DailyrecordNg …Nigeria's hottest news blog
Related Articles
The Nigerian police has reveal details of how Olukayode Olusanya, founder of Oak Homes Limited, allegedly defrauded a U.S.-based client, Anthony Ugbebor, an engineer.
The police are prosecuting Olusanya and his firm before Justice Musa Kakaki of the Federal High Court in Lagos on a four-count charge involving an alleged N152 million fraud, bordering on conspiracy, obtaining under false pretence, and stealing.
They were arraigned on November 26, 2024, and pleaded not guilty.
According to the prosecution, Olukayode Olusanya allegedly conspired with Lynda Umeh, Head of Sales and Marketing at Oak Homes, who is currently at large, to defraud the Nigerian-American complainant.
The alleged fraud reportedly took place between November 8, 2017, and August 4, 2020. During that period, the defendants were said to have convinced Ugbebor to pay N152 million for two three-bedroom apartments at Oak Residence in Victoria Island, promising delivery by February 28, 2019.
However, the property was allegedly never delivered.
At an earlier hearing on February 10, 2025, the prosecution sought to tender both the complainant’s petition and the defendant’s statement as evidence, but the defence objected.
At the resumed proceedings, Justice Kakaki ruled on the objections. The complainant’s petition was admitted and marked as Exhibit A, while the defendant’s statement was rejected.
The judge stated: “The petition sought to be tendered is signed. I admit the same in evidence and mark it as Exhibit A.”
On the defendant’s statement, he ruled: “The statement is hereby marked as rejected.”
Justice Kakaki explained that the prosecution had failed to comply with Section 17(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act.
Testifying as the first prosecution witness, Amiebelomo said he invited three additional witnesses during the investigation — Mrs. Kofo Coker, Mr. Seye, and Mr. Shuiabu.
When asked by prosecuting counsel, Supol M. A. Omo-Osagie, whether any of the witnesses submitted documents, he responded: “Yes, they tendered the payment receipt and offer letter from the defendant, issued in 2017, which the complainant, Anthony Ugbebor, accepted.”
The court subsequently adjourned the trial until July 8, 2025, for continuation.
During cross-examination, defence counsel Adeleke Agboola (SAN) asked when the petition was dated. The witness replied: “It was dated December 27, 2023.”
He added that the petition was submitted to the Assistant Inspector General of Police, Zone 2, and assigned to him for investigation on the same day.
Amiebelomo confirmed that he later met Ugbebor in person after the petition was transferred to his department and that the complainant made and signed a statement in his presence.
When asked to verify the authenticity of the signature on the petition, the officer stated: “I’m not a signature expert.”
He further disclosed that the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had previously handled the matter but said he was unaware that Olusanya had refunded N110 million to the EFCC via bank draft.
He also stated that Olukayode Olusanya did not inform him of any partial refund during his investigation.
Under further questioning, Amiebelomo said he was unaware of a civil suit — No. LD447LMW/2023 — pending before the Lagos State High Court, where a pre-emptive injunction had reportedly been granted against both the complainant and the EFCC.
“They were not served,” he said.
Agboola argued that the dispute was purely civil in nature and cited court decisions discouraging police involvement in such matters.
However, the prosecution objected to this line of argument.
Citing legal authority, Omo-Osagie maintained that civil transactions could assume criminal dimensions if fraud is established. He referenced Section 135 of the Evidence Act and urged the court to discount the defence’s submission.
Counsel for Oak Homes, Mr. E. Jude, later suggested that Amiebelomo’s investigation was inconclusive. The officer disagreed, stating:
“My investigation was conclusive. When I visited the location, the building was not complete.”
When asked whether the defendant offered any explanation for failing to deliver the property, Amiebelomo answered: “Yes.”
He added: “The defendant said the price he agreed with Ugbebor was no longer workable for him, as costs had increased, and that he would not go ahead with the initial terms. That was what he told me.”
When questioned about whether Olusanya mentioned COVID-19 or the sealing of the property by the Lagos State Government as reasons for the delay, Amiebelomo responded:
“No, he didn’t mention COVID or the sealing of the building by the Lagos State Government.”
