink and women (not necessarily in that order) …. to the death if needed.
    No doubt there are others who are willing to bend – as needed for peace’s sake….

  30. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    @ are-we-there-yet February 25, 2015 at 10:36 PM #

    “Even if there was not a clear stench of money laundering in the invoice it could not withstand scrutiny. It has an obvious typographical error where US$900,000 is converted to BB $1,400,000 even though the final figure of BB $1,800,000 is correct. An invoice for such a sum should not have that type of error. It is a clue that it could not have been above board. Surely the huge value of the invoice would have demanded that everything in it was correct and it should have been sent back for correction.”

    You must take into consideration that the invoice is from Thompson & Associates to CHBL and was approved for payment by CHBL personnel.

    The “typographical error where US$900,000 is converted to BB $1,400,000”, would be taken as just that, a typographical error, and would not necessarily cause any alarm for concern, especially since the extended amount listed as the total is correct. US$900,000 x 2 can only be $1,800.000.

    Supposed CLICO’s accountant returned the invoice to T&A for correction? The adjustment would have been made and the new invoice issued for payment.

  31. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    Artax, agree with you that the typo is not material considering that the final value is accurate, but Are-We has a more substantive point : the invoice needed a more detailed preparation.

    I appreciate that legal billing is its own animal but in all businesses as the ‘seller’ moves from proposal through the work stage to completion of a final invoice suggests that this document is sadly deficient.

    On the flip side, it’s difficult to accept that a company officer would accept a piece of paper seeking that type of expenditure without greater details/breakdown of how the charges were calculated.

    ‘To disbursement, expenses and fees related to searches in US Corporate Registries, Canadian registries, due diligence investigations, Assessor’s fees, valuation expenses, commencement proceedings for disclosure, opinion on international arbitration and settlement process US$523,000 x 2 = BDS $1, 046,000…” certainly DEMANDS further clarification in my view.

    I accept the law firm was CHBL’s ongoing legal adviser but the invoice is a crucial aspect of the interface between the companies and the senior officers should demand clarity.

    Wouldn’t someone want to know for ex. what the search expenses/fees were (incidental to the overall cost I know, but it highlights the casual nature of this arrangement).

    Considering that the reference to the ‘watching brief’ was subsequently disputed, this looks like the proverbial fluff job.

    Or based on subsequent events the proverbial ‘snuff’ job: Orgasmic joy just prior to the end!

  32. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    But then, considering 1) Walter’s clarity re the missing VAT charges and 2) that Mr Parris has since advised that this payment was in fact part of his gratuity we know that it was definitely a fluffy, snuff job.

    I was not aware that a crime by the officers and employees of a company dies with the dissolution of that company but clearly that is the case here.

    So now I wonder how long it will be before we see the names of attorneys Onika Stewart, Gale Prescod and Amiri Dear, which are prominently displayed on this company invoice, on the BU list of Lawyers in the News.

    One or all of them were surely involved in this transaction because according to this invoice there were supposedly some serious hours of works done.

    So all things considered one or all of these officers of the court have brazenly broken the law.

    Either, as being a party to a false invoice or willfully avoiding the tax laws of the country.

    In the big city annals of political prosecution one or more of these attorneys would be arrested on the substantive charge of the fraud and squeezed like a ripe mango to get the juice on this caper (or should I say on the smoothie)!

    But alas this ain’t the big city.

  33. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    DeeWord February 26, 2015 at 5:08 AM #

    “Artax, agree with you that the typo is not material considering that the final value is accurate, but Are-We has a more substantive point : the invoice needed a more detailed preparation.”

    DeeWord, I disagree. You and AWTY are viewing the situation against the background that it has become common knowledge, and as suggested by the forensic audit, that the circumstances surrounding the preparation of the invoice were fraudulent. However, my analysis is based on my being an accountant by profession.

    For example, supposed Company X, by way of written request, sought to contract my services to prepare financial statements for the year ending December 31, 2014. I would meet with management to assess their business operations for the year under review and subsequently provide them with correspondence outlining the scope of work to be undertaken and the associated fees.

    After completing preparation of the financial statements, I would send an invoice, which would simply state, for example, “Services rendered in connection with preparing financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2014”. It would not be necessary to include, in detail, what tasks were undertaken to prepare the statements, since the specificities of such would have already been outlined in my correspondence.

    You must take into consideration that David Thompson and Associates were CLICO’s legal advisors and the two companies would have built an “informal business relationship” over a period of time. Under ordinary circumstances, CLICO would have contracted the law firm to perform specific services. The requirements of these services would have been outlined (in detail) in a requisition or letter and the law firm would have provided them accordingly. Therefore, it would be totally un-necessary for the law firm to issue an invoice that “needed a more detailed preparation.”

