A public dispute involving ECB Technologies and one of its former key employees has taken another turn after Rubison, who says he previously handled logistics, finances, sales, marketing and social media for the Nairobi based technology company, gave a detailed account of his fallout with founder Edwin Nganyi.

Rubison has shared what he describes as evidence supporting his version of events, including photographs of damaged laptops, WhatsApp conversations and M-Pesa transaction records showing payments allegedly made to suppliers.

His account comes as the dispute continues to attract attention online, with questions emerging over business losses, personal payments made on behalf of the company and the circumstances surrounding his eventual decision to leave and establish his own technology venture, PRISM COMPUTERS.

The claims made by Rubison are his account of the dispute and have not been independently verified by this editor or this site. ECB Technologies and Edwin Nganyi have been allowed to respond to each specific allegation.

Rubison says he spent more than KSh1.8 million dealing with losses ¶

According to Rubison's account, his involvement with ECB Technologies went beyond ordinary employment.

He says he was responsible for several aspects of the business, including logistics, finances, sales, marketing and social media management.

He claims that during his time at the company, he identified significant financial gaps and eventually decided to hand back responsibilities to Edwin Nganyi after holding several meetings with him.

One of the central issues in his account is money that he says was used to cover company related losses.

Rubison claims the first amount involved approximately KSh1.086 million, with the losses being shared between him and Nganyi.

He further says he personally covered an additional KSh789,000 in 2026.

The combined figures put the amounts he says were associated with the dispute at approximately KSh1.875 million.

That has become one of the most questioned aspects of his account, particularly because some people responding to his posts have asked why an individual who was not a shareholder would voluntarily use personal money to cover company losses.

Rubison has not presented the matter as a simple case of one person stealing from another.

Instead, his account describes a complicated business relationship in which he says he became deeply involved in the company's operations and finances.

He says Edwin supported him before the fallout ¶

Rubison has also been careful to acknowledge that his relationship with Nganyi was not always hostile.

In his posts, he thanked Nganyi for supporting him during difficult circumstances in December 2023, saying the founder's guidance helped him understand business and that the connections he received through him contributed positively to his growth.

He also disclosed that he had stayed at Nganyi's house for approximately 13 months before eventually moving into his own accommodation in March 2025.

That detail is important because it shows that the relationship between the two men was reportedly much closer than an ordinary employer and employee relationship.

Rubison describes Nganyi as someone who played an important role in his development, while at the same time explaining why the business relationship eventually deteriorated.

He has also apologised for aspects of the dispute and said he would prefer an amicable resolution.

The dispute has now moved into the public domain ¶

The disagreement has attracted significant attention after both sides and people associated with the dispute began posting about it publicly.

Some of Nganyi's posts on X have taken an aggressive tone, including messages directed at individuals Rubison appears to be associated with.

In posts dated August 11, Nganyi wrote messages warning people to prepare for what he described as a "war" and made various allegations against individuals connected to the dispute.

Those allegations have not been independently verified and should not be treated as established facts.

The public exchange has nevertheless transformed what appears to have started as a private business disagreement into a highly visible dispute involving former colleagues, associates and people commenting on the matter online.

That creates an additional problem for both sides.

Once a commercial disagreement moves onto social media, allegations can spread much faster than evidence can be verified.

Questions over the money remain central ¶

The biggest unresolved issue is the money.

Several people responding to Rubison's account have questioned why he would spend hundreds of thousands of shillings settling liabilities belonging to a company in which he says he was not a shareholder.

Others have questioned whether those payments were made voluntarily, whether they were authorised by the company and whether there was an agreement that the money would later be reimbursed.

These questions cannot be settled through social media comments.

The most useful evidence would be the company's financial records, supplier invoices, payment receipts, M-Pesa statements, bank records and communications showing who authorised the payments.

If Rubison did use his personal funds to settle legitimate company liabilities, documentation should establish the circumstances.

If the payments were unrelated to company obligations, that should also become clear from the records.

A similar issue has appeared in other employer disputes ¶

The ECB Technologies fallout resembles a recurring problem in small and growing Kenyan businesses where the boundary between company money and personal money becomes blurred.

Workers at other companies previously brought complaints to this platform alleging that they had used personal resources while performing their duties and later struggled to recover the money.

