The United Policyholders Group (UPG) is so far neutral on moves by CL Financial (CLF) majority shareholder Lawrence Duprey to regain control of his former companies, spokesperson Angeli Gadjadar said.
"We're still fairly neutral on Mr Duprey's moves until we have more information. Caution is essential, especially as it seems that policyholders and the general public have been deliberately misled through both the withholding of information by the Central Bank and the Government over the last seven years and the sensational public statements by government officials about Ponzi schemes, etc," she said.
Duprey has written to the Central Bank and Government with his plan for repayment of the debt but has received no reply. Finance Minister Colm Imbert said he is seeking legal advice on a response.
Duprey's plan includes creation of two Clico entities, one of which should have a total asset base of $10 billion and focus solely on meeting the obligations of traditional policyholders.
UPG last week expressed concerns to Government and Central Bank about issues with their matter and is threatening legal action. Members had held Executive Flexible Premium Annuity (EFPA) policies with Clico, a CLF subsidiary. The group had sought judicial review of Government's proposal for EFPA policyholders to be guaranteed up to the value of their principal balances, while other policies would be fully guaranteed under Clico's statutory fund.
Gadjadar said UPG's recent letter to Government was sent directly to all parties on April 19, more than a week before Duprey's statement and before Government's subsequent pronouncements on a forensic audit. She said there has been no response, including acknowledgement of receipt, as yet.
Gadjadar noted Duprey's proposal for the $10 billion entity meant to hold the "traditional" policy portfolio.
"What happens in this plan to honour contractual obligations to EFPA policyholders? And what about British American policyholders?" she asked.
"The term traditional is just a convenient handle used to separate the policies that continue to receive premiums vs policies that are paid up. There is no legal basis for the separation of these policies in the Insurance Act."