Stop the secrecy at CLICO
Tuesday May 31 2011 | 05:00 AM

The apparent restricted access to information from judicial reports on CLICO and its sister company British American Insurance Company have sparked the latest controversy surrounding the troubled businesses.

A “preposterous restriction” was how the recently formed Barbados Investors and Policyholders Alliance described the process through which reading of the BAICO report, completed since December, was being facilitated, while it also was disappointed that the 30-day report completed by CLICO International Life Insurance judicial manager Deloitte Consulting Limited, would only be made available at the discretion of the High Court. But Deloitte CEO Oliver Jordan today steered clear of anything related to either case, and insisted policyholder and investors would be kept in form, but that a court-appointed officer he could not release information willy-nilly.

Jordan found himself under pressure today while responding to questions from individuals attending a Barbados International Business Association luncheon at the Lloyd Erskine Sandiford Centre this afternoon.

His comments followed the released of a statement earlier by BIPA, in which it expressed delighted that the Interim Report on CLICO had been submitted to the court by Deloitte “in a timely manner”, but was upset information was restricted.

“BIPA understands that any disclosure of the contents is at the discretion of the Courts and BIPA wishes to express in the strongest possible terms that CLICO policyholders have suffered from secrecy and silence for far too long and that the report must be made available within the shortest possible time,” the organisation said.

“We believe that this Interim Report reveals some critical information about money which belongs to the policyholders and they have a right to know the latest status of the company that took their money.” “The same goes for the BAICO Report. Whilst policyholders have the right to make an appointment with the Financial Services Commission to read the report, it is our understanding that the report can only be read at the FSC and no copying can be made. BIPA can express nothing less than its strongest displeasure at this preposterous restriction,” it added.

BIPA said the matter was an important one because the reports related directly “to what these two companies have done with policyholders’ money”.

It vowed to continue campaigning “for the rights of the policyholders, which includes an end to the secrecy and silence which has surrounded this debacle from the start”. “It is still our hope that justice will prevail in this matter, and we will continue to agitate as a group to get our money back,” it noted.

However, Jordan said it was not a question of secrecy, but one of procedures and protocols that the judicial manager could not ignore. “I think in every situation each court makes a determination as to what information can be put into the public domain so... I can’t speak to what directions will be provided. Once the court provides directions a judicial manager will act in accordance with those directions,” he said.

“I think it’s important for everyone to remember ... a judicial manager is not an independent person making their owner decisions. Judicial manager means you are an officer of the court, and any decisions or any information is based direction from the court and I think that’s something everybody has to keep in mind.”

“We have clearly communicated what the approach will be, or should be in judicial management cases, and I don’t want to be drawn into specifics of one judicial manager over another. The whole idea is to say this is how judicial management should be operated and we will approach them in a similar manner.”

Jordan did say, though, that as was normally the case with such matters the judicial managers in the CLICO and BAICO cases would have to consider a number of issues. These included “segmentation of the business and sale to interested third parties, injection new capital, resolution of ongoing litigation and finally cooperation from creditors and policyholders”.

“In summary judicial management is a tool that provides an opportunity to successfully restructure a company and avoid the risks and costs inherent in liquidation, particularly if there are a large number of policyholders and creditors that may be affected in a liquidation scenario,” he said.