Surtie Inheritance Scam

[king_chop]

Come on bra. Nobody is THIS stupid. Stop trolling

no my brother you cant mos jus cum say ppl is stupid here wots wrong wit you

 

[Speedster]

no my brother you cant mos jus cum say ppl is stupid here wots wrong wit you

He just did. And he's probably accurate in his analysis

 

[PsyWulf]

I hear you. I'm not arguing with anybody as I said before. Its just that the poeple in the "common enterprise" you speak of prefer to be known as beneficiaries

Nope
The "common enterprise" is the matter the collective participated in a la "Surtie Court Case Crowdfunding". As such they are Investors,they can call themselves sheep or bananas it has no bearing

 

[MrTruthSurtie]

Nope
The "common enterprise" is the matter the collective participated in a la "Surtie Court Case Crowdfunding". As such they are Investors,they can call themselves sheep or bananas it has no bearing

Goed meneer. Jy wen. Jy is korrek. Ek twyfel of dit enige invloed het in die agtervolging van die bewys dat die invordering van geld 'n bedrogspul is, maar as dit SO belangrik vir jou is, dan erken ek dat die korrekte term "investors" is, en nie "beneficiaries" nie.

The point is that COLLECTIVELY we call ourselfs beneficiaries. How would you like it if I refered to you as PsychoticKitten?

Nietemin, ek is nie op soek na enige argumente nie, so lets agree to disagree, want sowaar die vet verstaan ek nie hoekom party van julle aandring om oor sulke petty goed te debat nie

 

[PsyWulf]

Goed meneer. Jy wen. Jy is korrek. Ek twyfel of dit enige invloed het in die agtervolging

Words matter,especially in a legal context,and you should care since SARS is going to care and tax accordingly

van die bewys dat die invordering van geld 'n bedrogspul is,

Mostly fraud,your words have no effect on that either

maar as dit SO belangrik vir jou is, dan erken ek dat die korrekte term "investors" is, en nie "beneficiaries" nie.

Cool,was that so hard?

The point is that COLLECTIVELY we call ourselfs beneficiaries.

Nobody cares

How would you like it if I refered to you as PsychoticKitten?

Go for it,i've been called worse and better. Like I give a rat's fat arse?

Nietemin, ek is nie op soek na enige argumente nie, so lets agree to disagree, want sowaar die vet verstaan ek nie hoekom party van julle aandring om oor sulke petty goed te debat nie

See first paragraph

 

[Speedster]

Kyk meneer, ek sien jy het nou al hierdie vraag al baie gevra oor die jare, en laat ek dit vir jou so stel:

Die bedraggie wat ek geskenk het is so ongeveer wat ek in my spaarrekening oor 'n tydperk van sowat drie of vier maande in druk nadat ek genoeg op my familie spandeer het. So dit gaan my nie juis breek nie. Ek is nie desperaat vir 'n uitbetaling nie.

Soos ek voorheen genoem het, is ek nie seker of ons wel 'gescam' is nie. Ek hoop nie dis waar nie, maar as dit so is, then so be it.

Ek kan beslis bevestig dat as daar wel uitbetaling plaasvind, gaan ek beslis nie die geld weier nie.

Ek het maar op hierdie perron verskyn om die feite van die saak te bevestig vir die partye wie geld binnekort verwag. Hulle wag tevergeefs, want hierdie saak gaan nog baie lank neem om opgelos te word.

Jammer vir die Afrikaans, but my English did get up

Ek's baie bly jy's so vol liefdadigheid en gretig om jou fondse te deel. Jy kan maar gerus die leë hoop dat jy enigeiets hieruit gaan kry laat vaar en begin vrede maak dat jy wel ge"scam" is. Jy noem tereg dat die wat wag vir 'n uitbetaling tevergeefs wag. Dit sluit jou ongelukkig in.

 

[Speedster]

Just an observation…

People come on this forum making claims and their claims are dismissed because they don’t have sufficient proof that meets the expectations of the panel of experts on everything under the sun.

Today, I’ve seen someone come on here, not making any irrational claims, and substantialising the information he’s providing with an actual document that displays what he’s talking about.

And yet, now one of these experts-on-everything is getting stuck into him because of what he chooses to refer to HIMSELF as? That is just effing retarded. The man can call himself King of Kavukiland for all anybody cares, and it still wouldn’t detract from the fact that he didn’t misrepresent anything.

And for the record, for those who want to argue semantics, the definition of a beneficiary is someone who derives advantage from something. And this is regardless of whether they contributed to the outcome of whatever it is that resulted in this benefit. So by calling themselves ‘beneficiaries’ they are not wrong.

The only proof anyone has posted is that Bantu Holomisa is having an info session with pensioners associations in which, inter alia, he'll give his views on the Surtie claim. I'm not quite sure that really means anything in the greater scheme of things though.

