Embattled lawyer accused of forgery
● Bay attorney makes beeline for police station to report criminal complaint against Du-Wayne Stoltz
Accused of falsifying a settlement agreement, forging another lawyer’s signature, and then duping his client into paying the incorrect amount of money into his trust account, the conduct of Du-Wayne Stoltz was brought to the fore yesterday as two Gqeberha lawyers took him to task.
After heated discussions outside court, Matthew Kemp of Pagdens attorneys made a beeline for the police station to report a complaint of fraud and forgery against Stoltz.
In the meantime, the owner of Candy’s Revue Bar, Charl Muller, has been left to pick up the pieces after his assets were attached and his legal bills mounted, all the while thinking his lawyer at the time, Stoltz, had settled the payment dispute with the former owners of the Balizza nightclub.
Now the pressure is mounting for the arrest of Stoltz, less than a week after he was fined for practising under the name of a law firm not registered with the Legal Practice Council (LPC).
Kemp was the latest to take Stoltz on, alleging that his signature had been forged on an illegitimate settlement agreement.
The said settlement agreement, seen by The Herald, states that the total settlement figure is R335,000.
Yesterday, Kemp reported a complaint of fraud and forgery against Stoltz at the Humewood police station.
Stoltz is also being probed by the LPC for four separate matters.
“I have reported him based on the fact that he appears to have forged my signature on a fake settlement agreement, which his client signed in February, and where a forgery of my signature appears on the last page, dated March 8,” Kemp said.
Kemp represents the former owners of Balizza.
“The reason I have reported the forgery is because what Mr Stoltz [allegedly] did is not only unbecoming of the ethical standards required of attorneys, but it is also unlawful,” he said.
“I was provided this fake settlement agreement by Shellville’s new attorney, Dean Murray, this [yesterday] morning at court.”
Shelville is the holding company for Candy’s.
“We had in fact agreed on completely different terms, in a settlement agreement which Mr Stoltz and I signed on behalf of our respective clients on March 13, in terms of which it was agreed that the total settlement figure was R530,236.05,” Kemp said.
A day after finding out he had fallen victim to Stoltz’s alleged dubious dealings, Stoltz’s conduct was brought into question in the Gqeberha magistrate’s court yesterday as Kemp and Murray unpacked the mounting allegations against him.
Stoltz did not show up at court, and the matter was postponed to June 30, for the court to determine if Stolz should pay the costs of an application he had brought to force the sheriff to release Candy’s assets.
Muller has since paid up in full.
Police spokesperson Colonel Priscilla Naidu confirmed that a case was opened.
“A case of forgery was opened at SAPS Humewood,” she said.
Stoltz said he had no knowledge of Kemp’s criminal complaint.
Stoltz had acted on behalf of Candy’s in a protracted legal dispute between the co-owner of what was once the city’s most popular nightclub, Balizza, and Muller, over an unpaid debt which had ballooned to R600,000.
Judgment was handed down against Muller’s Shellville Traders CC in January 2021.
Shellville, it was found, had failed to honour the terms of a business agreement the parties signed for the sale of Balizza.
Shellville had signed an agreement to buy Balizza — which was situated across the road from Candy’s, in Time’s Square Shopping Centre — in late 2015.
The thinking was that Candy’s would benefit from the late-night traffic from the
nightclub but, about three months after purchase, Balizza closed and had not been paid the money owed.
In 2017, the former owners eventually went the legal route and last month a warrant of execution was served.
The matter ended with the sheriff of the court attaching some of Candy’s assets.
Muller told The Herald yesterday he was relieved the matter was finally settled.
“I am going to celebrate the victory by drinking a drink at Candy’s, maybe I’ll work a lap dance in as well,” he said jokingly.
“I was falsely accused but I am glad the truth is out there, it was a royal mess of affairs ... justice should now prevail when it comes to Du-Wayne — on our side the matter has been finalised.”
Stoltz is no stranger to controversy and was fined R60,000 last week for his alleged wrongdoing by the LPC.
He was found guilty on six counts of misconduct in September, with the sanction decided on April 18.
The council had found that Stoltz continued to trade under Nolands Law, even after he was instructed not to do so.
The LPC’s legal officer in the disciplinary department, Phindile Ntoni, said Stoltz had held himself to be above the law and abused and manipulated the legal process.
Investigations into Stoltz’s conduct started after he served a colleague from an opposing firm with a substantial costs order.
Rihanda Strydom, the attorney he served with the punitive order, lodged a complaint with the council against him and Nolands Law, registered as a private company.
Strydom, at the time, said that after the costs order was issued, she decided to do a background check on Stoltz and Nolands Law.
The Hawks also launched a probe into Strydom’s claims.
Hawks spokesperson Warrant Officer Bonnie Nxumalo said from June 2020 to June 2021, Stoltz was allegedly practising under Nolands Law, which was not registered with the LPC.
The docket will now be sent to the deputy director of public prosecutions for a decision.
Bay lawyer Kuban Chetty, not commenting on the Stoltz matter specifically, encouraged the public to report any red flags to the LPC.
“The LPC is the regulator of lawyers and advocates and therefore investigates any allegations against those in the profession,” Chetty said.
“The LPC, however, shouldn’t be seen as a body to settle scores with colleagues. First approach the colleague, then lodge complaints.”