You are here
Society Arts & Leisure 

Matilda Parker’s 65,000 Thousand Dollar House

Press Release By LACC

CASE – Ms. Matilda Parker is the Managing Director (CEO) of the National Port Authority [NPA]. Ms Parker embarked on a campaign of misrepresentation from the beginning of the process to the end of the process. Ms Parker purchased a house in the Sophie Community for US$65,000. However, when the LACC’s AD Verification Team asked about the means of payment, Ms. Parker said cash down payment.

After the Team expressed surprise by a US$65,000 cash down payment, Ms Parker later changed the story and said she made the purchase in installments. Ms Parker was given 2 weeks to bring the receipts of the installment payments. She later wrote back that the receipts were missing.

The AD Verification Team asserts categorically, that both of the above statements cannot be true at the same time – a cash down payment of US$65,000 Vs. installment payment of US$65,000.

One of the two assertions is definitely false and Ms Parker knows exactly which one is false. Ms Parker was also asked to disclose the seller of the aforementioned Sophie Community Property and the contact details of the seller.

Ms. Parker disclosed the name of the seller, but declined to give any contact details (telephone, residential address and/or other means of contact). This again is blatantly false information given to the LACC Team. No reasonable person will pay a hefty US$65,000 for a property, but claims not to have any contact information on the seller. This is clearly intentional and material misrepresentation and Ms Parker must be held to account.

Ms Parker USA House: Ms Parker USA house was put at US$750,000 (2012) on her declaration.  When asked for documents on the mortgage, the house was discovered to be valued only US$300,000 [2012]. When asked to explain the gross disparity, Ms Parker said it was an error.

LACC AD Team wonders how a US$300,000 house can be erroneously valued at US$750,000. Another one of Ms. Parker’s intentional and material misrepresentations, even up to the very end of the process. Ms Parker multiple misrepresentations [while under oath] left the Team with no other option but to find intentional and material misrepresentation of the facts.



Related posts

%d bloggers like this: