GAME ON
Casino boss in court gamble
● He’s a high roller with a taste for luxury hotels and casinos. But the cards are stacked against gambling tycoon Hassen Adams, who stands accused of shortchanging one of South Africa’s poorest communities for his personal benefit.
Adams, who no longer lives in Hout Bay but used to be a prominent local political leader, is defending a court bid to have him removed as chairman of a littleknown community trust he has controlled for more than 20 years. He insists he has had to personally bankroll the trust to keep it afloat — in the hope of generating profit for the community.
Adams is chairman of Grand Parade Investments, which owns the South African franchise of Burger King South Africa and Dunkin’ Donuts. It has significant gaming industry investments via SunWest International and the Golden Valley Casino in Worcester.
In court papers it is alleged that he and his company may have pocketed hundreds of thousands of rands in rental income from land leased by the Hout Bay Development Trust while paying only a fraction to the beneficiaries. Adams said the allegation would be laughable if it wasn’t potentially damaging to his reputation: “Why would I go and get myself corrupted in something like this? It is crazy.”
Many Hout Bay residents live in poverty, particularly in Hangberg, overlooking the harbour, where some of the targeted beneficiaries live.
Papers lodged at the High Court in Cape Town detail a battle for control of the trust, with Adams and cofounder Dicky Meter, a former ANC ward councillor for Hout Bay, pitted against five dissenting trustees.
The rival group, led by local coffee shop owner Priscilla Jansen, claim Adams has refused to include them in the trust’s financial affairs or divulge his dealings for more than 20 years. They say they had no choice but to take the matter to court, where it has been postponed to August.
The trust deed, signed in 1996, refers to benefiting disadvantaged communities. Its key asset is a 25-year
All of the surplus funds . . . have either been appropriated by Adams and his company as a management fee, or are unaccounted for Trustee Priscilla Jansen
lease agreement for a slice of Hout Bay harbour waterfront — with an option to renew.
However, income has been generated mainly from another property leased to local businesses, one of which is Jansen’s coffee shop.
In her founding affidavit, Jansen said financial documents supplied by Adams since 2010 showed that:
There was stated rental income of around R500 000 in 2013-14, but one of the trust’s tenants reflected their rental as being more than R1-million;
On August 20 2013 the trust paid Adams R219 875, said to be for expenses incurred by the trust, and on the same day an unauthorised payment of R297 036 was made to his company, Nadesons; and
The trust paid Nadesons’s annual management fees of between R30 000 and R51 000 between 2010 and 2015.
“The truth is that, apart from small donations made during May 1997, no amounts have been applied to achieve or to further the objectives of the trust,” Jansen said.
“All of the surplus funds that have been paid to the trust have either been appropriated by Adams and his company, Nadesons, as a management fee, or are simply unaccounted for.”
Jansen said the original trustees had allowed Adams to spearhead the trust’s business affairs but never expected to be excluded altogether.
Concerns were raised after the trust failed to generate much wealth for the community, despite elaborate plans, including one for a hotel on a waterfront plot. A hotel presentation submitted to court outlines the project and who would benefit — mostly Adams.
But Adams hit back this week, claiming he had no option but to defend his reputation in court against the unfounded allegations. He said the allegedly suspicious payments to himself were repayments to his loan account, and that the annual management fee was “fair and reasonable”. He insisted the trust’s finances were “meticulous” and had been accessible at all times to the trustees.
He said that far from profiting from the venture it had cost him huge amounts, both for making up the shortfall in the cost of the trust’s lease and in legal fees. He had offered to resign but felt morally obliged to insist the trust should then be managed by somebody who would serve the community’s best interests.
He said the community was justifiably frustrated by the trust not generating enough funds for social investment projects.
“I am at a stage where I don’t want to be the martyr. I employ thousands of people and I have a good name to protect. I can only reflect and say never again will I get involved in this kind of thing,” Adams said.