Derry
Burge is a debt management consultant. Dozens of consultants like Derry are
being undermined by banksters who break their code of conduct as outlined by
the National Credit Act and other codes that govern their activity.
This
is a letter to Joop Dekker of Standard Bank, on behalf of Derry's client. Joop
is the head of complaints in the office of the CEO, Jacko Maree. In the past,
Joop Dekker made a statement to me, that he is the authorised representative of
the CEO to deal with all complaints, and therefore "his words and
sentiments are those of the CEO", or something close to that. I trust that
this will still come back to bite him. Banks are foreclosing on people and
selling their homes for shortfalls of a few hundred Rand in some cases. This is
immoral, inhumane and unlawful, since they do not have any claim to your home,
after the process of securitisation.
The UBUNTU Party together with the support of groups like New ERA will continue to expose the banksters until our judges wake up and do what they are supposed to do - serve the people and deliver justice to the people.
Joop
Dekker is currently spreading misinformation and blatantly lying to many people
who have demanded answers to simple questions they are entitled to. This kind
of response from the bank may be applicable to millions of people in SA. Please
familiarise yourself with this. It all helps us to understand the beast. This
email is posted with permission of Derry Burge.
VIVA
UBUNTU
Michael
Tellinger
Gooday
Joop
I
am proudly a member of the NEW ERA as well as their union. I am absolutely
ecstatic as a member to be able to finally ask these questions, on areas that I
have so much more clarity on now, that NEED to be answered and a consumer has a
right to ask. Why you have such a defensive approach to responding to them is
unclear to me.
If
the banks were as transparent as they make out to be, it should be a simple
case of replying to them in a very short space of time without alleging that I
am being mislead. On the contrary it is the banks that are misleading the
consumers and the time has come to expose this. The biggest problem facing DC’s
is the lack of knowledge that the staff appear to have when addressed with
these questions. Is there a reason that the staff do not know what
securitisation is?
I
proudly stand up and join this fight for the Constitutional Rights afforded in
this country to all citizens and the protection provided by the NCA and the
Consumer Protection Act.
To
state that the questions are inappropriate leads me to believe that the bank
does not want to answer them, why?
This
consumer has never skipped a payment as per attachment and the R750 Consent
Order fee is to be found on the NCR website – if you wish for an invoice I will
provide it.
It
appears petty and prejudicial to want to take somebody’s home away from them as
you allege that just over R1000 was short paid under debt review.
When
a bank gets to the stage of taking away a person’s house for reasons given
above, it is a very sad day for me and those who support debt review – like
COSATU, The DCI and the UBUNTU Party as well as the NCR who strive to ensure
that the previously disadvantaged are protected – but you prefer to issue
summons on someone under debt review who clearly will be unable to afford a
attorney to defend her. Then after repossessing her house, guaranteed there
will be a shortfall further discriminating against her by passing a judgement –
ensuring that she will never be able to own a house again – where is the logic
in this? Has the bank so much money to spend on attorneys over issues like this
which could be solved by one phone call – the termination letter was not even
sent to me and the e-mail address is totally unknown to me – so I cannot
acknowledge termination as I will only accept an 86(10) by registered mail –
held up by the Magistrates Court Rules.
Standard
Bank is notorious for securitisation of bonds to Blue granite (1,2,3 etc) and
it is in the spirit of transparency and fairness to the consumer that I am
ENTITLED to ask this question due to the prevalence of this practice.
I
am more concerned about the banks lack of interest or even knowledge when asked
questions that are pertinent.
Then
the banks want us DC’s to use the NDMA –in good faith? This is surely not
applicable here and the very reason I feel that the NDMA should be dis-bandoned
– if I had worked through the NDMA complaints system, what response would I
then have got on this petty amount outstanding?
There
is NO leverage when trying to get assistance to help consumers when dealing
with your attorneys. They are all wearing blinkers and have no lateral
thinking. Surely if a proposal was made they should come back to you for a
response before issuing a summons to see if we can meet on even ground?
Or is it a matter of the attorneys milking the banks, no matter the outcome to
the consumer?
Again
as per attached documents – are you still going to proceed with High Court
action or allow for negotiations to assist this woman in keeping her property.
I
eagerly await your response.
Regards
Derry Burge
NCRDC108
