RMB has new identity

 

“Notice is hereby given in terms of Section 22 (6) of the Banking Act that Renaissance Merchant Bank Limited has changed its name to Capital Bank Corporation Limited and shall be known as such henceforth,” he said.
The announcement comes only a couple of weeks after former RMB  chief executive Mr Lawrence Tamayi said the bank would change, not only its identity, but also what defines its “DNA” as a bank.

“A rebranding exercise is also in the process,” he said. “The rebranding process will ensure that our staff will provide exceptional service to our clients. The process will define our DNA (genetic make-up of one’s system).”
Mr Tamayi said rebranding and transforming the bank would result in a solid institution as the bank also sought to recover all dues it is owed.

That process, which the bank’s chief executive said had already started, included recovery of all the money allegedly lost over the past few years.
Already, said Mr Tamayi, the bank has started performing satisfactorily and expected it to report a profit by December this year.
The bank is now under the control of the National Social Security Authority, which acquired an 84 percent stake following the unearthing of alleged financial impropriety by the RBZ.

The probe was prompted by a wrangle between Renaissance Financial Holdings founder Mr Patterson Timba and businessman Mr Jayesh Shah over a loan the former allegedly had failed to repay in time.

The investigations discovered financial impropriety involving a US$21 million core capital deficit while US$63 million deposits had been loaned to unsecured clients.
Of the deposits extended to beneficiaries as loans, a total of US$47 million was allegedly not performing, with a good chunk allegedly extended to related parties.

But Mr Timba has been adamant that the RBZ report overstated the extent of the institution’s exposure to beneficiaries. He recently told the Herald Business he would soon mount a legal challenge to repossess the bank.

This is despite his withdrawal of his case before the High Court in which he was challenging the disposal of the then RMB to NSSA.

Mr Timba said since the transaction had already been completed, he needed to mount a fresh legal challenge that addresses the proper scenario.
He argues the bank should have been sold according to the Articles of Association of RFHL, which means approval of shareholders, of which he was part.