Thursday, 16 October 2008

Forgery Alleged in Jade’s Takeover Bid

A crucial funding document was a forgery, claims OCBC Bank
PDF

1 comment:

Guanyu said...

Forgery Alleged in Jade’s Takeover Bid

A crucial funding document was a forgery, claims OCBC Bank

By CHEW XIANG
15 October 2008

What seemed an already murky takeover bid for a small Catalist company took a crooked turn yesterday after OCBC Bank alleged, in a statement to the press, that a crucial funding document was a forgery.

The statement backs up a BT report on July 4, which said that doubts over the authenticity of a bank guarantee letter for US$100 million supposedly issued by Standard Chartered Bank in Jakarta led to the withdrawal of OCBC and Allen & Gledhill, the financial and legal advisers to Anthony Soh’s takeover offer for Jade Technologies.

More information emerged in an investigation on the takeover conducted by the Securities Industry Council (SIC), which released its findings yesterday.

The SIC hearing committee said it ‘accepts that there might have been a deception on OCBC Bank in respect of the confirmation letters purportedly issued by (Stanchart Jakarta).

‘However, based on the available evidence, the hearing committee is unable to express an opinion as to whether Dr Soh was complicit in this deception.’

But according to the background facts presented in the findings, OCBC had first received on Feb 18 a copy of a letter signed by Ng Khok Pheng and Lim Bun Tjiaj, stating that Stanchart had been instructed to earmark US$100 million to make payment for shares tendered in acceptance of the offer. It also confirmed that Dr Soh had sufficient resources to satisfy full acceptances.

According to Dr Soh’s submission to the SIC, the letter had been arranged by a business partner, Abdul Rahman bin Maarip.

Dr Rahman, one Isnin bin Rahim and Dr Soh were equal shareholders in a Bermuda company which supposedly had US$625 million in an account with Stanchart.

OCBC claimed that it called the number given in the letter, which turned out to be a direct line to a Mr Ng, who confirmed the letter. Dr Soh said a banker’s guarantee would be sent to OCBC but OCBC said this was never received.

On March 27, it finally called the main telephone line of Stanchart in Jakarta, asking for Mr Ng. A respondent denied all knowledge of the letter and said Mr Lim, the other signatory, had left the bank for some time. A bank executive later confirmed it never issued any banker’s guarantees to OCBC.

On Dr Soh’s part, he claimed that the account had on previous occasions been used to issue bankers’ guarantees.

But the SIC said he had admitted himself he had control only over about US$40 million in the account, insufficient in any case to satisfy full acceptances of the offer.