Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 2 of 5

In Investment Banking and in Finance the rules of financial disclosure are simple — if you choose to speak, speak in full and not in half-truths." Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe have been providing half baked stories on the effect and impact of HC-6244-04 .The full founding affidavit for High Court Case HC-6244-04 is found here
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2059705&id=1393181020

Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe improper disclosures came at a critical time when investors were clamoring for details about Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwes' ability to settle the $ 15.4 million claim by ENG Capital relating to the 309 million Century shares which were illegally and fraudulently converted into Interfin Banking Corporation.

Instead of providing clear and accurate information to the market, Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe dropped the ball and made a bad situation worse by claiming that ENG Capital did not have a legitimate claim based on their legal opinion obtained from Mr Sternford Moyo after misleading him..

Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe is a product of a fraudulent merger between Century Bank and CFX Bank which was subsequently renamed Interfin Banking Corporation after another irregular merger between Century/CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.

In response to intense investor interest on the topic, Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe repeatedly made misleading statements in earnings forecasts and public filings and regulatory filings to the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe and to The Zimbabwe Stock Exchange about the extent of its holdings of assets which are under litigation which would most likely result in Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe failing to meet the going concern rule.

All these “fake mergers” described above were designed with the intention of concealing the initial fraudulent transfer of 309 million Century shares illegally and irregularly transfered into Century/CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation. This illegal transfer is being challenged through High court case HC-6244-04.

ENG Capital and myself are claiming US$ 15.4 million being the 309 million shares multiplied by the share price of $ 0.05 which give the claim total of US $ 15.4 million. Accordingly the share price and market value of Interfin Bank Holdings should be adjusted to take into account of this indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million which Interfin has to settle.

According to Wikipedia below are some of the factors which the share price and value of a company must factor into. One should consider Interfin Bank’s Management poor judgement in “merging” with Century/CFX Bank which has litigation under High Court Case HC-6244-04

In addition to High Court Case HC-6244-04 Interfin Bank investor need to consider the following factors raised by Wikipedia when investing in Interfin Bank Zimbabwe shares
“Stocks have two types of valuations. One is a value created using some type of cash flow, sales or fundamental earnings analysis. The other value is dictated by how much an investor is willing to pay for a particular share of stock and by how much other investors are willing to sell a stock for (in other words, by supply and demand). Both of these values change over time as investors change the way they analyze stocks and as they become more or less confident in the future of stocks.
Earnings per share is generally considered to be the single most important variable in determining a share's price. It is also a major component used to calculate the price-to-earnings valuation ratio.
An important aspect of EPS that's often ignored is the capital that is required to generate the earnings (net income) in the calculation. Two companies could generate the same EPS number, but one could do so with less equity (investment) - that company would be more efficient at using its capital to generate income and, all other things being equal, would be a "better" company.

It is important not to rely on any one financial measure, but to use it in conjunction with statement analysis and other measures
In financial markets, stock valuation is the method of calculating theoretical values of companies and their stocks. The main use of these methods is to predict future market prices, or more generally potential market prices, and thus to profit from price movement – stocks that are judged undervalued (with respect to their theoretical value) are bought, while stocks that are judged overvalued are sold, in the expectation that undervalued stocks will, on the whole, rise in value, while overvalued stocks will, on the whole, fall.
In the view of fundamental analysis, stock valuation based on fundamentals aims to give an estimate of their intrinsic value of the stock, based on predictions of the future cash flows and profitability of the business.”

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 3 of 5

Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 3 of 5
Investors and shareholders buying Interfin Bank Holdings shares need to properly access the value of the share before sinking their money into a disputed asset.Such investors are advised to review contents of High court case HC-6244-04 which is seeking the reversal of the illegal seizure of 309 Million Century Bank shares which were converted into Century/CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe.
The High court case HC-6244-04 is a must read for any and every investor or stakeholder in Interfin Banking Corporation which is in fact Century/CFX Bank in disguise.
Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe is a product of a fraudulent merger between Century Bank and CFX Bank which was subsequently renamed Interfin Banking Corporation after another irregular merger between Century/CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.

High Court Case HC-6244-04 has a direct bearing on Interfin Bank’s ability to go on as a going concern. The full finding affidavit for High Court Case HC-6244-04 is found here
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?aid=2059705&id=1393181020
All these “fake mergers” were designed with the intention of concealing the initial fraudulent transfer of 309 million Century shares illegally and irregularly transfered into Century/CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation. This illegal transfer is being challenged through High court case HC-6244-04.

ENG Capital and myself are claiming US$ 15.4 million being the 309 million shares multiplied by the share price of $ 0.05 which give the claim total of US $ 15.4 million. Accordingly the share price and market value of Interfin Bank Holdings should be adjusted to take into account of this indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million which Interfin has to settle.

According to Wikipedia below are some of the factors which the share price and value of a company must factor into. One should consider Interfin Bank’s Management poor judgement in “merging” with Century/CFX Bank which has litigation under High Court Case HC-6244-04

According to Wikipedia “Earnings Per Share (EPS). EPS is the total net income of the company divided by the number of shares outstanding. They usually have a GAAP EPS number (which means that it is computed using all of mutually agreed upon accounting rules) and a Pro Forma EPS figure (which means that they have adjusted the income to exclude any one time items as well as some non-cash items like amortization of goodwill or stock option expenses).
The most important thing to look for in the EPS figure is the overall quality of earnings. Make sure the company is not trying to manipulate their EPS numbers to make it look like they are more profitable. Also, look at the growth in EPS over the past several quarters / years to understand how volatile their EPS is, and to see if they are an underachiever or an overachiever. In other words, have they consistently beaten expectations or are they constantly restating and lowering their forecasts?
The EPS number that most analysts use is the pro forma EPS. To compute this number, use the net income that excludes any one-time gains or losses and excludes any non-cash expenses like stock options or amortization of goodwill. Then divide this number by the number of fully diluted shares outstanding. You can easily find historical EPS figures and to see forecasts for the next 1–2 years by visiting free financial sites such as Yahoo Finance (enter the ticker and then click on "estimates").
By doing your fundamental investment research you'll be able to arrive at your own EPS forecasts, which you can then apply to the other valuation techniques below.
Price to Earnings (P/E). Now that you have several EPS figures (historical and forecasts), you'll be able to look at the most common valuation technique used by analysts, the price to earnings ratio, or P/E. To compute this figure, take the stock price and divide it by the annual EPS figure. For example, if the stock is trading at $10 and the EPS is $0.50, the P/E is 20 times. To get a good feeling of what P/E multiple a stock trades at, be sure to look at the historical and forward ratios.
Historical P/Es are computed by taking the current price divided by the sum of the EPS for the last four quarters, or for the previous year. You should also look at the historical trends of the P/E by viewing a chart of its historical P/E over the last several years (you can find on most finance sites like Yahoo Finance). Specifically you want to find out what range the P/E has traded in so that you can determine if the current P/E is high or low versus its historical average.
Forward P/Es are probably the single most important valuation method because they reflect the future growth of the company into the figure. And remember, all stocks are priced based on their future earnings, not on their past earnings. However, past earnings are sometimes a good indicator for future earnings. Forward P/Es are computed by taking the current stock price divided by the sum of the EPS estimates for the next four quarters, or for the EPS estimate for next calendar of fiscal year or two.

I always use the Forward P/E for the next two calendar years to compute my forward P/Es. That way I can easily compare the P/E of one company to that of its competitors and to that of the market. For example, Cisco's fiscal year ends in July, so to compute the P/E for that calendar year, I would add together the quarterly EPS estimates (or actuals in some cases) for its quarters ended April, July, October and the next January. Use the current price divided by this number to arrive at the P/E.
Also, it is important to remember that P/Es change constantly. If there is a large price change in a stock you are watching, or if the earnings (EPS) estimates change, be sure to recompute the ratio.
Growth Rate. Valuations rely very heavily on the expected growth rate of a company. For starters, you can look at the historical growth rate of both sales and income to get a feeling for what type of future growth that you can expect. However, companies are constantly changing, as well as the economy, so don't rely on historical growth rates to predict the future, but instead use them as a guideline for what future growth could look like if similar circumstances are encountered by the company. To calculate your future growth rate, you'll need to do your own investment research.

The easiest way to arrive at this forecast is to listen to the company's quarterly conference call, or if it has already happened, then read a press release or other company article that discusses the company's growth guidance. However, remember that although company's are in the best position to forecast their own growth, they are not very accurate, and things change rapidly in the economy and in their industry. So before you forecast a growth rate, try to take all of these factors into account.”

Adopted from Wikipedia to illustrate other factors which Interfin Bank Investors and shareholders should consider when trading in Interfin Bank Holdings shares.


This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 4 of 5

ENG Capital and myself are claiming US$ 15.4 million being the 309 million shares multiplied by the share price of $ 0.05 which give the claim total of US $ 15.4 million. Accordingly the share price and market value of Interfin Bank Holdings should be adjusted to take into account of this indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million which Interfin has to settle.

Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe is a product of a fraudulent merger between Century Bank and CFX Bank which was subsequently renamed Interfin Banking Corporation after another irregular merger between Century/CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.