 

[Wary GOM]

Since I'm new here, let me tell everybody where I stand

Did I give money to this? YES
Do I believe the court case on it's own can be won? YES
Do I think this will be settled out of court? I HOPE SO BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT WILL BE
Do I think there are people who have been scammed? YES DEFINITELY
Do I think everybody who gave money have been scammed? I'M NOT SURE. I HOPE NOT BECAUSE I AM ONE OF THOSE WHO HAVE GIVEN MONEY, BUT WE WON'T KNOW FOR SURE UNTIL THERE'S MONEY TO BE PAID OUT

Congrats on putting this out there. Now we can place any of your posts in context of your actual situation.

 

[PsyWulf]

The only proof anyone has posted is that Bantu Holomisa is having an info session with pensioners associations in which, inter alia, he'll give his views on the Surtie claim. I'm not quite sure that really means anything in the greater scheme of things though.

Yeah,we know the Case exists,so this is proving - it exists

 

[Wary GOM]

Just an observation…

People come on this forum making claims and their claims are dismissed because they don’t have sufficient proof that meets the expectations of the panel of experts on everything under the sun.

Today, I’ve seen someone come on here, not making any irrational claims, and substantialising the information he’s providing with an actual document that displays what he’s talking about.

And yet, now one of these experts-on-everything is getting stuck into him because of what he chooses to refer to HIMSELF as? That is just effing retarded. The man can call himself King of Kavukiland for all anybody cares, and it still wouldn’t detract from the fact that he didn’t misrepresent anything.

And for the record, for those who want to argue semantics, the definition of a beneficiary is someone who derives advantage from something. And this is regardless of whether they contributed to the outcome of whatever it is that resulted in this benefit. So by calling themselves ‘beneficiaries’ they are not wrong.

AGREED - let's not get distracted by semantcs, BUT also, perhaps in a case like this, clarity is desirable. Sine the issue is based upon the outcome of a case of what became of the property of a deceased estate, "beneficiary" does have a strictly legal connotation and meaning. Scammers have repeatedly used the fact that estates have to be treated differently from common enterprises AND THAT DONOR BECOME BENEFICIARIES IN THE ESTATE.

 

[Wary GOM]

Yeah,we know the Case exists,so this is proving - it exists

Just so. And like many other "headlines" and "affidavits" very useful to fool yet more people and collect more money.

 

[PsyWulf]

Removed vacuous nonsense for brevity since even repeating what you said actually lowers the planet's collective IQ by 1point

Arguing definitions of "similar words with different meanings" vs legally *the* word just makes you prove yourself more of a vapid imbecile

Words matter. It's not about "if a word can be used". What is the best word,the description feelie goodies want to use,or the legal one?

Did you disprove the howie test definition? No? Then ****off Karen

 

[PsyWulf]

Also,if you're so hardup on not being an "investor" at best you're a "donator"

Beneficiary implies a definite recipient - no court case is ever definite

 

[dabean]

You donate without expecting a return.

People waiting for profit are investors.

 

[dabean]

Pension funds talking about the case mean that if the claim is successful other people will lose.

Who cares if you can get your S63AMG though, right?

 

[Wary GOM]

You donate without expecting a return.

People waiting for profit are investors.

Or mugs?

[Sorry, couldn't resist that trollism.]

 

[PsyWulf]

Pension funds talking about the case mean that if the claim is successful other people will lose.

Who cares if you can get your S63AMG though, right?

No no no no
wE aReN't InVeStoRs
Or something

 

[Wary GOM]

You sir, are the most m0r0nic individual on this thread. Trying to argue both sides of the discussion. Rambling on about mindless cr@p and repeating yourself incessantly even after the same things you’re ignorantly trying to present in a manner that is so misguided it’s hilarious have been explained to you on numerous occasions.

Anyway, I’m outta this b!tch until next Friday when I have nothing better to do until the whiskey tells me it’s time to focus on stuff that actually matter. But I’ll be back to come remind all of you how full of **** you all are.

Cheers!

Quite a little rant there, dude.
Not sure why it was only the suggestion that there are mugs here fired you up when apparently other posts I made have been getting up your nose in your very short time on the thread.

Sorry to see from the increase in crankiness and lack of focus that you have had such a bad week. Use the weekend to chill, dude, just chill. Have a braai, watch a movie and chill. Possibly add less water to the Friday whiskey so the alcohol isn't so diluted - that might make you feel more mellow even if not more rational.

 

[MrTruthSurtie]

Need gids, Meneer-Sonder-Naam. Hou maar liewer jou drank vir jouself.

I will not be here on a permanent basis but will come back when I have some relevant to share. Until then please don't kill each other with your words...lmk!

 

[king_chop]

ai this ppl lied too us again im so sick off it