NA
Nadim A
Active since Apr 2013
7
Reviews
0
Industries
Reviews
7 reviews2 months ago
Follow-up: Serious ongoing concerns about AIV Property Specialists’ compliance as managing agent
I am posting this follow-up to my previous review and in response to the recent reviews from Mike C, Kammy G, Yolanda K, and others who have raised similar issues with AIV Property Specialists. As a homeowner in a scheme where AIV has been acting as managing agent, I formally lodged a complaint with the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (PPRA) under reference G2167926I. The adjudication hearing took place on 27 January 2026 and the written order was issued on 9 February 2026. Without pre-empting any appeal or further process, the adjudication order contains a guilty finding against AIV for contravening regulation 26(2) of the Property Practitioners Regulations (failure to hold the correct category of Fidelity Fund Certificate for managing-agent activities). A fine was imposed. Section 56 of the Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019 is clear: a practitioner who performs services without the required FFC is not entitled to any remuneration for those services. This has potentially serious implications for any scheme where AIV has acted as managing agent during the period of non-compliance. To any current or past client of AIV (homeowners, trustees, or scheme executives): Request from AIV, in writing, a copy of the FFC held by the exact legal entity that has been managing your scheme (including the certificate number, issue date, expiry date, and category of services authorised). Independently verify the certificate’s validity and scope directly with the PPRA. If there is any doubt about the correct FFC having been in place, consider obtaining independent legal advice on your options, including possible claims for repayment of fees under section 56 of the Act. This is not legal advice — I am simply sharing what I have learned through my own complaint process and what the Act itself states. Each owner or scheme should make their own enquiries and seek professional guidance. If you are affected and would like to exchange non-privileged information about your experience or the PPRA process (without giving or receiving legal advice), you are welcome to contact me privately at ( nadim dot ally at gmail dot com. I will update this review if there are any material public developments in the PPRA matter. Thank you to everyone who has shared their experiences — greater transparency benefits all homeowners.
0 replies
4 months ago
Serious concerns about AIV’s compliance & management of HOAs
I’m writing as a homeowner in a scheme managed by AIV Property Specialists. I’ve read the reviews here from Mike C, Kammy G and Yolanda K, and unfortunately my experience raises even more serious concerns. In my case, AIV has been acting as the managing agent for our Homeowners’ Association. When I asked for proof that they were properly registered with the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (PPRA), I discovered that there are serious questions about whether the legal entity actually managing our scheme holds the correct Fidelity Fund Certificate (FFC) required for managing agents. I have formally lodged a complaint with the PPRA and the matter is currently before an adjudicator. I therefore cannot state the outcome yet, but I can say the following based on my own experience and understanding of the Property Practitioners Act: A “property practitioner” (including a managing agent) is supposed to hold a valid FFC in the name of the entity actually performing the services. Where a practitioner renders services without the correct FFC, the Act says they are not entitled to keep commission or fees for that period, and affected consumers may be able to seek repayment through the proper channels. For people like Mike, Kammy and Yolanda – and any other HOAs or owners dealing with AIV – I would strongly suggest that you: Ask AIV in writing for a copy of the FFC in the exact name of the entity that manages your scheme; and Contact the PPRA directly to confirm whether that certificate is valid for the relevant period and category; and Take independent legal advice on whether you may be able to reclaim management fees or other charges if it turns out that AIV did not have the correct FFC while acting as managing agent. This review reflects my personal experience and my understanding of the law. Anyone affected should verify the FFC status for themselves with the PPRA and, if necessary, consider pursuing their rights through the PPRA or the courts. If you are an owner in a scheme managed by AIV and would like to be updated on the outcome of the PPRA adjudication or share your experience, you are welcome to email me at nve.ffc@gmail.com . Please note I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice, but I’m happy to share information about my own case.
