OI
OMEGA INDUSTRIES
Claimed Business
OI
OMEGA INDUSTRIES
Claimed Business
4 Reviews (last 12 months)
Does not respond to reviews
Performance(last 12 months):
0Trustindex Rating
#10Ranked In Business & Legal Services
237h 33mReply Time
-100 NPSUnlikely
Replied to 100% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 356 hours 8 min
TrustIndex
0
Ranking
#10
in Business & Legal Services
Avg Reply
237h 33m
NPS Score
-100
Recommended: Unlikely
Replied to 100% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 356 hours 8 min
Review Distribution
3|4 Reviews
Jun '25 - May '26
5(50%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(50%)
5(50%)
4(0%)
3(0%)
2(0%)
1(50%)
Frequently Asked Questions About OMEGA INDUSTRIES
OMEGA INDUSTRIES has a TrustIndex of 0 out of 10 on Hellopeter, based on 4 reviews in the last 12 months. They reply to 100% of negative reviews, typically within 356 hours 8 min. Hellopeter has tracked OMEGA INDUSTRIES across 4 total reviews. How is the TrustIndex calculated? →
Recent reviews (4)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceGB
Gerrie B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Feb 2026, 06:54
Breach of Contract – Operational Crisis and Reputational Damage
Breach of Contract – Operational Crisis and Reputational Damage ISO Lomlingo (Pty) Ltd placed an order with Omega Tactical Distributors in December 2025 for security uniforms totaling R284,002, with payment made in full. Delivery was contractually agreed for mid-January 2025 to ensure our guards were properly equipped for the rainy season. Despite full payment and adequate lead time, Omega Tactical failed to deliver the uniforms. When severe weather, including flooding, struck our operational areas in January 2026, our guards were forced to work in hazardous conditions without the protective attire we had responsibly planned and paid for in advance. This failure resulted in: Threats of client contract cancellations due to lack of proper personnel attire Reputational damage when we could not fulfill commitments to have guards properly uniformed by mid-January Compromise of our duty of care to employees exposed to hazardous weather conditions Emergency sourcing of alternative uniforms at additional cost, forcing duplicate expenditure Operational disruption across multiple mining sites We planned ahead. We paid in full. Omega Tactical left us compromised during a critical operational period. As of February 2026, no uniforms have been delivered and no refund has been issued despite formal legal demand. Legal action is now underway to recover all amounts paid, together with consequential damages incurred.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)GB
Gerrie B
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Feb 2026, 06:54
Breach of Contract – Operational Crisis and Reputational Damage
Breach of Contract – Operational Crisis and Reputational Damage ISO Lomlingo (Pty) Ltd placed an order with Omega Tactical Distributors in December 2025 for security uniforms totaling R284,002, with payment made in full. Delivery was contractually agreed for mid-January 2025 to ensure our guards were properly equipped for the rainy season. Despite full payment and adequate lead time, Omega Tactical failed to deliver the uniforms. When severe weather, including flooding, struck our operational areas in January 2026, our guards were forced to work in hazardous conditions without the protective attire we had responsibly planned and paid for in advance. This failure resulted in: Threats of client contract cancellations due to lack of proper personnel attire Reputational damage when we could not fulfill commitments to have guards properly uniformed by mid-January Compromise of our duty of care to employees exposed to hazardous weather conditions Emergency sourcing of alternative uniforms at additional cost, forcing duplicate expenditure Operational disruption across multiple mining sites We planned ahead. We paid in full. Omega Tactical left us compromised during a critical operational period. As of February 2026, no uniforms have been delivered and no refund has been issued despite formal legal demand. Legal action is now underway to recover all amounts paid, together with consequential damages incurred.
0
Replies (0)PR
Phillip R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
12 Feb 2026, 07:58
Outstanding Service, Fast Delivery & Top-Quality Tactical Gear
I placed an order with Omega Tactical Distributors on 1 February for jumpsuit uniforms, security uniforms, and additional tactical gear for my company. I made full payment upfront and received the complete order within 2–8 working days. Everything arrived exactly as specified, in the correct quantities, with excellent workmanship and professional finishing. The quality of the uniforms and gear exceeded my expectations. The stitching, fit, durability, and overall presentation clearly reflect operational-grade equipment built to last. What impressed me most is that Omega Tactical Distributors provides a true one-stop solution. Previously, I had to source uniforms and related products from four or five different suppliers, which was time-consuming and inconsistent. Now I can purchase everything in one place at competitive pricing without sacrificing quality. The service from Eugene was exceptional. Communication was clear, professional, and responsive throughout the entire process. No delays, no excuses — just delivery as promised. Based on this experience, I am moving 100% of my business to Omega Tactical Distributors going forward. It is rare to find a supplier that delivers on quality, affordability, and service at the same time. Highly recommended to any security company looking for reliable supply and professional service.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)PR
Phillip R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
12 Feb 2026, 07:58
Outstanding Service, Fast Delivery & Top-Quality Tactical Gear
I placed an order with Omega Tactical Distributors on 1 February for jumpsuit uniforms, security uniforms, and additional tactical gear for my company. I made full payment upfront and received the complete order within 2–8 working days. Everything arrived exactly as specified, in the correct quantities, with excellent workmanship and professional finishing. The quality of the uniforms and gear exceeded my expectations. The stitching, fit, durability, and overall presentation clearly reflect operational-grade equipment built to last. What impressed me most is that Omega Tactical Distributors provides a true one-stop solution. Previously, I had to source uniforms and related products from four or five different suppliers, which was time-consuming and inconsistent. Now I can purchase everything in one place at competitive pricing without sacrificing quality. The service from Eugene was exceptional. Communication was clear, professional, and responsive throughout the entire process. No delays, no excuses — just delivery as promised. Based on this experience, I am moving 100% of my business to Omega Tactical Distributors going forward. It is rare to find a supplier that delivers on quality, affordability, and service at the same time. Highly recommended to any security company looking for reliable supply and professional service.
