Article: Wendy Machanik deeply regrets actions

Former estate agent Wendy Machanik deeply regrets the actions that led to her conviction on 90 counts of theft, she wrote in a newspaper opinion piece on Sunday.

"I'd like to hereby state clearly and unambiguously that, yes, I am guilty of unlawfully accessing my company's trust fund to the value of R17 million -- but not in the manner or for the reasons portrayed," Machanik wrote in the Sunday Times.
 
The only thing she regrets is getting caught and that she can't continue her stinking rich lifestyle.

Steal 17 million and you don't go to prison - what a joke.

Machanik is nothing more than a disgusting thief.
 
Not as simple as that.
Money was paid back. Nothing was "actually" stolen.

Monthly costs had to be covered (salaries, telephone, water & lights etc.). When times got tough there was not enough available cash in the business account to cover the running costs. Money was borrowed from the trust account to cover running costs until deals in the pipeline were registered. The borrowed money was then paid back into the trust account so everything balanced out.

The "investigation" only took into account every time the trust fund was accessed. They went back over a few years and just added up the total. Each time money went out it was counted as an act of theft.

What is really sad here is at the time at least 5 other big name agencies were doing the exact same thing to stay operational. The EAAB (estate agency affairs board) knew full well that this was going on within the industry but it was decided to temporarily turn a blind eye to the activities as it would otherwise have devastated the real estate industry in the country. On a side note: they were actually using money from their trust account too, never really publicly got out but action was taken: http://www.fin24.com/Companies/Property/Estate-board-under-administration-20120731


So yes, technically illegal, and it made for a nice change from the usual stories of our corrupt government officials.
 
nightjar said:
Some contrast!
Just goes to show that a sympathetic or tame magistrate/judge can make all the difference.

That snivelling cow should have got at least 15 years.

No apologies from Zuma though; his response is a simple “Up yours!” to anyone who dares to ask.
Click to expand...

If you read the post above yours from Brandon then you will see your post makes no sense.
 
Brandon said:
Not as simple as that.
Money was paid back. Nothing was "actually" stolen.

Monthly costs had to be covered (salaries, telephone, water & lights etc.). When times got tough there was not enough available cash in the business account to cover the running costs. Money was borrowed from the trust account to cover running costs until deals in the pipeline were registered. The borrowed money was then paid back into the trust account so everything balanced out.

The "investigation" only took into account every time the trust fund was accessed. They went back over a few years and just added up the total. Each time money went out it was counted as an act of theft.

What is really sad here is at the time at least 5 other big name agencies were doing the exact same thing to stay operational. The EAAB (estate agency affairs board) knew full well that this was going on within the industry but it was decided to temporarily turn a blind eye to the activities as it would otherwise have devastated the real estate industry in the country. On a side note: they were actually using money from their trust account too, never really publicly got out but action was taken: http://www.fin24.com/Companies/Property/Estate-board-under-administration-20120731


So yes, technically illegal, and it made for a nice change from the usual stories of our corrupt government officials.
Click to expand...

Wow, just wow.
 
Brandon said:
Not as simple as that.
Money was paid back. Nothing was "actually" stolen.

Monthly costs had to be covered (salaries, telephone, water & lights etc.). When times got tough there was not enough available cash in the business account to cover the running costs. Money was borrowed from the trust account to cover running costs until deals in the pipeline were registered. The borrowed money was then paid back into the trust account so everything balanced out.

The "investigation" only took into account every time the trust fund was accessed. They went back over a few years and just added up the total. Each time money went out it was counted as an act of theft.

What is really sad here is at the time at least 5 other big name agencies were doing the exact same thing to stay operational. The EAAB (estate agency affairs board) knew full well that this was going on within the industry but it was decided to temporarily turn a blind eye to the activities as it would otherwise have devastated the real estate industry in the country. On a side note: they were actually using money from their trust account too, never really publicly got out but action was taken: http://www.fin24.com/Companies/Property/Estate-board-under-administration-20120731


So yes, technically illegal, and it made for a nice change from the usual stories of our corrupt government officials.
Click to expand...

It is not just a matter of "technically illegal". For people who operate trust accounts like lawyers or estate agents, it is a HUGE issue and a VERY SERIOUS CRIME to tamper with a trust account. It's a big no-no!!

If your argument is allowed, then anyone can steal anything, as long as they give it back after a while. Those are not the lines along which a society should function- it would cause chaos.
 
blunomore said:
It is not just a matter of "technically illegal". For people who operate trust accounts like lawyers or estate agents, it is a HUGE issue and a VERY SERIOUS CRIME to tamper with a trust account. It's a big no-no!!

If your argument is allowed, then anyone can steal anything, as long as they give it back after a while. Those are not the lines along which a society should function- it would cause chaos.
Click to expand...

what she did was illegal and she should be punished, but from the above article she isnt the absolute monster she was made out to be.
 
syntax said:
what she did was illegal and she should be punished, but from the above article she isnt the absolute monster she was made out to be.
Click to expand...

Agreed - Yes, what she did was wrong. However, at least she didn't run away with the cash and disappear. I mean, it seems her intentions were good and money was paid back into the account.
 
blunomore said:
Why do you say that? It is a very serious crime she committed.
Click to expand...

yes, i stated as much when i said it was illegal and she should be punished.
But initially it was made out that she took the money and was spending it on her self to support a rich extravagant lifestyle.

She was actually just trying to keep the business going, she didnt run away from anything, and she paid it back.

so yes, its illegal, but i dont think she is the monster they made her out to be
 
I don't see the difference between what she did with the trust accounts and stealing company funds to gamble with.

If you win and pay the money back, that doesn't make you any less a thief.

If Machanik had been unable to pay money back into the trust accounts what then ?
 
daveza said:
I don't see the difference between what she did with the trust accounts and stealing company funds to gamble with.

If you win and pay the money back, that doesn't make you any less a thief.

If Machanik had been unable to pay money back into the trust accounts what then ?
Click to expand...

My point is that she was trying to keep the company a float, not running around spending it on herself etc.
I really dont think its that hard to see the difference?

Yes, it was a dumb thing to do, which she admitted it was. And yes, she should be punished. But she isnt a complete villain.
 
Brandon said:
Not as simple as that.
Money was paid back. Nothing was "actually" stolen.

Monthly costs had to be covered (salaries, telephone, water & lights etc.). When times got tough there was not enough available cash in the business account to cover the running costs. Money was stolen from the trust account to cover running costs until deals in the pipeline were registered. The borrowed money was then paid back into the trust account so everything was covered up .


So yes, technically illegal, and it made for a nice change from the usual stories of our corrupt government officials.
Click to expand...

Fixed your reply, There is no such thing as technically illegal, she committed fraud and got away with it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X