In their last attempt to stop MTI from being liquidated, the masterminds behind South Africa’s mega crypto scandal, play their wild card. The last-ditch is an effort to stop the liquidation of the company’s assets by trying to convince claimants that the liquidation will not serve them any purpose as they will not be able to claim their refunds and instead claimants would need to return what they had withdrawn.
The trial case of MTI, the biggest crypto scam of South Africa, is nearing its inevitable end. South African Court, which is dealing with the matter, is in the process of writing a final judgment which calls for MTI’s liquidation. Already, an interim order of liquidation of the company’s assets is in place. The final order for liquidation is going to be the last nail placed into the coffin.
However, the only contesting case against the will of the people and the law is Clynton Marks and his wife, Cheri. While Clynton is in official custody, yet his wife is proceeding with his case on behalf of MTI before the South African Courts. Clynton is not in favor that the company’s assets be sold to make the loss good caused to MTI’s customers/claimants. To delay the proceedings, and in an effort to obtain a favorable order, Clynton through Cheri has filed several applications. However, in either of the applications moved by Cheri, the Court did not detract from its earlier stance i.e. liquidation of MTI.
There was yet another intervention by Clynton as his wife moved a fresh application and bought further time. When the Court took up the application it postponed the final liquidation order until the next date of hearing i.e. 8th September 2021.
Since the last date of hearing, Clynton’s wife is making efforts to convince most of the claimants/MTI’s customers. She is trying to point out to them that if the final liquidation order was passed then it would not be in anybody’s interest. She has been suggesting to the claimants that the liquidation would in fact jeopardize their right to seek refunds. Cheri claims that once the order of liquidation is passed then the claimants of MTI will be regarded as the company’s debtors. Under the law, the sale proceeds of the MTI’s will be utilized firstly for settlement of claims of company’s creditors, claims Cheri.
In the opinion of Markses, the status of claimants/MTI’s customers after the final order will be that of “debtors”. This would mean that even if they had withdrawn their funds after the incident, they will need to return the funds back to MTI. What Markses exactly mean is that the order for liquidation will favor only the creditors i.e. banks etc. and not the claimants. Nor the claimants be entitled to reclaim their lost Bitcoins because there wouldn’t be anything left to pay for claimants’ refunds.
Both, Cheri and Clynton, are therefore seeking claimants’ support to stop the Court from passing the final order for liquidation. They want claimants to file counter applications or become party to the application filed by them and support Markses’ application.