  34. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    DeeWord February 26, 2015 at 5:08 AM #

    “Artax, agree with you that the typo is not material considering that the final value is accurate, but Are-We has a more substantive point : the invoice needed a more detailed preparation.”

    Another point you must take into consideration is the invoice’s heading, which was typed in bold, capital letters:

    “CONSOLIDATED INTERIM INVOICE”

    Special attention must be paid to the word “CONSOLIDATED”, which basically explains why the invoice did not need a more detailed preparation.

  35. Lemuel Avatar
    Lemuel

    I know that there are people here who are frothing at the mouth to destroy Clico Parris or at least collect monies owed to policy holders. But what I am not hearing is the broadening of the net to include those who “facilitated” Parris in his dastardly deeds. When are we getting to that point. David Thopmson and Parris are not the only villains in this thing. People, remember Hilter; he did not rule ALL by himself; most of the important Germans would have assisted Hitler in the full expression of his plans.

  36. David Avatar
    David

    What BU finds interesting is that David Thompson would have handed over the practice to the young legal bucks. On what basis would the law firm have paid a gratuity to Parris unless instructed. How does one connect Thompson to the transaction.

  37. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    DeeWord;

    You have clearly got my point and where I was heading.

    That invoice, whether consolidated or not, should not have been sullied by such a clear blatant mistake. It was not checked at source and it was not checked by CLICO. It speaks of a situation where DT associates (or almost certainly DT himself) could have submitted several invoices for millions of dollars, replete with little mistakes and have them honoured by his friend without them being checked. It also speaks of a situation where other persons in the businesses or the accounts staffs could not have seen or been involved in the invoice preparation or in the payment thereof since the little mistake would have been seen .

    The invoice was clearly a fictional construct between two powerful friends and no one else except perhaps the DT associates Office manageress.

    Indeed, the partners of both DT associates and the top brass of CLICO (not Parris) distanced themselves from that transaction and I believe them. This was a matter between DT and Parris alone and the clues in the invoice uneeringly points to that.

    It is (IMHO) a small window into the degenerate, unprofessional and don’careish operations of CLICO and the dead Prince.

    Whether it is in retrospect or not, my take on this matter is that it shows a total lack of professionalism between DT and associates and CLICO and that there was therefore a clear opportunity for the total mismanagement of that organization’s funds by the duo. Indeed, I would not be surprised if 10’s of millions of CLICO funds (ultimately from relatively small policy holders) disappeared through that chute.

    It is no wonder that the unsealing of the second JM forensic report is being so actively resisted by many stakeholders in the CLICO trough. That report has the potential to be the avenue to Dodds for many of them.

    From Artaxerxes recent interventions he appears to be missing the point and in the process suggesting that such slapdash consolidated invoicing for millions of dollars is par for his profession in Barbados. Any Forensic Auditor worth his salt should have picked up the inherent clues in that Invoice. The JM’s team did.

  38. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    Lemuel;

    I agree with you. I think that a start should be made with passing a fine tooth comb through the political contributions to top tier members of the” political class” throughout the Caribbean, like current Prime Ministers and past or deceased Prime MInisters and Families First accounts, etc.

    I have a strong suspicion that the second JM audit might have spoken to the above, wherein lies the resistance. I hope June Fowler maintains her first stance that it should be unsealed in the interests of the disadvantaged Policy Holders.

  39. are-we-there-yet Avatar
    are-we-there-yet

    David;

    That invoice shows clearly, if one reads between the lines, that DT was large and in charge of DT associates while he was PM.

    The fact that DT’s chaired a Cabinet meeting, practically on his dying bed, The overriding concern of which was to map out a strategy for dealing with the unfolding CLICO situation should also be apropos of the situation.

    My post above seeks to show that the invoice on its own can be interpreted as showing the fine hand of DT himself in that matter.

    …… and last but by no means least, the DT associates all (Note that Parris himself claimed that it was not a company but a sole ……. – I forget the legal term- ) claimed that they had no knowledge of the transaction even though it was promulgated using their letterhead. If they had no knowledge of it, it had to be a scam perpetrated by two persons only, DT and LP.

    Unfortunately all corroborating evidence on that matter would have been shredded and burnt long ago.

