Don’t be the next sucker…
Beware of adverts, whether online or printed. Three readers recently sent complaints about being hoodwinked in very different ways
IN THE first case, a woman said she responded to an ad in the local knock-and-drop for a domestic worker.
The ad – right at the top of the listing – recommended the person highly and because of its size and prominence, the domestic worker seemed to have been a valued employee.
But things simply didn’t add up: The former “employer” (the reference) wasn’t who he claimed to be; the worker conveniently forgot her papers on two consecutive occasions then turned out to be lying about who she was.
Having assured the prospective employer she had a work permit, she couldn’t produce it – and when asked for her passport, it contained an expired visitors’ visa from 2006.
It’s a risk people take all too often and if the relationship is based on deception, it’s not likely to improve.
The second reader was very nearly scammed for holiday accommodation. Everyone wants to take their families to the beach over December, which is why holiday accommodation is such a lucrative scam. Responding to a Gumtree ad for accommodation, which seemed to offer all the facilities she required, including a beach view and a swimming pool, the reader was just about to transfer the money for the deposit when her inner voice warned her to be cautious. Cleverly, she cancelled the deal and instead flew down to Durban, inspected other premises, and signed with the agents before parting with her money.
A third reader complained about the fridge repairs which she paid for but never received.
For Cornelia Moller, things have got nasty, with legal action now being threatened.
Having called the so-called chief executive of the company, which has no fixed address and operates as a “mobile unit”, she asked them to effect repairs on her two fridges.
“I assigned a company called ACCUTE AIR PTY LTD on September 3 to service two fridges: One large house fridge and one small cottage fridge.
“The chief executive of the company charged me R1 300 for filling the gas (Note: a reputable company quoted me between R600 and R900, depending on the size of the fridge.) The small fridge is working fine.
“The large fridge in the house was problematic and Carel van Niekerk, the owner of ACCUTE AIR, struggled to get it to work. He left that day with my cash payment (I have an invoice) and said he would return shortly. Now three weeks later and countless messages for him (he never answered or he cut me off), I still have a broken fridge. At first it was merely over-freezing when he came to look at it. Now the fridge cannot be used at all. It’s kaput!
“I have named and shamed him on some posts, eg I love Parkhurst (where I live), Greenside, Northcliff. I even went to the police station in Randburg who could not help but suggested I go to the Small Claims Court in Randburg, but I could not locate his address to deliver a summons. I am wondering if this is worth it? I am a pensioner without a fridge now and no money to repair it.”
A few days later, Moller wrote again: “I had (a reputable firm) here today and they gave me details of what Carel van Niekerk had done wrong. I paid another R1 460 for them to fix both the fridges that ACCUTE AIR could not. Apparently, he used a liquid gas which is used in aircons, and should not have been used in domestic fridges. So I lost R1 300. Today, I sent him a message that he should learn the difference between the liquid gases and when and how to apply them… For once I received a reply from him about 20 minutes ago saying that I have ‘gone too far’ and that his lawyers will be in touch with me.
“(The other company) charged me R1 460 so altogether I have spent R2 760… I seek help for the ignorant consumer which is me. This is the thanks I get for trying to stop fraud and just being an honest citizen.”
Note: I called the number and asked to speak to Van Niekerk. The man on the other end of the line denied being Van Niekerk but then quickly said he was the owner of ACCUTE AIR. When I asked him for comment, he said: “No comment,” and slammed down the phone. Their website claims they are “market leaders” but they are clearly small operators, working from a mobile unit.
The owner – whoever that might be – has threatened to sue Moller, but based on the above, I believe he’d have a difficult time convincing a judge of reputational damage. The shoddy “work” speaks for itself.