ANC ordered to pay R102m

The ANC has in the past been embroiled in similar suits, but what I've noticed is that these seem to just vanish over time, either they pay... or they strong arm the supplier into submission, using state resources. Either way, Ramaphosa managed to rally R1-billion for his CR17 campaign, there are individuals and companies who continue to prop up the ANC. Someone will settle this bill and after the next election another company will cry wolf about non payment because they never learn ... they render their services because they know the ANC has the keys to the public purse ... I don't feel sorry for these companies because the ANC has demonstrated that they are bad for business.
 
zulucat said:
The ANC has in the past been embroiled in similar suits, but what I've noticed is that these seem to just vanish over time, either they pay... or they strong arm the supplier into submission, using state resources. Either way, Ramaphosa managed to rally R1-billion for his CR17 campaign, there are individuals and companies who continue to prop up the ANC. Someone will settle this bill and after the next election another company will cry wolf about non payment because they never learn ... they render their services because they know the ANC has the keys to the public purse ... I don't feel sorry for these companies because the ANC has demonstrated that they are bad for business.
Click to expand...
I think it's much easier for donors to give money to Cyril than to the ANC. Maybe things would only get better once Ace is out of Luthulu house. Ramaphosa would help but Ace, Yengeni and the other Zuptoids would soon find a way to use that against him and set Mkhwebane on him again.
 
DreamKing said:
"seize the assets", it is meaningless.

do you know that they still can appeal against the ruling, and they will use this tactic to delay the payment up until you close down or you die?

make sense?
Click to expand...

If the order is to seize the assets, its a done deal.

Sure they can appeal, after the fact, so by that time they are allowed to grab whatever assets they want to.
 
The_Traveller said:
I beg to differ.

I have seized asset of many companies due to non-payment.

back in 2010 I seized an entire dealership of cars for a R2800 non-payment.
Click to expand...

are you a sheriff?

I don't really understand what you mean by "seized". are you talking about "attaching" assets or you actually took the assets in the possession of the court. normally "seize assets" is referring to "attach", not physically took the assets away from the owner.

PS: and also your story it doesn't make any sense for me.
 
DreamKing said:
are you a sheriff?

I don't really understand what you mean by "seized". are you talking about "attaching" assets or you actually took the assets in the possession of the court. normally "seize assets" is referring to "attach", not physically took the assets away from the owner.

PS: and also your story it doesn't make any sense for me.
Click to expand...

You attach assets and seize ( take into possession).

Anyway , believe what you want.
 
The_Traveller said:
You attach assets and seize ( take into possession).

Anyway , believe what you want.
Click to expand...

"attach assets" it doesn't imply you take away the assets from the owner. I need to make it clear.

if your assets will be attached by the court, the court will only attach the same / just above amount of money you owe. for your story, I don't think the court would seize the entire dealership for just R2800, it doesn't make sense and that is illegal.
 
thechamp said:
I once seized a Zulu man's homestead in Nkandka for an unpaid R500 loan back in the day.
Click to expand...
HAHA - I am here to support you bru. I think you assessed pros & cons of the situation and initiated a remedial action for the benefit of aggrieved party concerned. That is the best way to put it.
 
DreamKing said:
"attach assets" it doesn't imply you take away the assets from the owner. I need to make it clear.

if your assets will be attached by the court, the court will only attach the same / just above amount of money you owe. for your story, I don't think the court would seize the entire dealership for just R2800, it doesn't make sense and that is illegal.
Click to expand...
Maybe he did this by seizing their routing infrastructure. Or this happened in the 40s. :)
 
Wake me up when someone has a peek at the actual proof of payment.

Until then, this is like Zondo and his commission.
 
The_Traveller said:
You attach assets and seize ( take into possession).

Anyway , believe what you want.
Click to expand...

No one is going to let you seize a dealership full of cars for R2800 owing and to state so is just absurd. You'd have a hard time getting small claims court to care about that small sum let alone a sheriff. Your stories are ridiculous just like your understanding of the concepts brought before you in opposition of people paying what a court orders.

Show us the legal paperwork with such an attachment or seizure.

tldr; pics or it didn't happen.
 
^^vampire^^ said:
No one is going to let you seize a dealership full of cars for R2800 owing and to state so is just absurd. You'd have a hard time getting small claims court to care about that small sum let alone a sheriff. Your stories are ridiculous just like your understanding of the concepts brought before you in opposition of people paying what a court orders.

Show us the legal paperwork with such an attachment or seizure.

tldr; pics or it didn't happen.
Click to expand...
Pfft, you are just jealous because you have never seized anything for debt.
 
grok said:
That's like saying a F1 driver is jealous of you being a spietkop..
Click to expand...
F1 driver can't do F1 and WRC on national roads without getting in trouble. Spietkop can under certain circumstances. Now, see if you can beat that!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X