Regent University College has not been auctioned – Registrar to Public
The Regent University College of Science and Technology has denied reports suggesting that the school has been auctioned to defray a debt owed Obokom Civil Engineering Limited.
The University in a statement, however, admitted that it had to fulfil some financial obligations towards the construction company.
“We have taken notice of publications circulating online and in the news media regarding the seizure and auction of some assets of Regent University College of Science and Technology (RUCST).”
“Certainly, we have some financial obligations towards Obokom Civil Engineering Works Limited in respect of one of the buildings of the Institution. The company and its owner, Nana Obokomata IX has secured a court order against the property, but we are still in discussion with the company and its owner and we expect an amicable settlement soon. Secondly, the report that RUCST has been auctioned is incorrect,” the statement said.
The University also pointed out that the current development will in no way, affect academic activities.
“The current matter does not interfere in any way with the academic functioning of the University. Please, stay calm, and rest assured that everything will be resolved shortly.”
Obokom Civil Engineering LTD is said to have sealed a contract with Regent University College of Science and Technology to construct a six-story multi-purpose building for the University.
Per the contract, among others, stated that the University will start paying the construction company a year after the facility has been completed.
In effect, the University, however, failed to honour its financial obligation, forcing the construction company to secure a loan of one million Cedis from Unicredit Ghana Limited.
The University subsequently issued six post-dated cheques which were dishonoured. Unicredit, as a result, used the construction company‘s deposit of one million Ghana cedis to offset part of the debt.
After the University failed to pay the debt it owed, despite numerous notices, the construction firm instructed its lawyers to take the matter to court.
Thus, the final ruling on the case went in favour of the construction company.