FCCPC Shuts Down  Paradise Estate Office Over Disregard Of Regulatory Orders

By Ladi Gbegi

Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission ,FCCPC, has closed down the premises of Life Camp Paradise Estate, situated in the Life Camp district of the Federal Capital Territory, following claims that the company failed to comply with official directives.

The enforcement exercise, carried out yesterday, was led by Mr. Marvin Nadah, Deputy Director of the Surveillance and Investigations, Department of the FCCPC. He explained that the action became necessary after the estate firm allegedly ignored several notices issued by the Commission.

Nadah stated that the FCCPC had been receiving multiple complaints from consumers in the real estate sector, all of which were linked to Paradise Estate Limited. 

He further disclosed that since February, the Commission had instructed the company to transfer ownership of properties already paid for by subscribers over a three-year period, but that instruction was not carried out.

He added that the enforcement was prompted by what he described as continued non-compliance with the Commission’s directives, in accordance with Section 150 of the FCCPC Act 2018, which empowered the agency to take such action, including sealing premises.

He maintained that the Commission’s intervention was justified under the law.

Nadah also advised prospective property buyers to exercise due diligence, urging them to verify all claims made by real estate developers before committing their funds.

On the other hand, the Head of Legal for Life Camp Paradise Limited, Mr. Aloysius Ezenwa, said the company had been served with a summons by the FCCPC in relation to a petition filed by one of its clients.

He explained that the company had already escalated the matter to the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, appealing the Commission’s decision.

According to him, the complaint originated from a dissatisfied subscriber who raised concerns about the company’s processes, leading to the regulatory petition.

Ezenwa insisted that the company responded to all official communications as required, stressing that the disputed transaction is governed by a duly executed contract of sale between both parties.

He argued that the directives issued by the FCCPC conflicted with the terms of the contractual agreement.