THE Jamaica Redevelopment Foundation (JRF) — the company which bought the Financial Sector Adjustment Company (Finsac) debt portfolio — does not provide statements to entrepreneurs who lost their properties in the 1990s financial meltdown.

Finsac General Manager Errol Campbell told the enquiry into the financial sector collapse and the role of his organisation that the JRF has acted on the advice of its legal representatives.

Campbell, responding to questions by attorney-at-law Dr Christopher Malcolm, told the inquiry yesterday that a letter from the legal representatives of JRF directed the debt collection company not to release statements on the purchased accounts.

Malcolm is representing Paul Hurlock, an entrepreneur who insisted that his account was cleared up but his property was nonetheless sold by the JRF.

The JRF, an American company, bought the Finsac debt portfolio at a highly discounted rate with the understanding that a portion of the returns from the sale of seized assets would be paid over to Finsac.

Debtors have, however, long charged that even as the JRF sells seized properties, the collection agency has refused to provide statement of accounts to the indebted entrepreneurs.

Campbell, at a sitting of the enquiry last December, admitted that a large portion of the Finsac debts sold to the JRF were not verified, and that all they had were names and numbers.

On Tuesday, commissioners grilled Campbell about the open-ended sale of the bad debt portfolio to the JRF, allowing them to charge uncapped interest, and showed open surprise on the level of loans written off by Finsac.

Commission chairman, Justice Boyd Carey, in viewing Finsac records provided by Campbell, repeatedly remarked about what he termed “significant reductions” given to some debtors.

Justice Carey and his fellow commissioners asked Campbell to explain how a $325-million loan to one company was reduced by $295 million, and $322 million forgiven out of a $326 million loan in another case.

In another instance, a $116-million loan was reduced by $112 million, the Finsac records showed, as the commissioners display open consternation on the massive debt reduction offer to some debtors.

“The figures jumped out at me, too,” Campbell responded.

Campbell had requested time to do the necessary research after he declined to answer numerous questions posed during his two previous appearances before the enquiry, saying he did not have the facts.

The Finsac boss, who was not at the helm when the transactions were done, said he was unsure if he could get the reason for the massive debt write-offs.

He said, however, that according to the records there were some 220 debts approved for compromise but he did not know the total number of applications.

As the commissioners questioned the inconsistencies in the write-off with some small and others significantly large, Campbell said he could not find a comprehensive list to show the total amount of debt that was forgiven.

In the meantime, Commissioner Charles Ross questioned the method used in selling the loan portfolio to JRF.

Ross asked if non-financial institutions should continue to charge interest on loans after they have been bought, in reference to JRF, being a collection agency and not a financial institution.

“Why did Finsac opt for an open- ended disposal of the loans?” Ross asked.

“That is better addressed to former persons in Finsac,” Campbell responded. “Maybe I should leave that one alone I don’t know the reasons that governed that decision,” he added.

The enquiry continues today when Campbell is again expected to take the stand.