Kenya Commercial Bank (KCB) is facing fresh scrutiny over a disputed KSh147 billion transaction linked to Foxcapital Investment Ltd after UBS Switzerland AG issued a communication confirming identifiers for a euro payment allegedly sent to the investment company.
In a letter dated August 27, 2026, UBS referred to a payment transaction initiated in favour of Foxcapital Investment Ltd and provided transaction details that it said had already been confirmed.
The letter identifies the transaction as EUR 978,675,835, with a value date of November 28, 2025, and gives the Transaction Reference Number (TRN) CH12010406632432.
Statement by UBS confirming Ksh147 billion transfer. Photo/@georgediano/X
UBS said the transaction could be traced through the relevant banking and SWIFT infrastructure using the reference.
“For the avoidance of doubt, the above identifiers constitute the references by which the payment was traced and independently verified through the applicable payment and SWIFT infrastructure,” UBS said.
The Swiss bank further stated that receiving or correspondent institutions had been able to reconcile the payment against their SWIFT records, Nostro/Vostro records, transaction processing records, and relevant ledger entries.
It, however, added that the communication should not replace the original authenticated SWIFT records and underlying payment records maintained in the banking and payment systems.
The development is significant because KCB has disputed receiving the funds, which are at the centre of a legal battle with Foxcapital.
KCB has previously maintained that it found no corresponding transaction in its systems and has challenged documents presented by Foxcapital in court. The bank has also sought an investigation into the authenticity of some of the documents relied on in the dispute.
A view of a building displaying the KCB logo prominently above the entrance. Photo: Tuko Source: Facebook.
Foxcapital, on the other hand, has maintained that the funds were transmitted to its KCB account but were not credited to it. The company has claimed the money was placed in a “held – pre-settlement suspense” status. A court has issued orders preserving the disputed funds as the case proceeds.
The amount involved is equivalent to roughly KSh147 billion, depending on the exchange rate used.
George Diano raises questions over transaction
The latest development was highlighted by X blogger George Diano, who said the UBS communication raises fresh questions about KCB’s position on the disputed transaction.
Diano claimed that while KCB had denied receiving the funds linked to Foxcapital, the UBS communication and accompanying documentation appeared to support the existence of the transaction.
He also alleged that internal KCB emails could indicate an attempt to conceal or obscure the transaction.
“More troubling are alleged internal emails from KCB that appear to suggest an attempt to conceal or obscure the transaction,” Diano said.
He questioned how a transaction of such magnitude could disappear from banking records and asked who knew about it and when.
Those claims have not been independently established in the material available. The UBS letter itself does not accuse KCB of concealing funds, nor does it establish that KCB received or retained the money.
Instead, UBS says the transaction identifiers were confirmed and that the payment was independently verified through the applicable payment and SWIFT infrastructure.
The conflicting positions now leave the central issue before the court and investigators: whether the EUR978.68 million payment was received by KCB, what happened to it after transmission, and whether the documents being relied upon by either side are authentic.
KCB’s own position remains that its systems and transaction records do not show receipt of the disputed funds, while Foxcapital maintains that the money reached the bank.
The emerging dispute therefore turns not only on the existence of a transaction reference, but also on the actual movement, receipt, processing and accounting of the funds within the relevant banking systems.
The matter remains subject to legal determination.
