By Seedy Jobe
Lawmakers on Tuesday pressed the Office of the Ombudsman over irregularities in a staff motorcycle loan, after auditors revealed that a D75,000 loan had been approved even though the supporting invoice showed a purchase price of only D47,000.
The issue emerged during a hearing before the National Assembly Standing Committee on Finance and Public Accounts, where auditors presented findings from a review of the institution’s financial statements and operations for 2023 and 2024.
According to the audit report, management authorized a loan of D75,000 for a staff member’s motorcycle, despite documentation indicating a lower cost, creating a discrepancy of D28,000.
“The audit noted that the request and approval of a motorcycle loan paid to a particular staff member was D75,000. However, the invoice was D47,000, leading to a difference of D28,000,” auditors told the committee, recommending that future approvals be based strictly on submitted invoices and receipts. They also called on the Ombudsman’s office to recover the excess amount and return it to the institution’s account.
Officials from the Ombudsman’s office acknowledged the error, describing it as an administrative oversight.
“The office has noted the irregularity and will work on avoiding such in the future,” management said, adding that the staff member later provided a receipt. Officials explained that the loan application had been approved more than a year after it was submitted, leading the applicant to purchase the motorcycle from a different vendor.
Management further told lawmakers that the employee is currently repaying the loan under existing vehicle loan rules.
“It’s the only oversight in this situation where we approved a loan based on the application form, and that amount turned out to be different from the invoice,” an official said. “But the applicant is currently servicing the loan, and we are recovering the amount as per the current car loan rules.”
The committee chairman sought clarification during the session, asking whether D75,000 was indeed the approved figure.
“Yes, that was what was specified on the loan application form,” management replied. “It was a mistake — an oversight.”
Comments are closed.