0 replies
5 months ago
Fitzanne Estates (Pty) Ltd not registered as Managing Agent
After a very diligent background check I have confirmation that Fitzanne Estates are not registered in the activity of "Managing Agent" with PPRA. Our HOA "Directors" have non the less appointed Fitzanne as Managing Agent contrary to all the information Provided by myself and the PPRA. Fitzanne then went on to convene an EGM and presided over this event. They sent out a Teams Meeting request then removed me from the meeting and did not allow me access to the meeting. As a homeowner and member of the HOA it is my right to attend/object and participate. Fitzanne and the HOA is refusing access to minutes and statutory records that all members have a right to view. I have not mentioned the HOA name in this review but if there are any affected parties that are *******ly being managed by Fitzanne Estates please feel free to contact me directly for any help or information.
71 replies
7 months ago
Contradictions, Confusion, and No Accountability – Angor’s Failure to Manage
This review is shared in the public interest. No confidential estate details are included. Angor Property Specialists has demonstrated repeated contradictions in its own communications, creating confusion and prejudice for homeowners. Despite repeated attempts to resolve issues through internal processes, my concerns remain ignored or dismissed. Key Failures Experienced: Contradictory communications: On 11 August 2025 Angor issued a “formal withdrawal” from management, yet on 21 August and 1 September levy statements and arrears notices were sent as if Angor still had an active mandate. Clarifications sent later only deepened the contradictions. Selective disclosure: Official communications are not circulated to all members, while informal Gmail accounts controlled by a former director are used to issue estate-wide messages, misleading owners into believing they come from the Board. No transparency: Requests for trust account bank statements and details of disbur*****ts have gone unanswered, despite legal obligations under the Property Practitioners Act. Owners are left without clarity on whether funds are being safeguarded, reconciled, or paid out at the discretion of disputed directors. Ignored tickets: Multiple emails logged through Angor’s ticketing system produced nothing more than automated acknowledgments. Promises of “1-day turnaround” are consistently unmet, leaving homeowners in limbo. Why this matters: Managing agents exist to support directors and homeowners, not to shield disputed boards or confuse owners with inconsistent messages. Levy collection and arrears enforcement, when the agent itself claims to have “withdrawn immediately,” places homeowners under ******** financial distress and undermines trust. My conclusion: Angor’s conduct raises serious questions about accountability, neutrality, and compliance with the Property Practitioners Act and the CSOS framework. When an agent claims to manage “billions in assets” nationally, the public should expect professionalism, transparency, and lawful behaviour. Instead, homeowners are left facing contradictory notices, unanswered queries, and a breakdown of trust.
53 replies
7 months ago
Concerns on Governance, Transparency, and Treatment of Homeowners
I am a homeowner at NVE Homeowners Association NPC, where Angor was recently appointed as managing agent. Unfortunately, my experience has raised serious concerns: Premature Levy Demands: Levy instructions and “welcome packs” were circulated even before Angor’s contract was properly effective, with key mandate fields unsigned or incomplete. Conflicting Communications: Angor advised homeowners to treat certain notices as valid, yet simultaneously withdrew as managing agent, creating unnecessary confusion. Despite announcing disengagement, levy statements and arrears notices continued to be circulated. Selective Engagement: Angor declined to circulate a validly requisitioned Special General Meeting notice to homeowners, while at the same time distributing marketing material for paid webinars. This inconsistency undermines confidence in impartiality. Transparency & Accountability: Requests for clarity on access rights, CIPC filings, and financial handovers have not been fully addressed, raising governance concerns. Summary: Homeowners deserve a managing agent that is impartial, transparent, and consistent. Instead, Angor’s actions have created mistrust and unnecessary disputes. I hope this review encourages the company to reflect on its obligations and restore professionalism and trust with the communities it serves.
53 replies
64 months ago
Telkom Customer Service
I have been a telkom Customer for as long as I can remember... I have just had bad service and bad experiences with their billing for as long as I can remember... But my biggest gripe is with the way they deal with customers.. Nobody at Telkom will give you a number that you can reach them on so you can never resolve any issues... You have to deal with a new person every time you call in and start all over again
0 replies
Review Distribution
5 Star
0 (0%)
4 Star
1 (14.285714285714286%)
3 Star
0 (0%)
2 Star
0 (0%)
1 Star
6 (85.71428571428571%)