MBABANE – The Investors and Shareholders’ team has boldly dismissed claims of a pyramid scheme.
A few weeks ago, media reports emerged accusing the Status Capital Building Society of operating outside its license or rather committing financial crime.
The FSRA suggested that the SCBS conducted business in an unlawful manner.
“This is based on occurrences that took place in 2021; there has been no transgressions or regulatory breaches by the SCBS since the FSRA directed that there be dis-investments of the debentures,” submitted Banele Ngcamphalala.
Furthermore, he argued that the revocation of the license was done in 2025 without an update to the members, yet one would expect a service provider like the FSRA to keep the general public and the relevant stakeholders up to speed on issues relating to the service provider.
The Shareholders and Investors have urged the honourable court to place the SCBS under judicial management as their investments will be recovered in due course.
“The funds that have been recovered can be recapitalized in accordance with the Building Society’s Act, a move that qualifies that the issue of mismanagement can be addressed accordingly. There is a great potential that the FSRA can be a successful concern as all the investors are of the same mind and that is why the liquidation is opposed.”
What does the Building Society Act Say – Section 71 (1)
“Whenever an application is made in court for the liquidation of any building society on the ground such that one is unable to pay its debts, or that, but its mismanagement, or of its probable inability to meet its obligation or to be a successful concern or for some other cause, it is just and equitable that the society shall be wound up, and the court, upon consideration of the fact that, is of the opinion that, notwithstanding any present inability of the society to meet its obligation, or the existence of any other facts or circumstance alleged in the application, there is a reasonable probability that if the society is placed under judicial management as provided in this section, it will be enabled to meet such obligations and to remove the occasion for liquidation or dissolution, and is otherwise just and equitable that the grant of a liquidation order should be postponed, the court may instead of granting a liquidation order, grant a judicial management order, to be of force, either for a period stated in the order or an indefinite period.”
FSRA avoiding accountability
The FSRA is accused of avoiding accountability over the funds collected before the appointment of the first curator, Bimal Da Silva.
First and foremost, it is worth noting that the renewal of the 2025 licence was done after the appointment of the curator, contrary to the reports that it was done before.
“The SCBS was authorized to commence business on December 01, 2024 up to November 30, 2025.”
Therefore, the defence argues that it is only the Swaziland Debt Factoring Firm that required further engagements, not the other entities.
“The other investments had already been paid when the curator was appointed. It appears that the FSRA is avoiding accountability regarding the funds that were collected. The funds that were recovered were invested in Status Asset Management. The compliance office was responsible for recovering those funds. However, the FSRA decides to avoid this subject.”
Discussion about this post