A payment dispute linked to the 2025 Piny Luo Festival is now threatening to escalate into a wider legal and public accountability battle after a Nairobi-based branding firm accused Migori County of failing to settle KSh3,814,380.76 for services rendered during the event.
At the centre of the dispute is BrandPulse Experience, trading as Lokhart SIPE Ltd, which says it carried out branding services for the high-profile cultural festival but has been left chasing payment for months despite repeated follow-ups, formal correspondence and direct engagement with parties linked to the event.
The dispute places Migori County Chief Officer for Finance Dr John Achuora and Elgon Group CEO Mercy Wamoto under fresh scrutiny as questions mount over who was responsible for settling the branding bill and why the contractor says the agreed settlement amount remains unpaid long after the event was completed.
For what began as a supplier payment issue, the matter now carries wider implications for county procurement accountability, event contracting and the treatment of private suppliers engaged in public-facing county projects.
THE KSH3.8 MILLION CLAIM
The core of the dispute is now clearly set out in a final demand notice dated April 1, 2026. In that letter, BrandPulse states that it is demanding settlement of an outstanding amount arising from branding and experiential services rendered during the Piny Luo Festival 2025.
The company says that after prior engagements, it agreed in good faith to a discounted settlement amount of KSh3,814,380.76 from the original invoice sum of KSh4,717,447.08. According to the letter, that reduced figure still remained unpaid and had become “unacceptably overdue” since December 2025.
The final demand notice was addressed directly to Dr John Achuora, the Chief Officer for Finance, County Government of Migori, and warned that unless the amount was settled within seven days, the company would move to pursue legal and administrative remedies to recover the debt, together with associated costs and interest. The letter copied the Governor of Migori County, the County Secretary, the CECM for Finance, and Elgon Group Ltd.
That document is important because it changes the focus of the dispute. The current live claim is not the original KSh4.7 million invoice but the KSh3,814,380.76 discounted settlement amount that the contractor says Migori County still failed to pay even after a concession had already been made.
A COUNTY PAYMENT DISPUTE THAT REFUSES TO GO AWAY
The branding firm’s position is that it delivered services linked to the Piny Luo Festival but has spent months chasing money that should have been settled long ago. Earlier correspondence had already shown that the company was pressing for payment over branding work carried out at festival-linked venues and installations in Migori County. The April 1 final demand notice now gives the clearest indication yet of how far the dispute has deteriorated.
A contractor who had already reduced its claim by almost KSh1 million was still left writing a final demand to the county finance office, threatening legal recovery action and copying top county officials together with Elgon Group. That is not a routine payment delay. It is a sign of a dispute that had moved from internal follow-up to formal debt recovery pressure.
The existence of a discounted settlement amount also weakens any suggestion that the contractor was being unreasonable or inflexible. On the contrary, the letter suggests the company had already made a concession in the hope of resolving the matter amicably. Yet even after that reduction, the money still did not come.
That is the detail that now puts Migori County in an even more difficult position. If a supplier reduced its demand from KSh4,717,447.08 to KSh3,814,380.76 and still went unpaid, then the county must explain why the matter was allowed to drift into a final demand notice instead of being resolved administratively.
ACHUORA NOW CARRIES THE HEAVIEST QUESTIONS
The person who cannot escape the spotlight in this dispute is Dr John Achuora. The final demand notice was not addressed to a junior procurement officer or an event coordinator. It was addressed directly to the Chief Officer for Finance, the official expected to know the status of county payments and the movement of any funds linked to county obligations.
That matters because the county finance office is where the payment trail should either become clear or collapse entirely. If Migori County approved the branding bill, Achuora’s office should be able to say what amount was approved, whether payment was processed and to whom the money was released. If no payment was made, then the county should explain why a supplier was left waiting from December 2025 into April 2026 despite formal follow-ups and an agreed discounted settlement.
At the moment, the dispute appears to be caught in a fog of competing explanations. Information circulating around the matter suggests there are conflicting positions between county officials and parties linked to the event over whether money meant for the contractor was released and who was supposed to settle the claim. That is precisely why the finance office now carries the greatest burden of explanation.
A chief finance officer cannot sit at the centre of a multimillion-shilling county payment dispute and offer the public nothing but silence. If money was paid, he should show the payment trail. If money was not paid, he should explain what blocked the process. If another party was expected to handle settlement, he should explain the legal and administrative basis of that arrangement. What cannot continue is a situation where the supplier says it is unpaid, a final demand has already been issued, and the county still appears unable or unwilling to provide a clean answer.
THE ELGON GROUP QUESTION
The dispute also places Elgon Group and its CEO Mercy Wamoto under scrutiny, though the legal and financial weight of the claim still falls most heavily on Migori County because the final demand was directed to the county finance office.
Elgon Group appears in the paper trail because it was copied in the final demand notice, and because its name has repeatedly surfaced in conversations around the festival’s payment structure. That raises a legitimate question: what role, if any, did Elgon Group play in the management, coordination or payment chain of the Piny Luo Festival branding work?
If Elgon Group was merely copied for information, it should say so clearly. If it had a deeper role in handling suppliers, managing event implementation or facilitating payments, that too should be made public. The lack of clarity around the payment chain is one of the reasons this dispute has become so messy.
Even so, the final demand notice makes one point unmistakable: the company demanding payment has formally placed responsibility before Migori County’s finance office. That means the county cannot hide behind Elgon Group, and Elgon Group cannot be used as a shield for unanswered questions within county government.
THE LEGAL RISK NOW FACING MIGORI COUNTY
The April 1 letter is not a casual complaint. It is a final demand notice, and that has legal significance. It signals that the contractor considers the matter ripe for recovery action and has given the county formal notice before moving to the next stage.
According to the letter, the company attached:
- Invoice No. 001251219, and
- the letter of engagement for BrandPulse Experience in respect of the Piny Luo Festival 2025.
Those two documents matter because they are the kind of records that would sit at the centre of any recovery claim. If the contractor has a valid engagement letter, an invoice, proof of services rendered and a paper trail showing repeated demand for payment, Migori County could face a difficult time defending a prolonged non-payment position unless it has a clear legal basis for withholding the money.
The county also faces the risk of turning what should have been a simple supplier settlement into a larger public scandal. Once a final demand is copied to the governor, the county secretary, the CECM for finance and a private company linked to the event, the dispute stops being a back-office billing issue. It becomes a question of governance and accountability.
WHY THIS STORY MATTERS BEYOND ONE BILL
This is not just a dispute between one county and one supplier. It speaks to a wider problem in public procurement and county event spending across Kenya.
Private firms are often brought in to brand public events, supply logistics, run communications and deliver visibility for county projects. They are expected to move quickly, absorb upfront costs and deliver polished work because public officials want the event to succeed and the county to look organised. The problem comes after the applause, when suppliers begin chasing payment and discover that nobody wants to take responsibility for the bill.
That is how businesses are cornered. The county gets its event. The officials get their photographs and public praise. The public sees banners, stages, media coverage and cultural celebration. But the supplier who financed the work is left making calls, sending letters and issuing final demands months later.
That is why this case matters. If a contractor had to reduce a KSh4.7 million invoice to KSh3.8 million and still could not get paid, then the issue is no longer just delay. It becomes a warning about how county-linked projects can quietly push suppliers into financial distress long after the public event is over.
THE QUESTIONS MIGORI COUNTY MUST ANSWER
Migori County now owes the public a direct explanation.
Was BrandPulse engaged to provide branding and experiential services for the Piny Luo Festival 2025? If so, was the work delivered and acknowledged? Did the county approve the original invoice of KSh4,717,447.08? If yes, why was the contractor later forced to accept a discounted settlement of KSh3,814,380.76? And if that discounted amount was agreed, why was it still not paid?
Those are not minor questions. They go directly to the heart of public accountability. They also go to the conduct of the county finance office. A chief finance officer should be able to answer them with records, not rumours.
Migori County should also clarify the role of Elgon Group in the payment chain, if any. If the county’s position is that another party was involved in settlement, then that arrangement should be disclosed. If no such arrangement existed, then the county should say so plainly and take full responsibility for the payment status.
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
Unless the matter has since been resolved, the April 1 final demand suggests the dispute was already on the edge of legal action. That means Migori County may now be facing not only reputational damage but also the prospect of court proceedings over an unpaid county-linked debt.
For the contractor, the issue is simple. It says it did the work, reduced its claim and still remained unpaid.
For Migori County, the issue is harder. It now has to explain why a supplier was pushed to issue a final demand notice over a county festival bill that should have been settled months earlier.
For Dr John Achuora, the issue is even sharper. His office is now the address on the final demand. He is the finance official expected to know whether the county paid, failed to pay or simply allowed the matter to drift until it became a legal threat.
That is why this dispute is no longer a quiet invoice disagreement. It has become a test of whether Migori County can account for money tied to a public event, whether its finance office can explain an unpaid KSh3.8 million settlement claim, and whether private suppliers who work on county projects can expect to be treated as partners rather than as creditors to be ignored after the event is over.