One complaint involved workers at Karl Jays, who said they completed consultancy work but had gone months without receiving payment. They said the company repeatedly attributed the delay to clients who had allegedly not paid.

Another involved workers at Casa Marketing Solutions, where employees complained of persistent salary delays and said they were struggling to meet basic financial obligations while waiting for wages.

A separate complaint involving a Ugandan supplier, Kamaala Enterprises, alleged that a business transaction involving maize supplied to Kenya resulted in the supplier claiming approximately KSh700,000 after allegedly delivering produce that was subsequently paid for by the buyer.

The circumstances of those cases are different from the ECB dispute.

But they illustrate the same underlying business risk: when financial arrangements are not properly documented, personal relationships can quickly turn into commercial disputes over who owes whom what.

The allegations surrounding tax must also be separated from the main dispute ¶

Some people commenting on Rubison's posts have raised separate allegations concerning alleged tax evasion.

Those claims appear in the online discussion, but the material provided does not establish that ECB Technologies or any individual associated with it committed tax offences.

They should therefore not be presented as fact.

If there are genuine concerns regarding taxation, the Kenya Revenue Authority has the mandate to examine the company's tax affairs through the appropriate legal process.

That would be preferable to allowing serious criminal or regulatory allegations to be determined through social media arguments.

The company's position also matters ¶

Rubison has specifically stated that ECB Technologies remains operational and has sought to make it clear that his departure should not be interpreted as the collapse of the company.

That distinction matters.

A dispute between a former employee and a business does not automatically establish that the business is insolvent, fraudulent or incapable of operating.

Similarly, Rubison's claims of personal financial losses do not by themselves establish that Nganyi or ECB Technologies acted unlawfully.

Those matters would require evidence.

Why the dispute matters to other entrepreneurs ¶

Beyond the personalities involved, the ECB fallout offers an important lesson for young entrepreneurs and employees working in small businesses.

Personal relationships can make a company appear easier to operate in its early stages.

People share houses.

Employees use personal phones and vehicles.

Managers pay suppliers from personal accounts.

Founders lend money to employees.

Employees sometimes cover company expenses expecting reimbursement.

Friends become business partners.

But once the relationship breaks down, every undocumented transaction can become a point of dispute.

For that reason, businesses should maintain clear financial controls, written authorisation for expenditure and proper separation between company and personal accounts.

Employees who spend personal money on behalf of a company should equally retain invoices, receipts, approval messages and evidence of reimbursement agreements.

The dispute should now move from social media to documentation ¶

The public exchange between Rubison and Nganyi is unlikely to establish who is right.

Financial records might.

If Rubison's claimed payments can be matched to supplier invoices and company records, the nature of those transactions can be established.

If the amounts were company losses, the records should show how they occurred.

If Rubison was reimbursed or agreed to absorb the costs, that should also be documented.

And if there are claims that money was misappropriated, tax was evaded or company assets were damaged, the relevant authorities can investigate those specific allegations.

The Directorate of Criminal Investigations can handle allegations of criminal conduct where a complaint and evidence are presented.

The Kenya Revenue Authority can examine any genuine tax concerns.

Commercial disputes involving contractual obligations can be pursued through the appropriate civil or commercial legal channels.

The Office of the Data Protection Commissioner may also become relevant if either party publishes private personal information belonging to other individuals during the dispute.

A business disagreement should not become a public punishment ¶

The ECB Technologies dispute is now bigger than a disagreement between a founder and a former employee.

It has attracted questions from the public over the money allegedly spent, the nature of their relationship, the company's financial controls and the increasingly hostile social media exchanges.

But allegations remain allegations.

Rubison has presented his side and says he has supporting material. Edwin Nganyi has also publicly responded and made his own allegations against people involved in the dispute.

The appropriate next step is for the parties to put their documentary evidence on the table and, where necessary, allow independent authorities or the courts to determine the issues that cannot be resolved privately.

For entrepreneurs, employees and investors watching the dispute, there is a straightforward lesson.

Business relationships built on trust still require contracts, receipts, financial records and clear separation between personal and company finances.

Without those safeguards, a relationship that once involved mentorship, accommodation, shared business responsibilities and mutual support can eventually become a multimillion shilling dispute playing out in public.