Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Unclaimed Business
|1.5|16 Reviews (last 12 months)|This business does not respond to reviews
Department of Justice and Constitutional Development
Unclaimed Business
|1.5
16 Reviews (last 12 months)
Does not respond to reviews
AI Review Summary
Based on recent customer reviews, the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development is drawing predominantly negative sentiment from members of the public engaging with its services. Customers consistently mention prolonged delays in deceased estate administration, guardian fund applications, and maintenance court matters, alongside unanswered calls and emails to the Master's Office and complaints channels. A recurring theme is frustration with bureaucracy, missing files, and perceived unfair handling of cases. Positive feedback is rare but does highlight individual officials at certain courts who deliver respectful, professional, and efficient assistance when engaged directly.
Performance(last 12 months):
Trustindex Rating
2.3TrustIndex
2.3
Review Distribution
1.5|16 Reviews
Jul '25 - Jun '26
Recent reviews (16)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceA
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
16 May 2026, 11:33
Small claims at court become costly affairs.
Just to enlighten people using the small claims court to get your monies refunded or repaid. As per my experience it was a wasted and costly exercise. You have to go to the court in their jurisdiction to get a letter of demand then get the police escort in their area to deliver the letter. The same applies to getting a summons if you are not paid. It becomes a costly exercise and then if he owns nothing of value what will the sheriff of the court attach because even that is a cost factor. So rather in future never part with your until a service is delivered.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
16 May 2026, 11:33
Small claims at court become costly affairs.
Just to enlighten people using the small claims court to get your monies refunded or repaid. As per my experience it was a wasted and costly exercise. You have to go to the court in their jurisdiction to get a letter of demand then get the police escort in their area to deliver the letter. The same applies to getting a summons if you are not paid. It becomes a costly exercise and then if he owns nothing of value what will the sheriff of the court attach because even that is a cost factor. So rather in future never part with your until a service is delivered.
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
10 May 2026, 19:56
Request feedback regarding the ongoing child maintenance Child Maintenance Ref: INC000027415890, Precidency Case Ref: INC000027415890 Child Maintenance Court Case Number: 001505/2023/102, proceedings
Dear Department of Justice, I am writing to respectfully request feedback regarding the ongoing child maintenance Child Maintenance Ref: INC000027415890, Precidency Case Ref: INC000027415890 Child Maintenance Court Case Number: 001505/2023/102, proceedings. As noted in the court record, the next hearing date is contingent upon the request made on 29 March 2026 for an investigation report concerning the defendant’s church remuneration. Given the importance of this report to the fair resolution of the matter, I kindly ask for confirmation of the status of this request and any updates on the expected timeline for its completion. Ensuring transparency and timely communication in this process is vital for the welfare of the child involved, and I trust the Department will provide guidance on the next steps. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your feedback. Sincerely,
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
10 May 2026, 19:56
Request feedback regarding the ongoing child maintenance Child Maintenance Ref: INC000027415890, Precidency Case Ref: INC000027415890 Child Maintenance Court Case Number: 001505/2023/102, proceedings
Dear Department of Justice, I am writing to respectfully request feedback regarding the ongoing child maintenance Child Maintenance Ref: INC000027415890, Precidency Case Ref: INC000027415890 Child Maintenance Court Case Number: 001505/2023/102, proceedings. As noted in the court record, the next hearing date is contingent upon the request made on 29 March 2026 for an investigation report concerning the defendant’s church remuneration. Given the importance of this report to the fair resolution of the matter, I kindly ask for confirmation of the status of this request and any updates on the expected timeline for its completion. Ensuring transparency and timely communication in this process is vital for the welfare of the child involved, and I trust the Department will provide guidance on the next steps. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your feedback. Sincerely,
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
8 May 2026, 16:26
Lack of Assistance Regarding Deceased Estate Matter
I am writing to formally express my dissatisfaction and concern regarding the lack of assistance and communication from the Master of the High Court in Pretoria concerning our deceased estate matter. We have personally attended at your offices seeking assistance and guidance regarding the administration of the estate. Unfortunately, despite our efforts, we did not receive any meaningful assistance during our visit. In addition, we have sent numerous emails to the complaints department as well as to the secretary of the Regional Manager, yet to date we have received no response or feedback. This lack of communication has placed our family under severe stress and uncer*****y. This matter is now extremely urgent, as we are at risk of losing the estate property due to the continued delays and absence of intervention from your office. We therefore urgently request that this matter be attended to without further delay and that we receive feedback and assistance by Wednesday. We trust that this matter will now receive the urgent attention it requires.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
8 May 2026, 16:26
Lack of Assistance Regarding Deceased Estate Matter
I am writing to formally express my dissatisfaction and concern regarding the lack of assistance and communication from the Master of the High Court in Pretoria concerning our deceased estate matter. We have personally attended at your offices seeking assistance and guidance regarding the administration of the estate. Unfortunately, despite our efforts, we did not receive any meaningful assistance during our visit. In addition, we have sent numerous emails to the complaints department as well as to the secretary of the Regional Manager, yet to date we have received no response or feedback. This lack of communication has placed our family under severe stress and uncer*****y. This matter is now extremely urgent, as we are at risk of losing the estate property due to the continued delays and absence of intervention from your office. We therefore urgently request that this matter be attended to without further delay and that we receive feedback and assistance by Wednesday. We trust that this matter will now receive the urgent attention it requires.
