Now, Bolt takes legal action

with apology: Colm’s wife paid $7.5M”. Williams- Imbert is a director of Bolt and the wife of Finance Minister Colm Imbert.

On Monday, Imbert initiated legal action against Singh and the Express regarding the same article.

In a signed letter dated November 8 (Tuesday), Stephanie Moe of Fitzwilliam, Stone, Furness- Smith and Morgan law chambers told Singh that the firm has been instructed by Bolt and Williams-Imbert to request that Singh make “a full and unequivocal public retraction and apology” to be approved by the firm.

Moe said Singh is also requested to give an undertaking not to repeat the allegations made in her article.

Referring to the allegations contained in the article, Moe said the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) did not pay $7.5 million to Bolt in April 2016 and the sum paid to Bolt at that time was $102,489.75. Bolt did not receive two consultancy contracts from the HDC in 2004.

The company received one in July 2004 from the National Housing Authority (NHA) following a competitive tendering process and another in 2006 from the HDC. Moe said to the best of Bolt’s understanding, the HDC selected it for the 2006 contract based on its past performance and work history with the HDC.

She further stated that the 2004 and 2006 contracts between Bolt and the HDC were not, as far as Bolt and Williams- Imbert are aware, “procured by or tainted with any wrongdoing on the part of Bolt, Mrs Williams-Imbert or anyone else for that matter. At all material times, the fees charged by Bolt for services rendered by in it relation to these contracts, “fell within the acceptable range of fees charged by comparable service providers in the industry.” Moe said Imbert, “is not now and has never been a director, officer, employee or shareholder of Bolt.

She stated that that no time did Williams-Imbert, any other officer, employee or shareholder of Bolt engage in any conduct designed to influence Imbert to release funds to the HDC for the purpose of the HDC satisfying its payment obligations to Bolt. Moe added that the HDC’s public statement made it clear that none of the monies paid to Bolt by the HDC in respect of the sums due and owing under the 2004 and 2006 contracts were paid as a result of any action on the part of Imbert designed to favour Bolt.

After telling Singh that she failed to make proper enquiries to Bolt and Williams-Imbert on events dating some 12 years ago and did not give them ample opportunity to respond, Moe said such conduct falls well below the standard of acceptable journalism. She drew Singh’s attention to a High Court ruling on May 12 of this year in which Justice Frank Seepersad awarded $100,000 in damages against the Trinidad Express. With respect to that matter, Moe said Justice Seepersad observed that the Express and certain journalists connected to it, had engaged in reprehensible conduct in publishing certain defamatory articles and, moreover, that such conduct on their part warranted punishment. Moe told Singh that the firm expects to hear from her without delay and if a satisfactory reply is not received within 14 days of receipt of this letter, Bolt and Williams-Imbert, “will take such steps as they may be advised.”