A recent report framed Flamingo Clearing House’s review application as the move that “stalled” the Banxso liquidation. But court papers, the second creditors’ meeting transcript, the Master’s ruling and subsequent correspondence point to a deeper fight over creditor claims, voting power, legal fees, access to records and the treatment of a dissenting liquidator.
The public version of the Banxso liquidation has settled into a neat storyline: the estate was progressing, Flamingo Clearing House brought a review, and everything ground to a halt. It is a simple narrative. The documents tell a messier story. They show a liquidation already strained by disputes over claim values, the voting weight of settled complainants, the legal fees charged to the estate, the Master’s handling of objections, and the position of a liquidator who refused to sign off on matters he said he could not verify.
The review is now often described as a delaying tactic. A report that appeared in Moneyweb on the 26th June quoted five of the six liquidators and Mostert and Bosman as calling it obstructive and part of a “carefully coordinated strategy” to discredit the liquidators and derail the liquidation. That is a serious claim, and it is plainly newsworthy. But it is not the same thing as answering the application.
