Fidelity Bank’s Infidelity: How Bank Scammed GON-SETEC Nig Limited
By: GELE AGBAI
The individual who named Fidelity Bank Nigeria PLC likely had commendable intentions. By its designation, Nigeria’s sixth-largest commercial bank is conveying to stakeholders that it is a trustworthy institution, committed to upholding agreements and promises. In essence, the bank, which was established in 1988 as a merchant bank and transitioned into a full-fledged commercial bank in 1999 is asserting that its word is its bond; thereby affirming its reliability.
However, recent actions taken by the bank, particularly concerning its contractual relationship with GON-SETEC Nig Limited, a water engineering firm, have raised significant doubts regarding its fidelity claims.
Fidelity Bank entered into a contractual agreement with GON-SETEC Nig Limited to facilitate communication with the Lagos State Waste Water Regulatory Authority, which had issued a 72-hour Abatement Notice to the bank.
This contract was communicated to GON-SETEC Nig Limited via a letter dated May 6, 2026. The terms of engagement included reviewing the statutory notice served on the bank, advising the bank on appropriate technical and regulatory responses, engaging directly with the Lagos State Waste Water Management Office on behalf of the bank, negotiating with regulatory officials to avert enforcement actions, and advising the bank on all compliance measures necessary to satisfy the regulatory authority.
Fidelity Bank further instructed the company to act promptly to prevent prosecution, sanctions, closure of its facilities, and other enforcement measures.
In response to this contract, GON-SETEC Nig Limited mobilized its resources to fulfill the agreement.
According to Chief Kola Kuforiji, Principal Partner at Kola Kuforiji Law Office in Lagos, GON-SETEC Nig Limited successfully negotiated a two-week extension from the regulatory authority.
In a letter dated July 20, 2026, Chief Kuforiji informed that his client was periodically updating the bank on the progress and interactions with the regulatory authority, only to discover, much to their dismay, that the bank had awarded the same contract to another firm.
This action clearly indicates that Fidelity Bank has not acted in good faith and has breached the contract.
Several questions arise: Is Fidelity Bank’s letter of “urgent engagement” to GON-SETEC Nig Limited authentic or fraudulent? Can a responsible corporate entity renege on a commitment it has issued? Did Fidelity Bank initially intend to deceive GON-SETEC Nig Limited, or did corrupt officials within the bank breach the contract for personal gain? Regardless, the bank is liable for breach of contract.
Once a breach of contract is established, particularly when the breach is not attributable to the contracting firm, the principal party must face consequences.
GON-SETEC Nig Limited is committed to providing services that satisfy its clientele and receiving appropriate compensation. The termination of the contract has resulted in financial losses for the company.
Okenze George Nkwoji, Managing Director of GON-SETEC Nig Limited, has stated that the company is prepared to pursue this corporate rascality and lawlessness exhibited by Fidelity Bank to its logical conclusion.
Already, Chief Kola Kuforiji has demanded the sum of N150 million in damages from Fidelity Bank for this breach of contract.
He has warned that his client will initiate legal proceedings against the bank should it fail, refuse, or neglect to pay the sum of N150 million, which encompasses specific and general damages, within 14 days.
Okenze Nkwoji concurs with their attorney, asserting, “We shall seek an injunction to prevent the execution of the contract by the new firm until a judgment is rendered on the matter if Fidelity Bank fails to respond to our demand.”
Surprisingly, Fidelity Bank has yet to communicate to GON-SETEC Nig Limited the reasons for re-awarding the contract to another company. Any explanations provided at this stage would be perceived as belated. It is perplexing that a bank that prides itself on being managed by a stable, experienced, and proficient team is unable to execute fundamental responsibilities effectively.