  40. Sunshine Sunny Shine Avatar
    Sunshine Sunny Shine

    A close friendship with a law firm is not an avenue for that firm not to provide details concerning accounting matters. Breakdowns allow for validation of financial matters arising from the decision-making process. Proper accounting structures, where conglomerates are controlled by corporate bodies, requires these necessities for determination purposes. The filing of financial statements and audits would be needed to validate any transactions relative to large financial business dealings. It is just not enough for that law firm to provide fixed lump sum statements without necessary breakdowns. The only companies that do this are companies who have an agenda. It is obvious that the relationship between CLICO and the late Prime Minister law firm attests to the fact why there are numerous accounting discrepancies relative to CLICO finances. It is not enough though it is appropriate, to provide a requisition letter entailing the nature of the business since that business is subject to change over time.

  41. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    are-we-there-yet February 26, 2015 at 8:56 AM #

    “Any Forensic Auditor worth his salt should have picked up the inherent clues in that Invoice. The JM’s team did.”

    AWTY, once again, you are basing your assumptions [and that’s all there are, assumptions] on the fact that it is common knowledge the invoice was prepared under suspicious circumstances.

    A typographical error does not necessarily prove an invoice to be fraudulent. You must agree that the invoice was a “transaction” between DTA and CLICO, and did not involve either financial or forensic auditors to check and authorize payment. The forensic audit was conducted after the fact.

    It is also important to bear in mind that forensic auditors are trained in the intricacies of financial crimes investigation, guidelines on how to question suspects, gathering and securing evidence, litigation and conduct in giving testimony in court as an expert witness. Additionally, the scope of a forensic audit far exceeds that of a financial audit.
    Therefore, to suggest that a forensic auditor can conclude an invoice is fraudulent only by looking at it, or assume it “was clearly a fictional construct between two powerful friends”, WITHOUT conducting the relevant process of investigation, is ludicrous.

    Supposed you called an electrician to rewire a house. He meets with you to inspect the premises and discuss the services to be rendered. The electrician prepares a letter for the scope of work to be undertaken, in which he describes, in detail, the services to be rendered, supplies needed to complete the job and his labour cost. Let’s assume he charges you $3,500 for the job, you agreed and he commences work.

    On completion of the job, the electrician gives you an invoice which states: “Rendering electrical installation services for AWTY, $3,500”. Are you suggesting that, because his invoice has not outlined in detail the services he rendered, it’s fraudulent, even though you have correspondence, to wit the letter, in which the services are outlined and described?

    I understand your call for an invoice to be more transparent, but prudent business practices would necessitate a process by which supporting documentation is prepared to substantiate any financial transaction and subsequently used to authorize payment [what we would refer to as a “paper trail”].

  42. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    Sunshine Sunny Shine February 26, 2015 at 10:01 AM #

    “A close friendship with a law firm is not an avenue for that firm not to provide details concerning accounting matters. Breakdowns allow for validation of financial matters arising from the decision-making process. Proper accounting structures, where conglomerates are controlled by corporate bodies, requires these necessities for determination purposes. The filing of financial statements and audits would be needed to validate any transactions relative to large financial business dealings. It is just not enough for that law firm to provide fixed lump sum statements without necessary breakdowns.”

    You are missing the point as well and you need to take the emotionalism away from the discussion. Additionally, your above “quotation” are generalized and does not speak to the core of the processes that should be followed. Under ordinary circumstances, one company does not contract another company to provide services without adhering to the guidelines governing the processes of conducting financial transactions.

    My point is, a process has to be undergone from the initiating the transaction until payment is subsequently made. If ABCD contracted EFG to provided specific legal services, proper business practice would dictate:

    • ABCD informing EFG, by way of correspondence, outlining the services they are seeking to be provided;
    • EFG would acknowledge receipt and would send a quotation or invoice outlining, IN DETAIL, the SCOPE of SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED/RENDERED AND THE ASSOCIATED FEES.

    If the above documents are in existence, it would not be necessary for EFG to submit another detailed invoice, since a consolidated invoice would be satisfactory to facilitate payment.
    Copies of the correspondence relating to this transaction, including the initial quotation/invoice and the consolidated invoice would be attached to the cheque disbursement voucher.

  43. old onion bags Avatar
    old onion bags

    Poor poor hard working Bajans…..they elected a champion to look after their interest and smack>>>GETS THIS…..how can people ever have faith in these peple and institutions now?….Is people like David Eliis who talk about balance but now skilled in the art of re-balancing to suit an end.

    Time up people!….time to find an EQUALIZER.

  44. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    Artax I don’t dispute your professional position as outlined but I question the business integrity of this invoice.

    My initial query on this (previous post) was where are the accompanying documents. That is the question I would have asked sitting in the CLICO board room if I were reviewing this prior to approval despite any ongoing informal relationship between CLICO and Thompson & Assoc.