0
Replies (0)ER
Eugene R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
30 Jan 2026, 08:17
Clarification and factual correction regarding a misleading review by Charnelle
This review is posted to formally correct material inaccuracies contained in the review published by Charnelle titled “Misrepresentation of Delivery Terms and Withholding of Goods”. For the benefit of readers, the following clarifications are placed on record: No binding “free delivery” agreement existed. No courier method, provider, cost, route, or delivery SLA was ever contractually agreed or itemised in writing. No signed acceptance or amendment exists confirming delivery at the supplier’s cost. Payment was made for manufactured goods, not delivery services. The transaction related to custom-manufactured products. Delivery was never sold, priced, or contracted as a paid service. No courier charges were introduced “after the fact” by the supplier. A third-party courier independently contacted the reviewer regarding transport costs. At no stage did the supplier invoice, add, or demand courier fees. Goods were never withheld. The goods were completed and made available for collection. Collection was repeatedly offered, either personally or via a courier of the client’s choosing. No refund was requested or refused. No written refund request was ever submitted. In any event, South African law does not obligate refunds for custom-manufactured goods once production has commenced. The assertions in the referenced review are therefore factually incorrect, unsupported by evidence, and omit critical context. The matter is currently under formal dispute. This clarification is provided solely to ensure that readers are not misled by a one-sided narrative. — Eugene Owner / Authorised Representative
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)ER
Eugene R
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
30 Jan 2026, 08:17
Clarification and factual correction regarding a misleading review by Charnelle
This review is posted to formally correct material inaccuracies contained in the review published by Charnelle titled “Misrepresentation of Delivery Terms and Withholding of Goods”. For the benefit of readers, the following clarifications are placed on record: No binding “free delivery” agreement existed. No courier method, provider, cost, route, or delivery SLA was ever contractually agreed or itemised in writing. No signed acceptance or amendment exists confirming delivery at the supplier’s cost. Payment was made for manufactured goods, not delivery services. The transaction related to custom-manufactured products. Delivery was never sold, priced, or contracted as a paid service. No courier charges were introduced “after the fact” by the supplier. A third-party courier independently contacted the reviewer regarding transport costs. At no stage did the supplier invoice, add, or demand courier fees. Goods were never withheld. The goods were completed and made available for collection. Collection was repeatedly offered, either personally or via a courier of the client’s choosing. No refund was requested or refused. No written refund request was ever submitted. In any event, South African law does not obligate refunds for custom-manufactured goods once production has commenced. The assertions in the referenced review are therefore factually incorrect, unsupported by evidence, and omit critical context. The matter is currently under formal dispute. This clarification is provided solely to ensure that readers are not misled by a one-sided narrative. — Eugene Owner / Authorised Representative
0
Replies (0)CVdB
Charnelle Van den Berg
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Jan 2026, 05:39
Misrepresentation of Delivery Terms and Withholding of Goods
We engaged Omega Industries based on a written quotation which explicitly included “Delivery – Free delivery” as part of the quoted scope. Payment was made in full on the strength of that quotation. After payment and dispatch, we were contacted by a third-party courier and instructed to pay courier charges for the boots. No prior written notice was ever provided that courier costs would be for the client’s account, nor was any amendment to the quotation issued or accepted before dispatch. When this was queried, Omega Industries asserted that: delivery terms were merely “goodwill indications” despite being itemized in the quotation, courier charges were allegedly disclosed beforehand (no proof was produced), and that ownership of the goods had passed to the client while the goods were being withheld pending payment of additional charges. Omega Industries further indicated that if courier charges were not paid, the goods would be returned while payment already made would be retained. This position was communicated despite the absence of any agreed variation to the original quotation. In summary: A quotation stating free delivery was issued Payment was made in reliance on that quotation Additional courier charges were introduced after the fact Goods were withheld unless further payment was made Refund was refused unless the supplier’s revised terms were accepted This experience reflects poor contract management, post-payment variation of terms, and an unwillingness to resolve a dispute reasonably when clear written documentation exists. Potential customers are advised to exercise caution and ensure that all terms — especially delivery and logistics — are clearly confirmed and honoured before making payment.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)CVdB
Charnelle Van den Berg
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Jan 2026, 05:39
Misrepresentation of Delivery Terms and Withholding of Goods
We engaged Omega Industries based on a written quotation which explicitly included “Delivery – Free delivery” as part of the quoted scope. Payment was made in full on the strength of that quotation. After payment and dispatch, we were contacted by a third-party courier and instructed to pay courier charges for the boots. No prior written notice was ever provided that courier costs would be for the client’s account, nor was any amendment to the quotation issued or accepted before dispatch. When this was queried, Omega Industries asserted that: delivery terms were merely “goodwill indications” despite being itemized in the quotation, courier charges were allegedly disclosed beforehand (no proof was produced), and that ownership of the goods had passed to the client while the goods were being withheld pending payment of additional charges. Omega Industries further indicated that if courier charges were not paid, the goods would be returned while payment already made would be retained. This position was communicated despite the absence of any agreed variation to the original quotation. In summary: A quotation stating free delivery was issued Payment was made in reliance on that quotation Additional courier charges were introduced after the fact Goods were withheld unless further payment was made Refund was refused unless the supplier’s revised terms were accepted This experience reflects poor contract management, post-payment variation of terms, and an unwillingness to resolve a dispute reasonably when clear written documentation exists. Potential customers are advised to exercise caution and ensure that all terms — especially delivery and logistics — are clearly confirmed and honoured before making payment.
0
Replies (0)