Exclusive: EazzyTranzact CEO blames FX losses for current woes, says company is not broke

Nearly a year after the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) declared him wanted over an alleged N50 billion fraud involving foreign exchange transactions, the CEO of EazzyTranzact Payment Service Africa Limited, Olusanya Olumide Adeniran, has offered his first public account of the dispute.

In an extensive interview with Technext, Adeniran provided a detailed account of how the case involving Kashton Concepts Nigeria Limited arose from mounting foreign exchange losses, delayed settlement payments and failed repayment negotiations rather than fraudulent intent.

The EazzyTranzact CEO explained that multiple settlement proposals were ignored while enforcement actions made it increasingly difficult for his company to raise funds and repay outstanding obligations. 

In September 2025, the EFCC established a case of fraudulent diversion and alleged breach of trust against Adeniran and his companies: EazzyTranzact and EazzyOil Petroleum Gas Energy Limited. The anti-graft commission noted that Adeniran and his company made false claims about being a legitimate forex trader. 

However, Adeniran’s argument on the matter is simple: he is not a fraudster, and he supported the claim by referring to his professional background. He explained that spending years building an international business, obtaining licences in multiple countries, and working globally contradicts the fraud allegations.

“If I’m a fraud, how will I get a license in the U.S., in the U.K., in Canada? I’ve worked across 26 countries in my life. I’ve worked for international companies, so what do I want to do with fraud when God has already blessed my life?” he told Technext. 

The case has revolved around court matters, settlement provisions, and an in-between standstill. Also, Adeniran’s reputation has been shattered by accumulated losses in value, with claims that a commercial dispute between two companies was litigated as a fraud or scam case. 

Background 

It wasn’t the first sort of business transaction between EazzyTranzact and Kashton Concepts, a Nigerian oil and gas industry company founded by Sherif Ganiyu Shagaya. Both companies have had existing commercial relationships that have yielded about $200 million. 

The basis of the deals was forward foreign exchange (FX) contracts. Under this agreement, customers pay in naira immediately but receive U.S. dollars after an agreed period, mostly 30 days. This is a normal business practice commonly used with major oil and gas companies to manage foreign exchange needs. 

For oil and gas companies, oil prices, project costs, and exchange rates easily fluctuate. Agreeing to a forward exchange rate allows them to lock in cost (based on a particular FX) and avoid uncertainty. 

“Because oil and gas projects fluctuate, they will lock the interest with you. You pay immediately (in naira), and in 30 days, you will collect back your dollars,” Adeniran explained. 

In one of their various business deals in May 2024, EazzyTranzact and Kashton Concepts entered an agreement for a transfer of ₦13.5 billion, expected to be paid at once to avoid currency fluctuations due to FX. After which the payment company will then transfer $10,000,000 to the oil and gas company within a period of 30 days.

However, issues arose.

According to Adeniran and the transaction document shared with Technext, Kashton Concepts didn’t pay promptly. Instead of paying the full amount the same day they locked in the day’s exchange rate, they made the payment 11 days later. In a period of flexible naira-to-dollar rates, this amounted to different exchange rate calculations.

In that transaction, EazzyTranzact lost ₦1.5 billion due to delayed settlement and volatile exchange rate movement. 

Instead of stopping the deal on settlement grounds, both parties agreed to continue trading, hoping future transactions, if done promptly, would yield profit to offset the incurred loss. But losses kept growing, which became the financial foundation of the dispute. 

The transaction took another turn as Kashton Concepts needed additional financing ($50 million) to continue importing petroleum products and doing business. To solve this, they went for a Standby Letter of Credit (SBLC), a bank guarantee that reassures suppliers that if the buyer fails to pay, the issuing bank will pay instead. Here, EazzyTranzact was the guarantor. 

Explaining the dynamics, Adeniran said, “British Petroleum gives them products; they bring the product to Nigeria and sell. We change it, and you pay them back (British Petroleum).”

But by November 2024, the losses had become overwhelming.

According to the shared transaction document, over $109 million was completed between 29 May 2024 and 4 November 2024. Continued late payments saw a cumulative FX loss of about $31 million during the period. 

Adeniran clarified that the losses arose from exchange-rate movements rather than from theft or misappropriation of funds.

Also Read: Fraud, AI, and the trust gap: Why detection alone isn’t enough.

