The Premier, His BVI Hero and Her Bank of Asia Legacy

Nov 03, 2025 Breaking, Update 0 Comments

The saga concerning the Bank of Asia continues. 

Our newsroom has now uncovered shocking details of a foiled attempt by the Government to exploit Bank of Asia depositors, a large percent of whom are Virgin Islanders or residents that put their hard earned monies and trust in the bank. The Government attempted to withdraw its US$5 million deposit from Bank of Asia in late March 2025, a scenario which would have left other depositors with an additional nearly US$5 million of uninsured exposure.

Before turning to what strongly appears to be insider trading efforts on the part of the Government, we can now report that the Government’s US$5 million deposit on Bank of Asia was placed in a 6-month Term Deposit maturing in late July 2025, meaning that the deposit was placed in late January 2025. This was at a time when Lorna Smith was using family members to finalise her return to a Ministerial post and just before she travelled with Premier Natalio Wheatley to Asia in earlier this year. 

At no stage has the Government provided the public with these basic and seemingly benign details. At no point has the Premier or Lorna Smith admitted to playing any role in the original deposit, nor has either confirmed that they were even aware of the original deposit being made. We’re still to get a report from the Internal Audit the Premier commissioned, that he mentioned has been completed couple months ago. 

But there is far more to this story, which might explain their refusal to answer questions and their continued silence. As has been reported, the Auditor General is now investigating the matter. Most certainly she will be keenly interested in the new twist in the tale detailed below.

It is now a matter of public record, and has been reported by OffshoreAlert based on a court filing, that on 21 March 2025 the regulators to Bank of Asia, issued it a ‘Second Directive’. Only in the summer of 2025 was this made public, meaning that at the time of the directive no depositor (without inside information) would have been aware of it. The Second Directive consisted of five parts, which importantly included tight restrictions on withdrawals from Bank of Asia and only with regulatory approval could the withdrawals occur.

Separate and apart from the new restrictions, Term Deposits at Bank of Asia, such as the Government’s, could never be withdrawn or terminated prior to maturity. The bank’s website still reads: “Early Withdrawal or Termination…No early withdrawals or termination are allowed for Term Deposits.” The website also states that this restriction had been in place since November 2020.

The Second Directive was sent by the regulators to a single person at Bank of Asia, Mr Deon Vanterpool, the nephew of Lorna Smith. The only other parties that would have been aware of the Second Directive at the time were a tight circle within VIDIC, an entity reporting to Premier Wheatley, and a small group within the FSC, an entity reporting to Junior Minister Lorna Smith. The point of this is fairly obvious: if the 21 March 2025 Second Directive became known to the Government before it was made public in the summer of 2025, almost certainly it would have been Lorna Smith and/or the Premier that would have been the direct recipient of the crucial non-public information, both of whom continue to distance themselves from the matter and throw Civil Servants under the proverbial bus. 

And here is where the penny drops. Just when the Second Directive was sent by the regulators to Mr Vanterpool on behalf of Bank of Asia, the Government demanded of Bank of Asia that it be returned its US$5 million deposit. Then, despite the fact that Bank of Asia expressly restricts any withdrawal or termination on Term Deposits, Bank of Asia, then being operated under the direction of Deon Vanterpool, decided to ignore its own restriction policy and helped advocate for a Government withdrawal by directing the matter to the regulators for approval.

But the Government’s attempt to push itself to the front of the withdrawal queue at the expense of other unwitting depositors, and Bank of Asia’s attempt to ignore its own Term Deposit withdrawal restrictions, were blocked by Ms Lisa Violet. Ms Violet is the former CEO of VIDIC who left her job in June 2025 under a shroud of secrecy. Her post remains unfilled, with VIDIC continuing to publicly advertise an opening for the CEO role.

Ms Violet took little time in shutting down the Government’s demand. Our newsroom has learned that within a week of the Second Directive being issued and immediately after the Government’s demand for repayment, Ms Violet roundly rejected the Government’s attempt to withdraw its money. The Bank’s own withdrawal restrictions aside, Ms Violet clearly understood the adverse impact a substantial withdrawal would have on the bank’s financial position. More importantly, Ms Violet undoubtedly recognised that to allow the Government to front run other depositors would make VIDIC complicit in what surely seems to be a conspiracy on the part of the Government and those that tipped it off to act on highly sensitive non-public information to the potential severe detriment of other depositors. Given the timing of the Government’s demand, the Second Directive, and Ms Violet’s rejection, it is impossible to believe that neither the Premier nor Lorna Smith had an epiphany in the second half of March 2025 and demanded the withdrawal without the benefit of any non-public information.

Summing this up, we now appear to have, at a minimum, a gross abuse of power and pervasive corruption at the highest levels of Government. Whether the non-public information came from within Bank of Asia, VIDIC, and/or the FSC is neither here nor there in so far as the Government’s culpability. Acting on the non-public information would imply an attempt by well-informed Government officials to effectively defraud other depositors in the following way: if the Government’s attempt had not been foiled by Ms Violet and others, Bank of Asia would now have US$5 million less cash to repay the other uninsured deposits and therefore the other deposits, 80% of which are considered resident in the BVI/residents of the BVI, would have additional potential uninsured losses equal to the Government’s attempted, ill-gotten nearly US$5 million gain.

On October 22nd, during a ceremony held on Scrub Island, the Premier honoured Lorna Smith and lauded her a hero. But are they holding secrets that could burn the house down, while pretending to be unbothered by the Bank of Asia fiasco, and continuously attempting to change and control the narrative. 

The public should be outraged by these events and we implore the Auditor General to look closely into this matter further. It strongly appears that someone tipped off the Government, and only the Premier and Lorna Smith are directly connected to the persons and regulatory bodies that could have done so. Someone very senior within the Government gave the order to demand repayment of the Term Deposit, and undoubtedly there must be some written withdrawal demand communication from the Government to Bank of Asia to this effect. And clearly there would also be a written record of Bank of Asia, or the regulators, advising the Government that it could not redeem its (unredeemable) Term Deposit. There is no plausible way that all of this was handled verbally.

This Government now has even further serious questions to answer. The public must demand that the Government immediately provide its account of the story and do so with documents, including those connected with the original deposit and its apparent attempt to front run other unwitting depositors. Silence on the part of this Government should no longer be an option.

Stay tuned. More to come on Deon Vanterpool and his reignited role with the bank, possibly new investors and who may have brought them to the table, whether the Premier and Junior Minister are still wielding power to ensure all goes in their favour, and are the appointed liquidators working in the best interests of the bank, its depositors, shareholders and the BVI.
 

Will the BVI’s investor confidence be left further shattered? More to come… 

Share

Post a Comment

Weather Data Source: tiempolargo.com