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.
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.