All these “fake mergers” were designed with the intention of concealing the initial fraudulent transfer of 309 million Century shares illegally and irregularly transfered into Century/CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation. This illegal transfer is being challenged through High court case HC-6244-04.


According to Wikipedia below are some of the factors which the share price and value of a company must factor into. One should consider Interfin Bank’s Management poor judgement in “merging” with Century/CFX Bank which has litigation under High Court Case HC-6244-04

Wikipedia states that “Return on Invested Capital (ROIC). This valuation technique measures how much money the company makes each year per dollar of invested capital. Invested Capital is the amount of money invested in the company by both stockholders and debtors. The ratio is expressed as a percent and you should look for a percent that approximates the level of growth that you expect. In its simplest definition, this ratio measures the investment return that management is able to get for its capital. The higher the number, the better the return.
To compute the ratio, take the pro forma net income (same one used in the EPS figure mentioned above) and divide it by the invested capital. Invested capital can be estimated by adding together the stockholders equity, the total long and short term debt and accounts payable, and then subtracting accounts receivable and cash (all of these numbers can be found on the company's latest quarterly balance sheet). This ratio is much more useful when you compare it to other companies that you are valuing.
Return on Assets (ROA). Similar to ROIC, ROA, expressed as a percent, measures the company's ability to make money from its assets. To measure the ROA, take the pro forma net income divided by the total assets. However, because of very common irregularities in balance sheets (due to things like Goodwill, write-offs, discontinuations, etc.) this ratio is not always a good indicator of the company's potential. If the ratio is higher or lower than you expected, be sure to look closely at the assets to see what could be over or understating the figure.

Price to Sales (P/S). This figure is useful because it compares the current stock price to the annual sales. In other words, it tells you how much the stock costs per dollar of sales earned. To compute it, take the current stock price divided by the annual sales per share.

The annual sales per share should be calculated by taking the net sales for the last four quarters divided by the fully diluted shares outstanding (both of these figures can be found by looking at the press releases or quarterly reports).

The price to sales ratio is useful, but it does not take into account any debt the company has. For example, if a company is heavily financed by debt instead of equity, then the sales per share will seem high (the P/S will be lower). All things equal, a lower P/S ratio is better. However, this ratio is best looked at when comparing more than one company.

Market Cap. Market Cap, which is short for Market Capitalization, is the value of all of the company's stock. To measure it, multiply the current stock price by the fully diluted shares outstanding. Remember, the market cap is only the value of the stock. To get a more complete picture, you'll want to look at the Enterprise Value.
Enterprise Value (EV). Enterprise Value is equal to the total value of the company, as it is trading for on the stock market. To compute it, add the market cap (see above) and the total net debt of the company.

The total net debt is equal to total long and short term debt plus accounts payable, minus accounts receivable, minus cash. The Enterprise Value is the best approximation of what a company is worth at any point in time because it takes into account the actual stock price instead of balance sheet prices” according to Wikepedia

Adopted from Wikipedia to illustrate how and why the Interfin Banking Corporation share price and market value should be adjusted to reflect the ENG Capital indisputable claim of US $ 15.4 million being the stolen 309 million shares multiplied by the share value of $ 0.05 per share givng the total claim total of $ 15.4 million which Interfin Bank owes to me and my Company ENG Capital – Relentless Innovation.
This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 5 of 5

Interfin Bank Holdings share price should reflect ENG Capital claim Part 5 of 5
Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe is a product of a fraudulent merger between Century Bank and CFX Bank which was subsequently renamed Interfin Banking Corporation after another irregular merger between Century/CFX Bank and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe.

All these “fake mergers” were designed with the intention of concealing the initial fraudulent transfer of 309 million Century shares illegally and irregularly transfered into Century/CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation. This illegal transfer is being challenged through High court case HC-6244-04.

ENG Capital and myself are claiming US$ 15.4 million being the 309 million shares multiplied by the share price of $ 0.05 which give the claim total of US $ 15.4 million. Accordingly the share price and market value of Interfin Bank Holdings should be adjusted to take into account of this indisputable claim of $ 15.4 million which Interfin has to settle.

According to Wikipedia below are some of the factors which the share price and value of a company must factor into. One should consider Interfin Bank’s Management poor judgement in “merging” with Century/CFX Bank which has litigation under High Court Case HC-6244-04

“Management issues
Management issues: This involves examining perceptions about management and perceptions by management. It includes various qualitative judgments regarding the competence of current and prospective company management, as well as issues related to insider buying, future strategies to increase operations and market share. Most large companies compensate executives through a combination of cash, restricted stock and options. It is a positive sign when members of management are also shareholders.

When management makes large purchases of their own stock with private funds, it may indicate that management insiders feel the company is undervalued, or that a favorable company event will occur soon.

Another way to get a feel for management capability is to examine how executives performed at other companies in the past. Warren Buffett has several recommendations for investors who want to evaluate a company’s management as a precursor to possible investment in that company’s stock. For example, he advises that one way to determine if management is doing a good job is to evaluate the company's return on equity, instead of their earnings per share (the portion of a company’s profit allocated to each outstanding share of common stock).
"The primary test of managerial economic performance is achievement of a high earnings rate on equity capital employed (without undue leverage, accounting gimmickry, etc.) and not the achievement of consistent gains in earnings per share."

Buffett notes that because companies usually retain a portion of their earnings, the assets a profitable company owns, should increase annually. This additional cash allows the company to report increased earnings per share even if their performance is deteriorating.

He also emphasizes investing in companies with a management team that is committed to controlling costs. Cost-control is reflected by a profit margin exceeding those of competitors. Superior managers "attack costs as vigorously when profits are at record levels as when they are under pressure".

Therefore, be wary of companies that have opulent corporate offices, unusually large corporate staffs and other signs of bloat. Additionally, Buffett suggests investing in companies with honest and candid management, and avoiding companies that have a history of using accounting gimmicks to inflate profits or have mislead investors in the past”
Adopted from Wikipedia
This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@engcapital.ca . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Mutumwa Mawere’s return critical for Zimbabwe investor confidence Part 1 of 5

Mutumwa Mawere’s return critical for Zimbabwe investor confidence Part 1 of 5
Mutumwa Mawere one of Zimbabwe’s business icon “touched down at Harare International Airport at 1355 hours yesterday aboard a British Airways flight from Johannesburg after spending six years “in the wilderness”. This has to be one of the most visible achievement by the Government of National Unity in terms of being progressive and being “business friendly” Mawere’s safe return sends an encouraging signal to investors that indeed Zimbabwe is now on the progressive path to recovery and tolerance.
I personally met Mawere on different occasions in Harare, London and Toronto under different circumstances. When I met him in London one thing me struck most is how relaxed but focused he was on setting the record straight and also impart his vast business knowledge to others.
Below is how he is his early business life is described
“Mutumwa Dziva Mawere (born January 11, 1960 in Bindura, Zimbabwe), is an African business executive, pioneer, financier, banker and entrepreneur best known as the founder and Chairman of Africa Resources Limited ("ARL"). He is known for having built one of the most powerful and influential corporations in Zimbabwe's history called Africa Resources Limited
He was educated in Zimbabwe, Swaziland, United Kingdom and United States. He holds B.Sc (Economics), M.Sc (Management), MBA (Finance & Investments) degrees as well as other professional qualifications.
He began his professional career as an Acturial Student in 1984. He then joined the Industrial Development Corporation of Zimbabwe in late 1984 as a Research Economist and rose through the ranks to become a Senior Research Economist in 1987 before joining the Merchant Bank of Central Africa in the same year as a Corporate Finance Executive.
In 1988, he joined the World Bank as a Young Professional. After completing the program in 1989, he was appointed as an Investment Officer for the International Finance Corporation, the private sector lending arm of the World Bank. He rose through the ranks to become a Senior Investment Officer in 1994. In 1995, he resigned from the World Bank and immigrated to South Africa where he has been based since.
In 1995, he founded Africa Resources Limited (ARL), an investment holding company incorporated under the laws of the British Virgin Island, before moving to South Africa. In August 1995, he approached T & N Plc the UK domiciled parent company of Shabanie & Mashaba Mines Private Limited (SMM) with a proposal to acquire the company's Zimbabwean subsidiaries i.e. the asbestos mines, two Zimbabwean industrial companies and a Zambian manufacturing company. Negotiations began in September 1995.
In November 1995, Mawere formed a partnership with Investec Bank Limited, a South African investment bank, to structure and mobilize financing for a mining private equity fund.

While working on the private equity fund, he continued his negotiations with T & N that culminated in an agreement in March 1996 pursuant to which ARL, a company in which he is the sole shareholder, acquired the remaining mining and industrial assets of T & N in Zimbabwe and Zambia.
Since the acquisition of T & N's two UK based companies that were the sole beneficial owners of the Zimbabwean and Zambian companies, the ARL group of companies grew organically and through acquisitions to become one of the largest and diversified black controlled conglomerates with operations in South Africa, UK, Zambia, Namibia, and Malawi employing about 20,000 people and generating a turnover of about US$400 million.
In 1997, the group established a warehousing and forwarding business, Shipping Consolidated Holdings ("SCH") with operations in Zimbabwe (container depot) and Durban, South Africa (warehouse). Acquired a 100% stake in a cellular service provider, CST Cellular Private Limited, later renamed Firstel Cellular Zimbabwe.

Mawere was the promoter, sponsor and investor in a greenfield commercial bank, FBC Bank ("FBC"). FBC was registered as a commercial bank in February 1997 in accordance with the Zimbabwe Banking Act. FBC is one of the first three commercial banks to be provided with an operating license by the Registrar of Banks and Financial Institutions since 1981. Since opening its first branch in August 1997, FBC has established 14 branch locations countrywide.”
Mawere’s return to Zimbabwe opens a new chapter in Zimbabwe’s business environment as the country seeks to cement its image as an attractive emerging market. If individuals such as Sir Richard Branson are keen to invest in Zimbabwe ,it goes without saying that Zimbabwe’s own leading business people like Mawere must be at the forefront exploiting business opportunities that are so abundant in Zimbabwe.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 6 of 10)

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 6 of 10)
Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank clearly have no answer to the fact that they irregularly and illegally grabbed Century /CFX Bank but avoidance, pretentiousness and pretense driven by misleading their lawyers and misinforming the investing public and regulatory Authorities.
.Given that High Court case HC-6244-04 is still before the courts it is a puzzling mystery that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank even had enough guts to go and convince a respectable lawyer such as Mr Sternford Moyo to provide a legal opinion based on incomplete facts. This is shocking for a Banker to go and mislead a respectable senior lawyer of Mr Moyo’s experience and stature.
This clearly shows that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank did not do a proper due diligence exercise.If they had done a complete and proper due diligence they would have discovered that High Court case HC-6244-04 blocking the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank is still pending before the courts.

In addition Farai Rwodzi and Interfin should have followed the basics of a due diligence listed below ;


INSURANCE
A. List and description of all material property, casualty, liability and other insurance policies
B. Any directors' and officers' liability insurance policies
C. Description of present reserves for, and all potential claims with respect to, any self-insurance
D. History of all insured claims including paid, reserved, and related expense amounts (first dollar loss run)
E. Loss runs for workers' compensation and general liability
F. Loss history for any self-insurance (first dollar loss run)
G. Loss prevention/control recommendations made by insurers, brokers or consultants
SALES/MARKETING

A. Description of the markets in which the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries operate, identifying the type of customers and the size of the overall market (by value)
B. Identify any customers which account for more than 1% of annual sales of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries or, if there are more than ten such customers, the ten largest customers
1. The quarterly totals of sales
2. Details of current sales order statistics available to management
3. Sales comparison with the industry
4. Copies of standard sales correspondence, returns and allowance material together with samples of all forms of purchase orders, invoices, warranty agreements, guarantees, etc
5. Details of pricing policies and fluctuations
6. Copies of all printed price lists
7. Identification of principal competitors, a description of the basis of competition and the strength and weaknesses of the principal competitors
8. Indication of the relative size of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries within the industry. Details of trade associations relating to the business and any company memberships
9. Details of current advertising program (including copies of all promotional or other material used or capable of use in connection with the business) and the cost of the same and any other promotion programs
10. Details of sales policies and methods of remuneration of sales personnel

11. The policy on giving express product warranties and rights to customers to refunds, exchanges or credits following a purchase and the value of refunds, exchanges or credits given and warranty claims
12. List the 10 largest suppliers
13. Current research and development plans and budgets
14. Correspondence and other documents relating to negotiations with competitors of the Company
15. Consultants', engineers' or management reports and marketing studies relating to broad aspects of the business, operations or products
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Press releases
B. Listing and description of subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, etc.
C. Description of any future acquisition or disposition plans
D. Description of any future restructuring plans
E. Description of Company's information management system, including any future changes planned.

It is clear that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation avoided a proper due diligence exercise which would have revealed the existence of High Court Case HC-6244-04 challenging the illegal and irregular transfer of Century Bank into CFX Bank then finally into Interfin Banking Corporation. No amount of rebranding or renaming will conceal this fraudulent transactions all designed to hide the illegal nature of the underlying activities.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 5 of 10)

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 5 of 10)
Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank clearly have no honest answer to the fact that they irregularly and illegally grabbed Century /CFX Bank hide behind conflicting advice which was obtained through manipulation and partial information disclosure.
Given that High Court case HC-6244-04 challenging mthe illegal and irregular transfer of the 309 million Century Shares is still before the courts it is a puzzling mystery that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank even had enough guts to go and convince a respectable lawyer such as Mr Sternford Moyo to provide a legal opinion based on incomplete facts.
Such is the desperation that Rwodzi and Interfin ended up relying on an opinion by Mr Moyo which opinion is in direct contradiction to the one given by Mr Addington Chinake on the same transaction.

Mr Chinake concluded that since Gilbert Muponda is specified he has no rights to challenge the illegal transfer of Century to CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation.Yet given the same facts Mr Sternford Moyo states that I have legal right to challenge the illegal sale and transfer of the Bank and block the subsequent laundering attempts of renaming the Bank CFX and then Interfin Banking Corporation.

This clearly shows that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank did not do a proper due diligence exercise.If they had done a complete and proper due diligence they would have discovered that High Court case HC-6244-04 blocking the illegal sale and transfer of Century Bank is still pending before the courts.

In addition Farai Rwodzi and Interfin should have followed the basics of a due diligence listed below ;


“ PROPRIETARY RIGHTS
A. General

1. List and details of any material Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) registered or for which applications for registration have been, including, patents, licenses, trademarks, trade names, domain names, copyrights and other intellectual property rights (including technology transfers)
2. Particulars of any license, royalty and other intellectual property agreements (where the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries is licensor or licensee)
3. List and description of any pending or threatened claims for infringement or other violations of proprietary rights owned or used in the business of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries, including any challenges as to the validity, subsistence or ownership of such rights
4. List and description of any suspected or alleged infringement by third parties of intellectual property rights owned by the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries, or used in their business
5. Arrangements for the disclosure of confidential information (which includes technical and commercial information and know-how which is not in the public domain) either by or to the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries
6. Details of any agreements with employees and consultants regarding their use of the confidential information of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries
7. Agreements, policies or other arrangements relating to proprietary rights of employees in products of the Company, any subsidiary or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries (including royalty or other fee arrangements)


VII. PLANT, PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
A. Real Property
1. Description, location and character of all real property owned
2. Material deeds, surveys and other real property title documents
3. List of any material real property mortgages which are not disclosed in most recent financial statements
4. List of all leased real property, including descriptions, terms of leases, sale and leaseback arrangements, options, annual costs, etc.
5. Reporting letters and opinions regarding the acquisition of any material real property
6. List of title insurance policies
B. Personal Property
1. Description, location and character of all personal property owned
2. List of all material leased personal property, including descriptions, terms of leases, options, annual costs, etc.
C. Miscellaneous
1. Description of facilities and plant, including listing of all material fixed assets and accumulated depreciation
2. Any available appraisals
VIII. INSURANCE
A. List and description of all material property, casualty, liability and other insurance policies
B. Any directors' and officers' liability insurance policies
C. Description of present reserves for, and all potential claims with respect to, any self-insurance
D. History of all insured claims including paid, reserved, and related expense amounts (first dollar loss run)
E. Loss runs for workers' compensation and general liability
F. Loss history for any self-insurance (first dollar loss run)
G. Loss prevention/control recommendations made by insurers, brokers or consultants
IX. SALES/MARKETING

A. Description of the markets in which the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries operate, identifying the type of customers and the size of the overall market (by value)
B. Identify any customers which account for more than 1% of annual sales of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries or, if there are more than ten such customers, the ten largest customers
1. The quarterly totals of sales
2. Details of current sales order statistics available to management
3. Sales comparison with the industry
4. Copies of standard sales correspondence, returns and allowance material together with samples of all forms of purchase orders, invoices, warranty agreements, guarantees, etc
5. Details of pricing policies and fluctuations
6. Copies of all printed price lists
7. Identification of principal competitors, a description of the basis of competition and the strength and weaknesses of the principal competitors
8. Indication of the relative size of the Company, its subsidiaries or any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries within the industry. Details of trade associations relating to the business and any company memberships
9. Details of current advertising program (including copies of all promotional or other material used or capable of use in connection with the business) and the cost of the same and any other promotion programs
10. Detailsofsalesocies and methods of remuneration of sales personnel

11. The policy on giving express product warranties and rights to customers to refunds, exchanges or credits following a purchase and the value of refunds, exchanges or credits given and warranty claims
12. List the 10 largest suppliers
13. Current research and development plans and budgets
14. Correspondence and other documents relating to negotiations with competitors of the Company
15. Consultants', engineers' or management reports and marketing studies relating to broad aspects of the business, operations or products
X. MISCELLANEOUS
A. Press releases
B. Listing and description of subsidiaries, joint ventures, partnerships, etc.
C. Description of any future acquisition or disposition plans
D. Description of any future restructuring plans
E. Description of Company's information management system, including any future changes planned.”

These are basic steps that would have highlighted the exixstance of High Court Case HC-6244-04 which would have provided Mr Moyo and Mr Farai Rwodzi an accurate picture before misleading the investing public.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 5 of 5

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 5 of 5

Interfin Bank Directors seem to be ill advised and practizing massive self-deception on a grand scale. It is well documented and in public domain that I challenged the illegal sale and or transfer of Century bank through High Court case HC-6244-04.Yet they go ahead and somehow convince a Lawyer of Mr Sternford Moyo’s standing to issue a legal opinion that has an effect of breaking the ZSE Act and mislead the investing public. This is a serious offence under the ZSE Act, Company Act and other Zimbabwean laws that govern director fiduciary duties.
These Directors need to know that in their personal capacity they could be fired, tried and convicted for lying to minority shareholders and the Investing public...their employer.

Everyone wants the money, but it pretty much amounts to selling your soul when supposedly respected members of the comm7unity such as Bank directors willingly mislead the regulatory bodies such as The Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe Stock Exchange ,Ministry of Finance, Securities Commission etc.


The ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACTActs 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980. Is clear on this. Below is an extract from the ZSE act which Interfin Banking Corporation Directors ought to be familiar with since they run a Company governed by this act.


“73 Prohibition of fraudulent acts or of carrying on business of stock exchange
(1) No person shall—
(a) make or cause or permit to be made in any document or return which
is required by or under this Act to be sent to the Secretary, the Minister, the Registrar,
the Committee, the Exchange auditor or an auditor referred to in paragraph (d) of
section forty-six a statement which he knows to be false or does not know or believe
to be true; or
(b) by addition, alteration, erasure or omission falsify any document or
return referred to in paragraph (a); or
(c) by any statement, promise or forecast which he knows to be false or
does not know or believe to be true induce any other person to purchase or sell any
securities; or
(d) directly or indirectly use or take part in any manipulative or deceptive
method of dealing in listed securities likely to stimulate further dealings in listed
securities or any class or classes thereof on the Exchange; or
(e) by means of fictitious transactions or the spreading of false reports
influence the prices of listed securities or any class or classes thereof on the
Exchange.”
Practizing self deception at an alarming scale when they willingly break the relevant Governing Act .This act is freely available on the internet and Interfin Bank Directors need to familiarize themselves .The direct link is here http://www.parlzim.gov.zw/cms/Acts/Title24_COMMERCIAL_AND_FINANCIAL_INSTITUTIONS/ZIMBABWE_STOCK_EXCHANGE_ACT_24_18.pdf
Interfin Banking Corporation Directors seem to be practizing moral flexibility whilst bending rules and regulations to conceal their prior knowledge of a legitimate claim which they with held informing their employers who are the Investing public who are protected by the ZIMBABWE STOCK EXCHANGE ACT Acts 27/1973, 24/1975, 15/1981, 20/1984; R.G.Ns 54/1975; 1135/1975, S.Is 468/1979, 236/1980.

High Court Case HC-6244-04 was filed in 2004 and its still pending before the courts. Yet Interfin Banking Corporation Directors pretend there was never any challenge to their illegal and irregular grabbing of Century/CFX Bank.

By will fully and deliberately misleading the Investing Public in violation of the ZSE Act Interfin Banking Corporation is an organization that has re-defined the definition of corruption , deceit and concealment of material information from Investing public and Regulatory Authorities.


This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 4 of 5

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 4 of 5

Mr Sternford Moyo’s claim that there was never an objection to the sale and or transfer of the Century Shares into CFX Bank shares then Interfin Bank shares can not go unchallenged .His opinion must be put under an intregrity test and be compared to publicly available information.

In my original article titled “Gilbert Muponda: Further Revelations on the Century/CFX bank Fraud”
Published more than a year ago on Sep 28th, 2009 and filed under Financial News, which appeared in many newspapers including The Zimbabwe Metro Newspaper I made it clear there was already a High Court case blocking the illegal sale and transfer of the 309 Million Century Shares. The relevant link is here http://www.zimbabwemetro.com/finance/gilbert-muponda-further-revelations-on-the-centurycfx-bank-fraud/

Therefore anyone who did a serious due diligence would have discovered that the dealing in such shares was null and void in addition to being illegal and fraudulent as it was misleading the investing public.

Below is the full article wherein I made it clear High Court Case HC 6244-04 had been set in motion and therefore any dealing in the said 309 million Century shares and any attempt to conceal the original fraudulent transfer will constitute further unacceptable fraudulent behavior and decepit meant to mislead regulatory Authorities and the General Investing public

The original article -
“It appears there is a misunderstanding on why I have been publishing letters relating to claim for ownership of 309 million Century/CFX Bank shares. In addition some have asked why the matter is being raised 5 years after the 309 Million shares were irregularly sold and transferred.

When the sale was done on or around 12 May 2004 I through my lawyers Ziweni and Company filed a high court application to block the sale of the shares. This record should still be there at the HarareHigh Court. As soon as we filed this application I was then specified without a hearing. This limited my ability to follow up the application. My lawyer and his firm was also specified. Leaving me without legal representation on the matter.

This was all done to ensure that the 309 million shares are sold, transferred and Century/CFX Bank is snatched from my Company – ENG Capital.
Several articles have been written highlighting how these 309 million shares and Century/CFX bank was grabbed from ENG Capital. Over the time we had hoped the current and previous Directors and Management of CFX Bank would reach out and try to find out what really transpired and resolve our claim. This is the normal way of doing business.

If you hear someone claiming ownership of your Bank or business you are expected to confront or engage that person to verify the nature of their claim. The CFX Bank Board, Management and shareholders somehow made the arrogant decision to behave as if everything is normal and totally disregard a claim which has been documented even at High court since day one of the fraudulent merger between Century and CFX Bank.

Even the latest press comments by the Bank through an individual identified as its Lawyer it appears they want to keep hiding behind technicalities such as you should have raised the claim earlier or you are specified therefore you cant act on your own behalf. This is inaccurate and misleading.

This level of arrogance and total disregard of material facts and potential impact on investors is an attitude which must be challenged and stopped. As out lined above this matter was filed at the high court in May 2004.And over the years articles detailing the claim have been published. Any serious and responsible Board of Directors would have taken corrective action by at least engaging in negotiations.

Let it be noted that had they done that at early stages this matter would have been closed by simply acknowledging that there was some injustice but however they were not aware that such a thing had happened. This would have been a reasonable and acceptable position.

However it appears the current Board and Management want to keep denying clear facts and act as if nothing was amiss. The continual reference to my specification only highlights that the people who grabbed Century/CFX Bank from me and ENG Capital are the same people who abused the law and manipulated the legal system to specify me without a hearing so that I can follow through action to block the sale and transfer of the shares.
The cases of illegal and unjust business seizures have been occurring at an alarming rate in Zimbabwe. This must be firstly documented. Those doing it must be notified and warned. Those aiding ,abetting and facilitating such business seizures must be documented and be made aware records exist of their illegal action.

Employees in affected businesses such as employees at CFX Bank are encouraged and expected to remain professional and do their best to keep the Company vibrant but must avoid being used as proxies in a shareholder fight. This is not wise.

This part of an effort to fully document and seek redress for the fraudulent transfer of 309 million shares which were used to merge Century Bank and CFX Bank. CFX Bank was created as a result of a merger between CFX Bank and Century Bank.

Century Bank was fraudulently merged with CFX Bank through the illegal and irregular transfer of 309,000,000 Century Holdings shares owned by ENG Capital and Companies owned or controlled by ENG Capital. Since this was a fraudulent and illegal transfer of ENG shares the plotters of the scheme renamed the resultant bank CFX Bank dropping the name “Century” in an effort to hide their tracks and attempt to remove any link with Century.

In April 2003 ENG Capital Investments acquired Century Discount Holdings from Century Financial Holdings ( A ZSE listed Financial Holdings Firm).The purchase price was Z$1.5 billion then equivalent to US$ 3 million. The purchase price was paid in full. ENG then applied to the Registrar of Banks and Financial Institutions for the change of controlling shareholder approval which approvals were denied.

After several attempts to get the underlying reasons for the denial I was informed that ? the Authorities? were not comfortable with ENG political inclination which they said remained ?unclear? in addition issue of the ENG Directors age was raised. We then tried to find out if Century Financial Holdings was in a position to refund ENG for the purchase price and to reverse the Century Discount House purchase. Century Holdings was not in a position to refund ENG.

The only recourse was that ENG had to acquire Century Financial Holdings to mitigate any potential loss of outlay on the Century Discount house acquisition. As such ENG and its associated Companies acquired a total of 52% (including the 309 million) of Century Financial Holdings making Century an ENG subsidiary.

Through our Lawyers Ziweni and Company we sought the identity of the buyer and also to clarify that the share sell was null and void as it had all the hall marks of corruption, insider dealing and was being challenged by the beneficial owners of the shares. In addition the shares had been sold through a special bargain and not an open market transparent transaction. The shares were sold for an unrealistic amount of Z$ 3 billion when ENG Capital had acquired the same shares for at least Z$35 billion. This resulted in the prejudice of Z$ 32 billion to ENG Capital Creditors and Contributories/Shareholders. We also asked the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange to investigate and stop the share transfer.

These articles form part of a wider effort to ensure that Zimbabwe?s Corporate sector eventually develops to be one where shareholders are respected and the rule of law is not applied selectively in terms of Investor protection. Whilst the case study may be focused on the 309 million shares and ownership of Century/CFX Bank the facts and scenario can be applied to other businesses that were affected by similar schemes that we devised by corrupt politicians and a corrupt central Bank Governor. It is very important that such cases be clearly and completely be documented.”

End of original article.

When such articles are freely available in the public domain it becomes a puzzling mystery as to why a Senior Lawyer such as Mr Moyo would write an opinion claiming that there was never a challenge to the illegal sale and irregular transfer of the 309 million shares when High Court Case HC-6244-04 is pending before the courts.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 3 of 5

Sternford Moyo misled & manipulated by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin on ENG Capital – Part 3 of 5

After going through the legal opinion provided by Mr Sternford Moyo to Interfin regarding the disputed takeover over Century/ CFX Bank and its subsequate rebranding into Interfin Banking Corporation it becomes clear that Mr Moyo is a victim of deception and manipulation.

He was deceived into believing that there was never a legal challenge to the fraudulent and illegal transfer of the 309 million Century Shares into CFX Bank then into Interfin Banking Corporation. All records will show this illegal transaction was challenged through various letters and High Court application HC 6244-04 filed at Harare on May 2004.

This challenge was widely reported in the Herald Newspaper, The Independent and the Daily Mirror. Records at the National archives will confirm this .It remains a mystery why Mr Moyo would claim that there was never a challenge when publicly available records confirm the existence of a challenge which is currently before the courts.

“Prima facie, therefore, any disposal by the liquidator which is confirmed by the High Court or the Master of the High Court is a lawful disposal. A party alleging that the liquidation procedures were influenced by an unlawful act or unlawful activities has to make the claim formally in court and establish the basis for any allegation he or she may make.

It has been suggested in another opinion on the matter that Section 10 of the Prevention of Corruption Act [Chapter 9:16] divests Muponda of any locus standi. This is not correct. The issue was addressed by the Supreme Court in the case of MUTUMWA DZIVA MAWERE v THE MINISTER OFJUSTICE, LEGAL AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS, S.C. NO. 158 OF 2005. In that matter, an objection to locus standi was raised on the basis that Mutumwa Mawere was a specified person and could not, therefore, institute legal proceedings to challenge his specification or at all without the authority of the investigator. It was common cause that the prohibition was not absolute and could be cured by the authority of the investigator. Likewise, the obstacle faced by the directors of ENG can be cured by the authority of the investigator. ……….”

It is clear from the above that Mr Moyo was misinformed and his opinion was possibly fraudulently obtained. It is noteworthy to find out who misled him and what was the intention and motive for such misinformation. What was being hidden by the false impression that there was never a court case to challenge the transfer of shares? It is clear he gave an opinion which he would not have otherwise given had he been furnished with the full facts especially my founding affidavit for High Court Case HC -6244-04

Mr Moyo continues “……Consequently, Mr Muponda or Mr Watyoka, wherever they may be, can institute legal proceedings notwithstanding the specification. Decisions to the High Court to the contrary made before 11th September 2008 when the Supreme Court made its above finding are applicable only where the specified person proposes to use the resources of his estate in Zimbabwe. An additional basis raised by the Supreme Court is given on page 6 of the judgment where the Supreme Court pointed out that: “In addition, it is a moot issue whether he can be deprived of his constitutional right to challenge an administrative decision such as the above in a court of law to test its correctness. For example if such authority was refused by the investigator the appellant would have a right to appeal if it was unreasonably refused.”

Contrary to the above excerpts the illegal sale of the 309 million shares was challenged through various channels. Letters of complaint were sent to -
(1) the Register of the High court
(2) Liquidator
(3) Zimbabwe Stock Exchange
(4) Fidelity Stock Brokers
(5) Century Holdings Limited
This was followed up by a High Court application HC -6244-04 blocking the sale and or transfer of the 309 million Century/CFX Bank Shares. Its mind boggling that a Bank such as Interfin with the assistance of a lawyer of Mr Moyo’s standing would conduct a due diligence and fail to uncover the existence of such publicly available records which can even be obtained from the National Archives.

This behavior only serves to confirm that Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation have something to hide that’s why they misled a leading lawyer without letting him review details of High Court Case HC-6244-04

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 4 of 10

Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank clearly have no answer to the fact that they irregularly and illegally grabbed Century /CFX Bank but avoidance, pretentiousness and pretense .Given that High Court case HC-6244-04 is still before the courts it is a puzzling mystery that Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank even had enough guts to go and convince a respectable lawyer such as Mr Sternford Moyo to provide a legal opinion based on incomplete facts. This is shocking for a Banker to go and mislead a respectable senior lawyer of Mr Moyo’s experience and stature.

Having reviewed Mr Sternford Moyo’s Opinion which appeared on NEHANDARADIO.COM it is clear Mr Moyo was not well briefed and his reputation is being abused by individuals who are determined to conceal their shaddy deals by asking him to provide an opinion that he would otherwise not provide should he review all facts especially my affidavit for High Court Case HC -6244-04.Mr Moyo has been made to believe that the sale of the shares was never challenged.

However this is false and misleading because right now High Court Case HC-6244-04 filed by my then lawyer Mr Oscar Ziweni in May 2004 is still pending as such Mr Moyo can not state that the sale of the shares was never challenged.
Mr Sternford Moyo is one of Zimbabwe’s most respected and senior lawyers and it is clear he only provided an opinion based on incomplete and in-accurate facts provided by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank. I remain convinced that should Mr Sternford Moyo review High Court Case 6244-04 he will undoubtedly revise his legal opinion and advise Farai Rwodzi correctly that the take over of Century /CFX Bank was null and void in addition to being illegal and irregular.
Due diligence basically means using common sense, doing your homework and thinking things through before investing time and money in an opportunity.
In business transactions, the due diligence process varies for different types of companies. The relevant areas of concern may include the financial, legal, labor, tax, IT, environment and market/commercial situation of the company. Other areas include intellectual property, real and personal property, insurance and liability coverage, debt instrument review, employee benefits and labor matters, immigration, and international transactions
Below is an extract from - Diligence long overdue - conducting prudent due diligence May, 1999 by Lawrence G. Graev. It clearly outlines some of the dangers of doing transactions without proper due diligence

“The rush to join in today's frenzy of M&A transactions has some companies viewing due diligence as a necessary evil - and giving the process short shrift. Yet, cutting corners can destroy a merger, thwart strategic gains from the deal, and plunge a company into costly, distracting, and potentially ruinous litigation.
As a young associate at a large law firm working on one of my first M&A transactions, I was shocked to see how our client, a sophisticated merchant banking firm, pushed on all the professionals to "get the deal done." About three months after the closing, I was asked to share my recollections of the deal with a senior litigation partner of the law' firm, who told me that our client had discovered an "inventory problem" at the acquired company. I subsequently learned that the "inventory problem" involved finding out that a significant number of paint cans - the company was a manufacturer of paint - in finished goods inventory contained water instead of paint.
Even as a young associate, it seemed to me that this "problem" could have been identified prior to the closing with some prudent due diligence and coordination with the various accounting firms involved in the transaction. My experience since then suggests that in all too many M&A situations due diligence is viewed more as a necessary evil than as an integral - and potentially beneficial - part of the process.
The 1997 merger of HFS with CUC International to form Cendant Corp., for example, was announced with great hoopla. However, as a result of CUC's inadequate financial controls, Cendant was forced to report that net income had been inflated by $500 million over three years.
Earlier this year, Michael Ovitz, the former president of Walt Disney Co., invested $20 million to take control of Livent. It was only after this expenditure that Ovitz and his associates apparently discovered accounting irregularities in the company's records that contributed to Livent's bankruptcy filing and the possible loss of Ovitz's investment.
These cases are unusual in that fraud was, or may have been, involved. More typical situations involve pre-existing environmental conditions, tax liabilities, litigation, and agreements that can stifle a company's strategy for a deal because they bar it from acting in an intended manner, or impose a hidden cost. In a mammoth deal, such as the $75 billion Exxon/Mobil merger, there are thousands, or tens of thousands, of commitments and agreements. There are dozens of environmental risks related to production, refining, and distribution that should be checked. There are existing lawsuits, some with and some without merit, that need analysis.
Until these have been examined, Lee Raymond of Exxon and Lucio Noto of Mobil can't know whether Exxon/Mobil can achieve the intended cost savings of $2.8 billion annually and whether Exxon/Mobil can actually reduce its work force by 7.3 percent, or 9,000 jobs. The companies can't even know whether their cultures will mesh synergistically or clash and prevent bold action. Such was the case, for example, at Pharmacia & Upjohn, until a new CEO, Fred Hassan, put a stop to arguments between Swedish and American employees of the merged companies.
Due diligence is risk management. Risk management calls for judgment and analysis. The trade-off in a merger or acquisition is how much risk a CEO is prepared to assume in closing a deal versus the risk of not getting a deal done. There is no easy answer, but far too often the urge to "close" a deal can fog judgment and lead to unnecessary risk assumptions.
Although the cost of due diligence is one hurdle, the psychological capital already invested by the CEO and management group in the deal can be an even greater obstacle. The seller emphasizes its desire for the quick development of an operational and financial structure that will lead to the speedy completion of the sale. Because of the time and effort expended to effect the merger or acquisition, not-too-subtle pressure, often from major investors, is placed on anyone or anything endangering its fruition - including due diligence.
But this pressure must be overcome if the CEO is to be successful in his or her M&A activity. Since the margin of error for survival in M&As is thin - and getting thinner - due diligence should start even before negotiations are underway. What's more, beginning the process early on could head off a long, costly effort to unwind a transaction that should never have been entered into in the first place.
Ideally, good-faith negotiations between lawyers for the two parties should take place at every step along the way. And for the buyer's lawyers to be able to negotiate most efficiently - on the purchase price, on the structure of the transaction, on the allocation of risk between the parties for liabilities and other contingencies, and on other significant terms - a vast store of data ought to be forthcoming from due diligence. That data will eventually be the basis for both the purchase agreement and the closing documents.”
These are general guidelines that Investors need to follow to ensure that they do not invest in encumbered assets with hidden or contigent liabilities. Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe did not do a proper due diligence. In addition they have gone further by misleading a leading lawyer to issue a legal opinion based on incomplete and false facts.
This behavior only serves to confirm that Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation have something to hide that’s why they misled a leading lawyer without letting him review details of High Court Case HC-6244-04

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 2 of 10)

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 2 of 10)
Since the dispute between Farai Rwodzi of Interfin Bank Holdings Zimbabwe and myself erupted after the corrupt, illegal and irregular takeover of Century/CFX Bank by Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe it has become clear that Farai Rwodzi, Interfin Banking Corporation and its shareholders and Directors ignored basic corporate finance rules of engagement that of conducting an enhanced due diligence before you make an acquistion or major investment in another entity.

If Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation had done an enhanced due diligence on Century /CFX Bank they would have discovered that Century/CFX Bank was already a disputed asset and an intense ownership battle was already under way with ENG Capital seeking the reversal of the criminal and fraudulent transfer of its 309 million shares in Century /CFX Bank under HIGH COURT OF Zimbabwe case HC -6244-04.

Such litigation automatically alerts would be investors to stay clear or get involved but set aside contigent liability payment plan.

Interfin Bank Zimbabwe and Farai Rwodzi should have closely looked at the following areas which are basic areas defined by common source freely available internet resources that guide would be investors. Under High Court Case HC -6244-04 it is very clear that the sale and transfer of the 309 million shares in Century /CFX Bank is contested and the case is still before the courts.

Under such circumstances it is clear any independent legal advisor would have issued a Qualified legal opinion highlighting the potential payments to be made which would increase the cost of acquisition if not stop the acquisition.

Below are some direct areas that Interfin should have paid close attention to during the Due diligence process if ever there was one.

“II. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
A. Financial Statements
1. Consolidated financial statements for all years and interim periods subsequent to the most recent fiscal year end
2. Monthly income statements for most recent 12 months
3. Internal financial (profit and loss, capital expenditures, etc.) projections, and all supporting information
4. Most recent business plan

5. List of any off-balance sheet liabilities not appearing in most recent financial statements (including the notes thereto)
6. Auditors reports ("management letters") and management responses
7. Summary of accounting policies to the extent not disclosed in financial statements
B. Tax Materials
1. Federal, state and municipal returns
2. Description of and documentation relating to any pending issues with tax authorities
3. Tax basis of assets of the Company and of capital stock and assets of its subsidiaries
4. Tax sharing or indemnity agreements

5. Closing letters and closing agreements, appeals reports, tax litigation status, Internal Revenue Service ("IRS") rulings and technical advice memoranda, and any other material IRS documents and tax assessments documents
C. Indebtedness
1. All instruments evidencing debt obligations or lines of credit and all agreements and material correspondence relating thereto
2. Any other actual or contingent indebtedness (e.g., loan guarantees, letters of credit, banker's acceptances, swaps) not reflected in most recent financial statements and all agreements and material correspondence relating thereto
3. List of existing key financing institutions
D. Miscellaneous
1. Schedule of current notes payable/receivable, intercompany advances and description of cash management system
2. Description and listing of current reserves
3. Description of revenue/cost recognition policies
4. Breakdown of selling, distribution, marketing and administrative expenses
5. Explanation of foreign exchange accounting policies, if any
6. Information regarding any indebtedness to the Company or any of its subsidiaries of directors and senior officers
7. Cost of sales breakdown
III. EMPLOYEE MATERIALS
A. Agreements
1. Employment agreements (including, but not limited to, contracts with management personnel or entities affiliated with management personnel)
2. Collective bargaining agreements
3. Consulting agreements
4. Employee handbooks, summaries, guidelines and bulletins
5. Schedules of salaried and hourly employees showing their current compensation rates and breaking out employees by:
a. Geographic location
b. Function
c. Age
d. Years with company
e. Union vs. non-union
f. Participation in employee benefit plans
g. Part-time vs. full-time
6. Description of labor disputes, requests for arbitration or mediation, grievance proceedings, etc.
7. Description of negotiations with any unit or group seeking to become the bargaining unit for employees
8. Employee turnover, absentee history and severance policy
9. Description of any union representation elections
B. Benefit Plans
1. Any pension, supplemental pension, retirement, post-retirement, stock option, severance, incentive, profit-sharing, executive compensation, bonus and other employee benefit plans (and any related trust agreements and insurance or annuity contracts), including information regarding employer stock held thereunder, a schedule of plan assets, a detailed description of the plan (including structure, etc.) and a list of trustees
2. Audit and actuarial studies and reports including summary plan descriptions, annual returns and ZIMRA and other tax filings, NSSA pension and retirement plans and details of any accrued liabilities not reflected therein
3. List of any asset transfers or other withdrawals, partial wind-ups or contribution holidays with respect to all pension plans”


These are general guidelines that Investors need to follow to ensure that they do not invest in encumbered assets with hidden or contigent liabilities.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and
www.facebook.com/muponda
Email: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.Muponda
Twitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapital
Phone: 1-416-841-5542

ENG Capital vs Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Bank Zimbabwe Dispute unpacked (Part 1 of 10)

Since the dispute between Farai Rwodzi of Interfin Bank Holdings Zimbabwe and myself started after the illegal and irregular takeover of Century/CFX Bank BY Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank Zimbabwe it has become clear that Interfin and its shareholders and Directors ignored basic corporate finance rules of engagement.

Since Century Bank was illegally taken over it has had 3 name changes.This alone indicates deep underlying ownership problems. The Bank has been changed from Century Bank to CFX Bank then Interfin Banking corporation. All this in a period of less that 6 years in an effort to hide the tracks of the fraudulent conversion of 309 million Century shares into CFX Bank.

These various name changes are symptomatic of fraudulent transactions which keep being re-arranged to hide the original tracks. Other Banks such as Barclays or Standard have kept the same name for more than 100 years. Why is Century changing from Century to CFX Bank then Interfin Banking Corporation.

In addition Century/CFX Bank has had more than 7 different Managing Directors over a 5 year period since its illegal and irregular seizure from ENG Capital and myself. This has to be a world record for any Bank. The very high staff turnover especially at the top level of any Financial Institution only serves to confirm the ownership dispute.

These underlying problems could have been detected and avoided by Interfin Bank and Mr Farai Rwodzi had Interfin done a proper enhanced due diligence exercise ahead of their involvement with Century/CFX Bank.

All documents requested are supposed to be with respect to the Company, its subsidiaries and any joint ventures involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries and should be provided with respect to all periods since the founding of the Company, to allow a clear trend analysis to be developed should it be necessary.

Below is a basic list which Interfin should have used before getting involved with CFX Bank .This is freely available on the Internet. The list represents a standard due diligence request list and attempts to be over-inclusive rather than under-inclusive.

“I. CORPORATE BOOKS AND RECORDS
A. Charter and By-laws
1. Original certificate of incorporation of the Company and all amendments thereto
2. By-laws of the Company, as amended
3. Charter and by-laws of each wholly or partially owned subsidiary of the Company and of any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries
4. Closing record books for any material corporate transactions (e.g., reorganization into holding company structure, joint ventures, etc.)
5. Other relevant legal documents governing the organization and management of the Company

B. Minutes of meetings and unanimous written consents (since date of incorporation) of the Company, any of its subsidiaries and any joint venture involving the Company or any of its subsidiaries, of the following:
1. Shareholders
2. Board of Directors
3. Executive Committee
4. Audit Committee
5. Any other committees
6. Specific authorizing resolutions
7. Material (including financial projections), if available, distributed to the Board of Directors, or any committees thereof, in connection with the most recent meetings of the Board or such committees
C. Officers' and directors' questionnaires prepared in connection with the most recent proxy statement of the Company
D. Shareholders
1. Shareholder list and other stock records

2. Any shareholder agreements, voting trusts, proxy agreements, escrow agreements or similar arrangements
3. Any stock purchase agreements with shareholders
4. Any agreements relating to preemptive rights or other preferential rights of shareholders
5. Any agreements restricting the sale or other disposition of capital stock
6. Any agreements or plans concerning outstanding or proposed stock options, warrants or rights, including any employee stock ownership plans
7. Any agreements relating to registration rights of shareholders
8. Any trust agreements or other documents if shares are held in fiduciary capacity
E. Qualifications and Registrations
1. List of jurisdictions where qualified as foreign corporation or licensed to do business
2. Any other material governmental qualifications, registrations, business licenses, permits, authorizations, exemptions or security clearances, including those pursuant to Federal or state antitrust, environmental, nuclear regulatory, public utility or public service or securities laws and regulations
F. Reports to Shareholders
1. Annual reports
2. Quarterly and special interim reports since most recent annual report”

If Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Banking Corporation had done a proper due diligence they would have discovered High Court case HC-6244-04 wherein I am challenging the legality of the Century/CFX Bank transfer and or conversion.

This article appears courtesy of GMRI CAPITAL – www.gmricapital.com . It is generated for 3MG MEDIA – www.3mgmedia.ca .

Gilbert Muponda is an Investment Banker and Founder of GMRI CAPITAL . He can be reached at; www.ZimFace.com and

www.facebook.com/mupondaEmail: gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com . Skype ID: gilbert.MupondaTwitter ; http://twitter.com/gmricapitalPhone: 1-416-841-5542

Bank with links to Mujuru got diamond profits

Bank with links to Mujuru got diamond profits

By Lance Guma
05 October 2010

Interfin Financial Holdings, a bank with reported links to retired army general Solomon Mujuru, received an investment of over US$2 million in diamond and gold proceeds from the state-owned Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation (ZMDC).

This follows revelations that several top managers at the ZMDC, who have since been suspended by the board chairman, invested millions of dollars in the money market even as the corporation’s own mines were forced to close down due to lack of capital.

Exiled businessman Gilbert Muponda is locked in a bitter dispute with Interfin after accusing them of ‘looting’ his Century Bank (CFX Bank) and says his team have been investigating the story in preparation for a law suit against Interfin. He says managers at Interfin bribed ZMDC managers to invest the money and it was only their lavish lifestyle and expenditure patterns that got them caught.

Suspended ZMDC chief, Dominic Mubayiwa sent smoke signals when he started building a 3 storey mansion in Borrowdale, something clearly beyond his means. Over US$40 million in diamond and gold proceeds is said to have been siphoned off or used in shady deals. The figure is said to include US$30 million raised from diamond sales between October 2008 and April 2010.

Mubayiwa and his team poured money into Interfin, Premier Bank, Kingdom Bank, BancABC, Fidelity Asset Management and Premier Asset Management. This is despite the ZMDC Act making it clear its primary function is to invest in the mining industry, on behalf of the state.

Worse still, Mubayiwa and his management failed to pay government any meaningful dividend. A confidential ZMDC report leaked to the media says; ‘The first ever dividend of US$1 million was in March 2010 and US$3 million dividend paid on July 26, 2010 was only made after the board insisted to management that one of ZMDC's responsibilities was to generate revenue for the fiscus.’
SW Radio Africa understands that a prominent army general deposited close to US$5 million in a local bank soon after the first international diamond auction held in Harare in August. It was estimated that US$72 million was raised from the auction but how much went to government remains a mystery.

Banking sources confirmed that the deposit made by the general set tongues wagging in the industry. More importantly it confirmed how senior military figures are controlling the diamond trade in Zimbabwe.

Meanwhile Muponda warned money transfer giant Moneygram International over its continued dealings with Interfin. He said there was corruption at Interfin and ‘in the United States (where Moneygram is headquartered) you have what is called the Foreign Corruption Act which they are liable to if they are seen to be involved in corrupt activities. They will be linked to these things if they are not careful,’ he warned.

Farai Rwodzi ,CFX/Interfin Bank Zimbabwe & Muponda ownership dispute Part 5 of 5

Farai Rwodzi ,CFX/Interfin Bank Zimbabwe & Muponda ownership dispute Part 5 of 5


This is the final of the “Farai Rwodzi ,CFX/Interfin Bank Zimbabwe & Muponda ownership dispute” series which documents the illegal,irregular and corrupt take over of Century/CFX Bank and its fraudulent conversion into Interfin Banking Corporation by Farai Rwodzi.

Over the last 10 or so years Zimbabwe has seen a vast transformation in terms of asset ownership and control of the means of production. Some of it has been legal some illegal. Some has been positive some hasn’t been a total disaster.

During this transformation many illegal and irregular transactions were done under one pretext or the other. Now with foreign investors keen on Zimbabwe its about time those who are holding looted assets to clean them and account for how they acquired them. People like Mr Rwodzi and Interfin will find this had if not impossible to do because they hold looted and grabbed assets.

However due to the move towards Globalizations and market convergence it is clear that illegally and irregularly acquired wealth and assets will find it difficult to gain their true market valuation as there will be extra scrutiny and back ground checks to verify how certain assets were acquired.

In my dispute with Mr Farai Rwodzi ,Inte4rfin Bank Zimbabwe and the Interfin Shareholders it is clear this is very relevant.Mr Farai Rwodzi and His Interfin Banking Corporation have been throwing excuse after excuse in an effort to hide their tracks of taking over my Bank whuch was illegally and fraudulently converted from Century Bank to CFX Bank then finally into CFX/Interfin Banking Corporation.All these changes are designed to conceal the original fraudulent of the 309 Century Bank million shares converted into CFX Bank.

Due to technology and market intergration and interaction it is impossible to hide such illegal takeovers.And once the market detects such history will not perform .This is what exactly happened to CFX Bank until it was on the verge of collapse then Interfin felt wise enough that they could salvage some value and assist in hiding the original fraud by renaming the Bank as Interfin Banking Corporation.

Interfin have been claiming they were not part of the original fraud so they cant be held accountable for the initial illegal transfer of the 309 million Century Bank shares into CFX Bank. This is clearly a mischivious and desperate defence by Interfin Banking Corporation.

This is similar to someone who has just been caught at a road block driving a stolen car and in def3ence asks the police to ,let him drive on the car since he wasn’t the one who actually stole the car.”Have these Gentlemen ever had of Possession of stolen property? In any case the original “buyer” of the 309 million shares remains a mystry and as such Interfin must be held accountable.

In the above example the Police normally hold the driver of the stolen car until they locate the alleged original thief otherwise if the original thief is not identified then the one driving the car is deemed to be the thief.

In business and especially in Corporate Finance there is something called Due diligence.In everyday language this refers to a detailed back ground check and verification of facsts before you enter into a material transaction.

So in this case before Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin got involved with Century/CFX Bank they should have done a due diligence which would have revealed that Century/CFX Bank was a stoled asset and their fore they should avoid any dealings with it.

Having proceeded to take over CFX/Century Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank assumed all assets and liabilities of CFX/Century Bank and this includes my $ 15.4 million claim for my 309 million Century shares illegally and irregularly converted into Interfin Banking Corporation.

Advice which Farai Rwodzi & Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe ignored

It appears Zimbabwe has a new breed of Bankers like Mr Farai Rwodzi and Interfin Bank who are under some illusion that they are above the law. Normally in Banking when there is a problem between Bankers a simple phone call can fix the problem ,usually there is no need to use lawyers or courts especially when the people involved know each other. Lawyers normally come in to formalize an agreement that Bankers agree among themselves. Such is the tradition of Banking.

Since the Century/CFX/Interfin Bank ownership dispute has started I have since discovered that Interfin Banking Corporation Zimbabwe and Mr Farai Rwodzi believe they are high and might and would not talk to a fellow Banker even when confronted with facts.

Initially I wrote a letter which should have been enough to initiate discussions to resolve the dispute. Then I called Mr Farai Rwodzi personally and he banged the phone. Such attitude amongst Bankers is not expected and its not progressive. In the long run it does more harm than good.
The following text is a letter of advice
I wrote on the legal aspects of my case and my opposition against Interfin Holdings’ then proposed acquisition of Century/CFX Bank holdings.
“The Shareholders
Interfin Holdings Limited
15th Floor, NSSA Building
Cnr Sam Nujoma St/Julius Nyerere Way
HARARE
4 November 2009
Attention: Mr. R. Njanike
Dear Gentlemen and Lady,
RE : PROPOSED INTERFIN ACQUISITION OF MY BANK – CENTURY/CFX BANK
LIMITED
at Law dated 2 November 2009 and my letter of
yesterday to your Board of Directors. The purpose of this letter is to
warn Interfin Financial Holdings Limited not to interpose itself in
the CFX ownership dispute as you may regret that transaction. Interfin
should not meddle in this as the consequences will be dire.Finance
Bank of Zambia and its Swiss Financiers pulled out of this transaction
because of the unresolved ownership dispute.How can Interfin ignore
this?
(1) Current CFX Bank lawyers a flaunting around their “legal
opinion” as fact. Firstly CFX Bank lawyers are compromised as they
can not provide an Independent legal opinion in a matter in which they
have an interest since they are representing the respondent. They have
a conflict of interest and should have recused themselves in providing
the legal opinion. It appears as though they just provided this
“legal opinion” to earn fees knowing fully well that their opinion
in this matter was not even worth the piece of paper it was written
on.
(2) Their purported legal opinion is rather misplaced and
misdirected in as much as it seeks to analyze current ENG legal status
.The current status is immaterial since we are trying to correct fraud
and theft which resulted in ENG being incapacitated.
(3) Further CFX Bank Lawyers are assuming that since I remain
specified in Zimbabwe therefore I have no capacity to vigorously
pursue this matter. This is fallacious and ill advised .I hope the
same lawyers are aware that Financial markets do not operate in a
vacuum and in the bigger scheme of things Financial markets are not
controlled from Harare. As indicated previously no stone will be left
unturned till justice prevails on this matter. This means all legal
options are on the table and legal action is being pursued in several
jurisdictions.
(4) CFX Bank lawyers are further peddling a tired lie that the
shares were being sold to pay off ENG creditors. This totally ignores
where the matter started and how it developed into a crisis. The
original and official allegation was that ENG Capital was a brief
case Company which had no meaningful assets. ENG and Myself were
further demonized and smeared, that the only visible assets acquired
were cars. Shouldn’t CFX Lawyers be addressing this anomaly. How
can a brief case Company own 309 million shares in a Bank. How come
the public was not clearly told that ENG owned a Bank .Why was there
over focus on cars which made up less than 1% of ENG’s Capital base?
Assuming for one moment that ENG had real problems ,why wasn’t it
well advertised that even though ENG was having problems it owned a
Bank and bidders would be invited to take over that Bank and pay a
fair price? Why was the disposal being done clandestinely and under
cover of darkness?
(5) ENG was sufficiently liquid and solvent to meet its liabilities
but despite all this its cheques were being bounced and dishonored.
This act alone of bouncing and dishonoring cheques of a Financial
Institution creates panic and an impression of a Bankrupt Institution.
It must be noted that First Mutual Life and National Discount House,
being ENG counter parties in fact sued Zimbank for irregularly
dishonoring ENG cheques at a time when the ENG account was fully
funded and had sufficient funds to meet its liabilities. This clearly
confirms a well calculated campaign to close down ENG and grab its
assets.
(6) I am sure you were told that ENG CAPITAL had many cars, and
these cars were the only assets that ENG had. The correct and accurate
facts are that ENG was a Group of Companies of which the Companies had
Directors, Managers and employees and the cars were for the use of
these members of staff who ran the various companies which made up
ENG CAPITAL.
(7) ENG Capital group had a market value of US$ 175 million, just
before the RBZ descended on the Institution.
Below is a brief ENG Group Structure ;
ENG HOLDINGS GROUP STRUCTURE
- SUBSIDIARIES
- ENG CAPITAL INVESTMENTS PVT LTD
- ENG ASSET MANAGEMENT PVT LTD
- ENG REAL ESTATE
- ENG NOMINEES PVT LTD
- ENG PRIVATE EQUITY (PVT) LTD
- ENG CAPITAL ADVISORY SERVICES
- ENG STRUCTURED FINANCE
ADDITIONAL MAJOR ASSETS OWNED
- Century Bank Holdings (now CFX bank)
- Leasing Company of Zimbabwe, (Century Asset Managers)
- Century Discount House
- Hybri Micro-Finance Institution
- Care Insurance PVT LTD
- RestCel Insurance PVT LTD
- Amalgamated Health Services (Harare West Hospital )
- 15% of OK Zimbabwe Limited
- 15% of Zimplow Holdings Limited
- 20% Medtech Holdings Limited
- Hornet Re-Insurance PVT LTD
- Pearl Pension Fund Management
- 25 % Clan Holdings Limited
- 25 % Zimbabwe News Papers Group – Zimpapers Limited
- Allied Conveyor Belts PVT LTD
- River Drilling PVT LTD
- Real Estate including (Anastasia Court, Belgravia House, Thaine
Building)
- Various Listed ZSE Listed shares
- Treasury Bills
- GMB Bills
- Cargill Commercial Paper
- $ 4 billion – Alliance Capital Debenture (representing 123 million
First Mutual Life shares)
- 23 Million First Mutual Life shares
This is relevant as it proves beyond any doubt that ENG was a solid
Group of Companies. It was targeted out of greed by plotters including
Senior Politicians who wanted to loot and grab assets.
(8) This mêlée was nothing more than a ploy to infringe upon my
citizenship rights and strip me of my assets; a well orchestrated
political game to deny perceived enemies of Senior Politician’s
financial freedom.
(9) My battle against civil asset forfeiture is one for the
preservation of freedom and property. This is an important area as
Zimbabwe seeks to portray an image of a stable state with the rule
of law and private property rights are protected and preserved.
(10) All facts indicate to a grand miscarriage of Justice.
(11) A miscarriage of justice occurred as ENG and its directors now
bear the burden of proving their innocence. The preponderance of
evidence, which means that the RBZ only must make a better case -
however slight, than the property owner – ENG.
(12) The 309 Century Financial Holdings Limited Million shares in
question were sold through Fidelity Stock brokers on or around May 13,
2004. Within the same week an announcement was then made that CFX Bank
was taking over Century Holdings. The shares were sold to a Senior
Politician’s reported consortium for Z$2,9 billion when ENG had spent
$35 billion to accumulate the shares, thereby prejudicing ENG,
Creditors, Investors and contributories of at least Z$32,1 billion.
(13) As ENG Co-founder, Contributory and Shareholder, I wrote to
the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Chief Executive Mr Emmanuel Munyukwi
asking for an investigation because we had agreed with the majority of
creditors that the shares should not be sold but rather swapped with
creditors and investors instead of selling them at an unreasonable
price. But the 309 million Century /CFX Financial Holdings million
shares were somehow clandestinely sold and that transaction enabled
CFX Bank to take over Century Holdings Limited.
(14) This allowed the reverse listing of CFX Bank on to the
Zimbabwe Stock Exchange. Without those 309 million Century Holdings
Limited million shares owned by ENG the CFX/Century merger would have
never happened. Senior politicians and their proxies became the new
controlling shareholder of the new merged bank. Is this by design or
accident? Senior politicians then forced out Mr. Sean Maloney who had
helped to put together the transaction. Mr. Sean Maloney had to leave
the country under unclear circumstances . Part of the same shares
snatched From ENG were later transferred to Premier Bank Financial
Holdings which is reportedly owned by a Senior Politician. There has
generally been shuffling of shares which is normally associated with
covering tracks of an illegal and irregular transaction.
(15) ENG directors and contributories asked the high court to set
aside the sale of the shares and the matter action is still before the
courts in Harare. We asked Zimbabwe Stock Exchange Committee to
investigate. They refused. We asked the brokers for the identity of
the buyer of our shares. They refused. The brokers indicated they were
under serious pressure from individuals they couldn’t identify to
maintain total secrecy on the identity of the buyer. Within a few days
of raising the challenge of the CFX/Century shares Justice Minister
specified me without affording me a hearing or an enquiry as required
by the Constitution of Zimbabwe . There was specification at the
instigation of senior politicians who were eyeing assets held by ENG
including Century/CFX Bank. The specification was meant to harass,
cow, intimidate and silence me from raising further complaints and
challenges regarding ENG assets specifically these 309 million shares
in Century/CFX Financial Holdings.
(16) Since the ENG shares in Century /CFX Bank Financial Holdings
were irregularly transferred the Bank ownership remains in dispute.
The ENG shareholders and contributories filed and sought a high court
order to stop the transfer of the shares until the dispute had been
resolved . The shares were still clandestinely transferred despite the
pending high court application to resolve the dispute . After filing
for this order My Lawyer the late Oscar Ziweni was also specified by
the Minister of Justice and threatened ,harassed and intimidated until
he went into hiding. However the point remains ENG Founders,
Shareholders and Contributories still lay claim to these shares and
stake in Century/ CFX BANK which were looted by Senior Government
officials.
In conclusion Interfin Holdings Limited should consider itself
warned. Interfin should stay clear of CFX Bank until this matter is
resolved. There are entities and individuals in Zimbabwe who
erroneously believe they are above the law. They have the mistaken
belief they can grab, loot, steal assets and get away with it. In the
process they try to launder their loot through various disposals and
restructurings such as the ones that were done at Century/CFX Bank.
This is being fully documented. CFX Bank has had more than 5 Managing
Directors in a space of 2 years .This shows the instability brought
about by being a disputed asset whilst the looters try to pull “
strings” from behind the scenes.
For the sake of transparency I am copying this letter to the
following ;
Minister of Finance Zimbabwe
Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor – Dr Gono
Zimbabwe Stock Exchange CEO – Mr Emmanuel Munyukwi
CFX BANK Board of Directors
Zimbabwe Parliament -Budget, Finance and Investment Promotion
Members Below
Hon Zhanda , Hon. Beremauro, Hon. Bhebhe A, Hon. Chinyadza, Hon.
Cross, Hon. Khumalo ,M Hon. Madzimure, Hon. Mashakada, Hon.
Matshalaga, Hon. Mudiwa, Hon. Muguti, Hon. Mukanduri, Hon. Ndava, Hon.
Nyaude. Committee Clerk- Mr Ratsakatika
My full contact details are below should you need any
clarification.
Yours Faithfully,
Gilbert Muponda
Toronto ,Canada
1-416-841-5542
1-647-994-5542
Email – gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com[1]
http://www.facebook.com/muponda[2]
Skype ID – gilbert.muponda
Links:
——
[1] mailto:gilbert@gilbertmuponda.com
[2] http://www.facebook.com/muponda”