1 reviews | Active since Member
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
© Copyright 2026 hellopeter.com and its affiliates. All rights reserved.