Owned Only by One

JESUS:My LORD&my GOD|my wife, boys, &Kiara are my everything|Humanity is not cheap|

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@Stix_001 @Sophie_Mokoena People have a variety of customs relating to the death of loved ones. We need to be very careful that we recognize and acknowledge and that's it.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@RayDont5dq @Sophie_Mokoena Something about this post screams "I am an imbecile but don't bother helping bcoz I am beyond redemption" 😱😱😱

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@mikehits180 @WorkElizab 32÷2=16. Therefore 16x2=32. So at 24 when you multiply his age by 2 you get 48 and the half of that is 24.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@WorkElizab 48 is the correct answer. At him being half your age you'll always be twice his age, so 24x2 is 48.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@errolbsk I saw a few E20 kombis in the township Errol. We need to position those together with the Zola Budds that are still around. Bus ticket? Hayi asime kancane.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

The court concluded that Nedbank could not genuinely and seriously have believed that the client was personally served. He therefore was not served and the default judgment was set aside. Nedbank was also ordered to pay the costs of the application.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

The client denied that he was personally served or that he was with his wife at the time of service. His wife died in 2014 and the alleged service of the summons took place in February 2025. He attached the death certificate and in the instalment sale agreement he concluded with Nedbank, he is recorded as a widow.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

In respect of the sheriff’s return of service, the sheriff confirmed that the summons was served personally on the client. In his affidavit, the sheriff submitted that the client, together with his wife, took receipt of the summons. That both the client and his wife verbally confirmed to the sheriff that the client was indeed the person on the summons and as such, he accepted personal service of the summons.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

It was unearthed that no lawful debt review process was in place and Nedbank re-submitted debit orders to client’s bank.  Those debit orders were successful and Nedbank continued to debit client’s account, specifically in the last 4 months leading to the date of the default judgment.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

Following investigations, it had emerged that the account had fallen in arrears due to a fraudulent debt review listing. The client became a victim of fraud and this fraud resulted in a fraudulent reporting to Nedbank that the client was under debt review.  The debit order mandate was therefore stopped as a result of this alleged debt review process and there accumulated the arrears.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

He argued that he did not receive service of the process leading to Nedbank obtaining judgment against him and that he was paying on the account so there was no basis for Nedbank to obtain judgment. He submitted that he only became aware that default judgment had been granted against him when the sheriff attached the car.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

Default judgment was eventually granted in Nedbank’s favour. In terms of the default judgment, the instalment sale agreement was cancelled and client was ordered to return the car. Client then brings a rescission application on the grounds that the default judgment was erroneously granted in his absence.

[Tina @Tina_Hokwana]

Nedbank and a client concluded an instalment sale agreement for the purchase of a 2021 Nissan Navara and the monthly instalment payments are debited by Nedbank from the client’s nominated bank account. Nedbank subsequently issues summons after alleging that the client was in arrears. Sheriff serves the summons and the return of service states that the client was personally served.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@Collinslesufi @Tina_Hokwana You followed a very wrong account. 5yr olds aren't here.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@Tina_Hokwana @marshall_d95633 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@RNMathe @MyGoodman12 @Tina_Hokwana I am beginning to suspect that that Board, like many dispute resolution mechanisms, is more bark and not bite. How else can we explain such endemic misconduct by sheriffs who do this with lawyers for the plaintiffs?

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@Timmytom0897 @Tina_Hokwana The FSP's would not take such huge regulatory risks on their licenses with such matters IMO.
The ones daring enough to chance it are some of the legal firms representing them.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@tata_kaKhazi @Tina_Hokwana @kayEasy_ Who knows Sbuda? There's a separate issue with the sheriffs behaving this way across the board. The false returns of service with a sworn affidavit🙆🏽‍♂️😱
My ex was also a victim. Instead of rescission, she capitulated and entered into an ardangement with her BC. I left.

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@sandileskhosi @Tina_Hokwana

[Owned Only by One @Multhye1]

@saoirse_sikhu @Tina_Hokwana I couldn't but feel mortified at the sheriff! I am curious to know what happened to the sheriff and who fired the first shot at him?
This conduct has become rife believe me😫