Commercial relationship collapse 

The turning point came when trust between both parties collapsed. 

Despite initial agreements to continue trading and work towards a solution, Adeniran explained that Kashton Concepts became reluctant to continue business. He noted that the discussion shifted from operational matters to disputes with the chairman, Sherif Ganiyu Shagaya, which halted further transactions.

The breakdown of the transaction prevented the implementation of a recovery plan agreed upon by both parties.

Adeniran explained that his company was negotiating a large banking facility worth billions of naira, which later fell through. He noted that losing this funding significantly affected EazzyTranzact’s ability to repay its obligations. 

“Providus Bank said we can get up to ₦33 billion in funding”, he said, then added that the conversation went from 100% to 0% in one week. “₦17 billion meant to be approved to us went off.”

Legal matters

Amidst the failed agreement, the dispute moved from commercial negotiations to law enforcement. 

In a petition filed by Kashton Concepts, Adeniran and EazzyTranzact were alleged to have absconded with billions of naira, a claim rejected by Adeniran’s legal team, which replied that the allegations ignored the extensive history of transactions and ongoing negotiations. 

For him and his lawyers, the matter was a commercial dispute rather than criminal fraud. 

“The petition stated that I collected funds and ran away. My lawyer said this is a commercial matter. These are the receipts. These are the bank transactions,” he added. 

Following the involvement of the EFCC, several properties associated with Adeniran were marked. This includes 10 flats of a 4-storey building and 2 blocks of 2-storey buildings in Victoria Island, Lagos, 6 blocks of 2-storey buildings in Lekki Phase 1, Lagos, and five cars, with allegations that these properties were obtained with Kashon Concepts’ transaction funds.

In response, Adeniran noted that these assets were legitimate business properties and were not purchased using the complainant’s funds.

After a few back and forth, some of the properties were released. 

Moves for settlement 

While negotiating a settlement and repayment, both companies soon discussed sharing losses and structured repayment plans.

“We never stopped trying to resolve the dispute. We agreed that this loss position will involve a sharing formula where I take 75%, he takes 25%. My position was to pay $24 million,” he said.

Adeniran stressed that EazzyTranzact still had capacity to repay and was not insolvent, stating that the company possessed valuable assets and was actively seeking financing. He argued that the inability to pay immediately should not be interpreted as an inability to pay at all.

“Our valuation was done by one of the top finance companies in Nigeria and one in the UK. When they did the valuation that time, it was $75 million,” he added. 

With the capacity to repay, Olumide’s request was time to gather funds.

“We can use our equity as collateral. We’re also using the 65 billion property that we put in the trust to raise funds. So give us breathing space.”

While negotiating a repayment plan, both parties’ lawyers met with several proposals in a bid to settle the matter amicably. However, after those discussions, representatives of Kashton Concepts stopped responding.

“The lawyer has not come back to us. There’s no document. There’s no letter. There’s no email from them saying this is our proposed resolution.”

Recognising that immediate cash repayment is proving difficult, EazzyTranzact proposed transferring their ₦5.4 billion property to reduce the debt. 

Also Read: The digital heist: Crypto scams, biometric fraud, and recovery solutions.

Current status

Repayment plans and settlement processes are believed to be stalling. According to Adeniran, efforts to settle debts through financing, settlement proposals or property transfers were either blocked or ignored.

He added that enforcement plans did not improve repayment either. At the same time, allegations and loss in value have reduced the company’s ability to generate the funds needed to repay the debt. 

“Every time there’s an opportunity to pay money, Kaston runs away. They sabotage us, they ensure that we don’t have the capacity to repay,” he said. 

For Adeniran and EazzyTranzact, the point is to clarify that the matter was all a failed commercial business relationship that stemmed from poor decisions. He distanced himself and the company from fraud attempts, stressing how the matter has affected his reputation, credibility and status locally and internationally.

Latest from Kashton Concepts 

In a recent report, Kashton Concepts maintained its position regarding the alleged financial misconduct and continued to pursue the matter through legal measures.

While the matter still sits before the Federal High Court in Abuja, EazzyTranzact and its CEO continue to seek options to extricate themselves from the deep waters. One major misconception Adeniran seeks to erase is to clear his name and rewrite the misconceptions: commercial dispute, not fraud.