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
9 Apr 2026, 03:06
non payment of guardian fund
I have a huge problem with the department of Justice regarding my 18 year old daughter's (Elihle Hope Ngcongo ID number: 0709090376084)guardian fund which she app**** for in December 2025 till today there hasn't been any progress with the application. When I call I am told that they Will only communicate with the beneficiary which is my daughter but when she calls her calls are not being answered. She even went as far as going to Pietermaritzburg missing a day of lectures to fix the issue with no positive outcome. She is currently registered at UKZN her funds are not paid for because we had hope that by now the money would have been paid out. This is so frustrating and such an inconvenience as we had ensured that all relevant documents are submitted to avoid any delays. OUR CALLS ARE NOT BEING ANSWERED AND THERE IS NO FEEDBACK REGARDING THE APPLICATION!!!!!!!!!
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
9 Apr 2026, 03:06
non payment of guardian fund
I have a huge problem with the department of Justice regarding my 18 year old daughter's (Elihle Hope Ngcongo ID number: 0709090376084)guardian fund which she app**** for in December 2025 till today there hasn't been any progress with the application. When I call I am told that they Will only communicate with the beneficiary which is my daughter but when she calls her calls are not being answered. She even went as far as going to Pietermaritzburg missing a day of lectures to fix the issue with no positive outcome. She is currently registered at UKZN her funds are not paid for because we had hope that by now the money would have been paid out. This is so frustrating and such an inconvenience as we had ensured that all relevant documents are submitted to avoid any delays. OUR CALLS ARE NOT BEING ANSWERED AND THERE IS NO FEEDBACK REGARDING THE APPLICATION!!!!!!!!!
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
25 Mar 2026, 17:45
FORMAL RECORD OF PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY – CASE 0108570
PUBLIC WARNING: THE COLLAPSE OF JUSTICE IN SA (CASE 0108570) Title: 12-Year ***** Protected by NFO & PPRA "Regulatory Chain" of *******ion I am a victim of a 12-year financial dispute involving ABSA Bank, Vartrust Real Estate, and a total failure of the South African justice system. This is a documented case of forgery, *****, and administrative irregularity that spans from the bank’s branches to the highest regulators. THE ***** (July 2013): ABSA and their agents misappropriated a R146,178.79 property deposit based on an unsigned, void Offer to Purchase (Page 13). Under the Alienation of Land Act, this contract is a legal fiction. They kept the money, "flipped" the property for R1.65M, and left me with a loss that now totals R3.24 million (Restitution + Interest + Opportunity Loss). THE REGULATORY COVER-UP (24–25 March 2026): The National Financial Ombud (NFO) accepted my case in January 2026. On 18 March, the tracker showed the status as "Open" and "Waiting for Participant." • 24 March 2026: ABSA Bank officially defaulted on their final defense deadline. • 25 March 2026: Exactly 24 hours after the bank’s default, NFO Team Leader Lisbeth Mokhachane and Case Manager Mpho Sejabeng summarily CLOSED the case, claiming "no jurisdiction." THE VERDICT: There is no "justice" for innocent consumers in South Africa. The NFO, PPRA, Ombudsman, and Department of Justice (DOJ) operate as a single "Regulatory Chain" designed to shield banks and financial institutions from accountability. When a bank defaults, the regulator simply deletes the case file. This is Regulatory Capture. This is ***** by the state. This matter has been formally escalated to Minister Thembi Simelane (Human Settlements) and the Ombud Council for investigation into administrative irregularity and bad-faith procedural shielding. BEWARE: The NFO/ DOJ and all regulators are working with banks and estate agents its bureaucracy bureaucracy plus *******ion is not a protector
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
25 Mar 2026, 17:45
FORMAL RECORD OF PROCEDURAL IRREGULARITY – CASE 0108570
PUBLIC WARNING: THE COLLAPSE OF JUSTICE IN SA (CASE 0108570) Title: 12-Year ***** Protected by NFO & PPRA "Regulatory Chain" of *******ion I am a victim of a 12-year financial dispute involving ABSA Bank, Vartrust Real Estate, and a total failure of the South African justice system. This is a documented case of forgery, *****, and administrative irregularity that spans from the bank’s branches to the highest regulators. THE ***** (July 2013): ABSA and their agents misappropriated a R146,178.79 property deposit based on an unsigned, void Offer to Purchase (Page 13). Under the Alienation of Land Act, this contract is a legal fiction. They kept the money, "flipped" the property for R1.65M, and left me with a loss that now totals R3.24 million (Restitution + Interest + Opportunity Loss). THE REGULATORY COVER-UP (24–25 March 2026): The National Financial Ombud (NFO) accepted my case in January 2026. On 18 March, the tracker showed the status as "Open" and "Waiting for Participant." • 24 March 2026: ABSA Bank officially defaulted on their final defense deadline. • 25 March 2026: Exactly 24 hours after the bank’s default, NFO Team Leader Lisbeth Mokhachane and Case Manager Mpho Sejabeng summarily CLOSED the case, claiming "no jurisdiction." THE VERDICT: There is no "justice" for innocent consumers in South Africa. The NFO, PPRA, Ombudsman, and Department of Justice (DOJ) operate as a single "Regulatory Chain" designed to shield banks and financial institutions from accountability. When a bank defaults, the regulator simply deletes the case file. This is Regulatory Capture. This is ***** by the state. This matter has been formally escalated to Minister Thembi Simelane (Human Settlements) and the Ombud Council for investigation into administrative irregularity and bad-faith procedural shielding. BEWARE: The NFO/ DOJ and all regulators are working with banks and estate agents its bureaucracy bureaucracy plus *******ion is not a protector
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Mar 2026, 14:20
Outstanding Professional Service – Equality Court Johannesburg Central
I wish to place on record my appreciation for the excellent service I received from Mr Khumalo KP at the Equality Court Johannesburg Central. On attending at the Court, Mr Khumalo assisted me with professionalism, patience, and a clear understanding of his responsibilities. He provided precise guidance on the process, responded to my queries in a respectful and efficient manner, and ensured that I was properly assisted throughout my interaction. His conduct demonstrated: A high level of professionalism and accountability; Respectful and client-focused engagement; Efficiency in handling enquiries and providing assistance. This level of service is commendable and reflects positively on the administration of justice. It is important that such conduct be recognised, as it promotes public confidence in the Court system. I trust that this feedback will be noted and that Mr Khumalo receives the recognition he deserves. Thank you.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
19 Mar 2026, 14:20
Outstanding Professional Service – Equality Court Johannesburg Central
I wish to place on record my appreciation for the excellent service I received from Mr Khumalo KP at the Equality Court Johannesburg Central. On attending at the Court, Mr Khumalo assisted me with professionalism, patience, and a clear understanding of his responsibilities. He provided precise guidance on the process, responded to my queries in a respectful and efficient manner, and ensured that I was properly assisted throughout my interaction. His conduct demonstrated: A high level of professionalism and accountability; Respectful and client-focused engagement; Efficiency in handling enquiries and providing assistance. This level of service is commendable and reflects positively on the administration of justice. It is important that such conduct be recognised, as it promotes public confidence in the Court system. I trust that this feedback will be noted and that Mr Khumalo receives the recognition he deserves. Thank you.
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Mar 2026, 11:06
Pathetic humanitarian viola8
Honestly the DOJ there is so much *******ion Bureaucracy Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Minister must sort out this Department
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
6 Mar 2026, 11:06
Pathetic humanitarian viola8
Honestly the DOJ there is so much *******ion Bureaucracy Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Dear Mpho and N. Luiters, I refer to the attached email from Smit Sewgoolam Attorneys dated 12 February 2014. No 10-Day Extension: I formally object to the 10-day ‘comment period’ for Tracy Hill. As shown in the CC list, she was notified of the refund demand 11 years ago. Granting her additional time while my family remains homeless violates the NFO Vulnerable Consumer Policy. Confirmed Misappropriation: The attorneys confirmed they did not hold my funds and instructed Vartrust to refund me. The bank and trustees ignored this directive, facilitating the 30 June 2014 property flip. Ministerial Oversight: This evidence has already been submitted to the Minister of Justice’s investigator. Any further internal delays constitute a documented obstruction of a Ministerial inquiry. Exclusion of Stakeholders: It is unacceptable that I am the sole recipient of this correspondence, while other relevant participants and stakeholders remain excluded. Full transparency requires that all responsible parties be copied on all future communications. Demand for Interim Recommendation: I demand the Interim Recommendation for R3,243,700.00 by 12:00 PM today, 6 March 2026. If no action is taken, I request an immediate Section 65 Summons for Tracy Hill to explain her 11-year defiance of legal instructions under oath. Urgent Clarification Required: Additionally, why was 12 February 2014 chosen as the date for correspondence when this matter was cancelled months earlier? What caused the delay? This timeline discrepancy must be addressed immediately. Thank you for your urgent attention to this matter. I expect a response confirming immediate action by 12:00 PM today. Minister must sort out this Department
0
Replies (0)A