    As a professional you would not accept this invoice if you were doing that end of year statement prep which you mentioned. I suspect that if this invoice was flagged when you were completing the prep you would not sign-off on the final accounts without details on this invoice.

    Based on your acumen displayed here, I further suspect that if you were the chief accountant at CLICO that you would have the ” correspondence … the scope of work” filed along with this invoice.

    As you said, that proposal/scope of work sets the tone but if both organizations are legitimate and upfront an invoice like this would likely have it as an addendum.

    So being consolidated as you pointed out, where is the accompanying info for the files?

    Also of course, where is the VAT charge?

    As you clearly advised, every day companies operate with similar informal relationships but your professional training also would advise that documentation and explanations are required to meet standard accounting and operational standards, far less to safeguard against fraud.

    I don’t think we are disagreeing at all really.

  45. David Avatar
    David

    @DeeWord

    The invoice, error not withstanding, had to have been approved by HR and the Board given the state of Clico at the time. Any way you view this transaction it had to be red flagged.

  46. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    Ok Artax, my remarks were prepared and posted before I saw your most recent post.

    There you agree that “Copies of the correspondence relating to this transaction, including the initial quotation/invoice and the consolidated invoice would be attached to the cheque disbursement voucher”.

    So we can conclude as Are-We said: ” The invoice was clearly a fictional construct between two powerful friends…”

    That is known now, and a careful review at the time of the invoice would have caused reason for doubt and concern although the full extent of the fraud was not then evident.

  47. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    Absolutely, David. Absolutely correct.

    Was poor management then; in the rear view mirror look like grounds for the prosecution of criminal management.

  48. DeeWord Avatar
    DeeWord

    @Are-We: “The fact that DT’s chaired a Cabinet meeting, practically on his dying bed, The overriding concern of which was to map out a strategy for dealing with the unfolding CLICO situation should also be apropos of the situation.”

    I well remember a friend calling me and was quite anxious to discuss David then imminent death. Not in the gossipy Bajan way but as age contemporaries of the man with some shared history.

    May the good Lord have mercy on all our souls, but knowing what we know now and with a reference to your quote above I wish the dear Mr Thompson an eternal journey of sitting in purgatory with none other than Tom Adams.

    In short, the worst type of hell there is.

  49. Artaxerxes Avatar
    Artaxerxes

    DeeWord February 26, 2015 at 11:31 AM #

    “As you clearly advised, every day companies operate with similar informal relationships but your professional training also would advise that documentation and explanations are required to meet standard accounting and operational standards, far less to safeguard against fraud.”

    DeeWord, you are absolutely correct. You have also raised some very important questions, which in actuality brings to fore the ethical standards set by the CLICO’s accountants, relative to approving payment for invoices such as the one in question.

    All professional accounting associations, whether they be ACCA, GGA, or CPA, have a code of ethics that are taught over the duration of studying for the professional designation, and must be adhered to by all qualified accountants.

    Firstly, the scope of work, as outlined in the invoice, was specific to Sam Lord’s Castle, its owners and Marriott’s, re “Purchase of Sam Lord’s Castle and related property; Purchase of Grant’s Hotels Limited Shareholdings; Litigation involving Marriott’s Corporation and its successors; Litigation involving Abarco Inc.”
    Note, items 1 to 3 outlined on the invoice are specific to the scope of work; however, item 4 outline legal services relative to construction and financial agreements between CLICO and UWI.

    Secondly, there is the question of VAT.

    I would have had to peruse all the related supporting documentation before authorizing payment or signing the cheque.

    If you read the JM audit report, a “red flag” was raised initially, because the amount on the invoice [i.e. $3.33M] was similar to sum of a $3.33M claim by Parris, in respect of gratuity he alleged was due to him. Such similarities would certainly initiate an investigation.

    This would require the auditors to review Parris’ employment contract, as well as any correspondence relative to the authorization of DTA providing the services as outlined in the invoice. Obviously, the auditors did not find any documentation to substantiate the legal services, and they were some doubts about the information provided to explain Parris’ gratuity.

  50. SITH Avatar
    SITH

    If you want to know who prepared the invoice, who signed the cheque on the back, and who signed the cheque on the front, ask the office manager Mara. Bring it up in the house and ask. Make the question and answer a record of Government. The cancelled cheque, if there is one, must exist somewhere. Who did Thompson and Associates bank with? Was it the same bank that asked Leroy to bank with another bank.

    There is always the chance that the invoice itself was not prepared by Thompson & Assoc. A cheque could have been drawn by Clico payable to Thompson & Associates and deposited into a 3rd account. The cheque could have been endorsed on the back “pay to”. If this were the case, the cheque would be in the possession of Clico and perhaps included in that sealed file.

The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading