Edmund Olotu
As the controversy surrounding the Marek “Chinedu” Zmyslowski case continues, Edmund Olotu has published a post on his medium page which he says provides evidence against the “lies & deceit” in Marek’s earlier post.
Marek had said a certain investor, who he described as “godfather” had bribed the Nigerian police who then notified Interpol to issue a red alert on him. He was then arrested after landing in Poland.
Marek, in his post took a swipe at Nigerian and the country’s business and tech ecosystem for being corrupt.
Edmund in his post said: “It is deceptive to have a dual company structure wherein the valuable and tangible assets (the technology) are held in one entity (foreign – HotelOnline) whilst the “idea” is held in another entity (local – HotelOga) without disclosing such to investors so they can make an informed decision on valuation and other issues pertinent to the security of their investment.”
Edmund, who from his post, showed he was an active player in the entire deal, continued:
You cannot sell either of the companies to a buyer whilst in conflict with your shareholders over the structure; and without the board’s consent of your shareholders or investors with preemptive rights.
If you end up selling; upon receiving funds from a sale, the receiver is expected to settle debts of the company and pay investors.
Transferring shares and relinquishing ownership in the valuable entity at a time when investors are in discussions to collapse both companies into one entity, and prior to its subsequent sale to another company, reeks of deception.
Edmund claimed Marek was misusing funds without board approval, running the company into debt. He said while HotelOga and HotelOnline were running concurrently, Marek was facilitating payments to HotelOnline.
He said Marek lied when he claimed to her merged HotelOga to an East African company. He said the merger was between HotelOnline and the East African company, Savannah Sunrise.
He added that Marek tried to sell the Nigerian entity to Nightsbridge who saw gaps in the deal (he didn’t disclose the dual structure to them). “They backed out of the transaction- but not before they had paid Marek $30,000 for technology,” he added.
After the deal with Savannah Sunrise, Edmund said Marek decided to move to Poland. He continued:
It is important, at this point, to note that Marek’s actions were criminal in nature. Not disclosing the dual entity structure shows an “intent to deceive.” Siphoning company money to the Polish structure and into his personal account is tantamount to money laundering. Taking money from Nightsbridge for technology knowing fully well that the technology belongs to the Polish company is tantamount of selling what does not belong to you — which is theft. Or perhaps he forgot that the technology did belong to the local entity and invoiced for it??? Either way, the dishonesty is evident.
Edmund said that Marek’s claim that Interpol put his name on Red Alert because of just “testimonies,” adding that “we did provide enough proof of criminal intent by Marek.”
“Shareholders discovered payments of more than $180,000 to the Polish entity as revenue for transactions undertaken by the Nigerian entity,” Edmund said.
He added that maybe a foreign company, Expedia used HotelOnline for easier payments for transactions with HotelOga and investors expected the Polish entity to transfer the funds to the Nigerian entity.
“However, this didn’t happen as more than $80,000 ended up in Marek’s personal bank account,” Edmund said.
He added that Marek’s claim that the “godfather’s” lawyer called him to pay $300k to have the case against him closed was false. He said:
“Marek was asked by shareholders to return the funds he took from investors since he had received commercial value from the Polish entity. As part of a settlement agreement, he was to return the money to an escrow account of a notary public of HIS choosing for safe-keeping. The sale would be ratified by the shareholders, which in turn removes the crime against the company. This, in turn, may allow the state to drop the criminal charges against him and his name removed from the Interpol red notice. However, where this is not possible, and the state chooses to pursue the case, then his money will be returned to him by the notary public.”
Edmund continued:
The last myth I’d also like to dispel is the point he makes that “he sued the investors and won in federal court’.
Marek has an ongoing criminal case against him with suit number FHC L/384C/17 dated 19th October. This is completely different from the civil suit initiated by Marek against the Nigerian Police (not the investors) under suit number FHC/L/CS/1627/2017; wherein the subject matter was the release of his bank account restricted by the Police and the said suit was instituted on the 26th of October 2017. This suit was way before the red notice on the 25th of November and as such does not contend the red notice.
Edmund concluded:
I don’t think I have ever seen a more offensive opinion written about a host country. A country that accepted him, invested in him and gave him opportunities it hardly gave its own citizens. Yet at the first intersection of conflict, he uses the harshest words in his vocabulary to denigrate Nigeria.
Read the full story HERE.
The post Edmund Olotu shares Post on “Evidence of Marek Zmyslowski’s Theft & Fraud in his business dealings” appeared first on BellaNaija - Nigeria breaking & top news to the World 24/7. Read Today.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment