IVD, a prominent auto dealer, has publicly accused Nigerian artist Davido of owing him a significant debt of ₦5.5 million related to a car purchase made for Davido’s aide, Isreal DMW. This situation has escalated recently, with IVD asserting that Davido has only paid ₦1 million out of the total ₦6.5 million cost for a 2009 Toyota Venza, leaving an outstanding balance of ₦5.5 million.
The controversy initially surfaced when Blessing CEO, a social media influencer, claimed that Davido owed IVD ₦4.5 million for the vehicle gifted to Isreal DMW. However, shortly after her public assertion, IVD denied the claim, stating that Davido did not owe him any money at that time[1]. This denial was short-lived, as Blessing CEO later leaked an audio recording in which IVD admitted that Davido indeed owed him money. In the audio, IVD expressed frustration over Davido’s delayed responses to his messages regarding the debt, stating that he often received replies only after two months and that payments were never completed despite promises to send his account details[1].
As of January 9, 2025, IVD has reiterated his claims regarding the unpaid debt during a recent public statement. He clarified that Davido had made only a partial payment of ₦1 million, which is far below what was agreed upon for the vehicle purchase[3]. The total cost for the car was set at ₦6.5 million, indicating that Davido’s outstanding balance is now ₦5.5 million.
IVD’s accusations have drawn considerable attention on social media and among fans of both parties. Many are questioning the integrity of the transaction and the nature of Davido’s financial dealings. The public is particularly interested in how this situation will unfold, given Davido’s high profile in the entertainment industry and his previous philanthropic engagements.
This incident raises broader questions about celebrity accountability and financial transactions within Nigeria’s entertainment sector. It highlights potential issues surrounding informal agreements and payment practices between artists and service providers. The fallout from this situation could impact Davido’s public image, especially if it continues to gain traction online.
In conclusion, as IVD continues to assert his claims against Davido regarding the unpaid car debt, it remains to be seen how both parties will address this issue moving forward. Given the current climate of social media scrutiny, both individuals may need to clarify their positions to their respective audiences to mitigate any reputational damage.