Local News
SCORES of civil servants and other Zimbabweans are up in arms with a South African vehicle clearance company after it failed to deliver vehicles they bought from Japan last year. The second-hand vehicles have been stuck in South Africa since floods hit Durban last April.
The vehicles were bought through Be Forward and were stored at a warehouse owned by JLR Services and Warehousing company awaiting clearance for importation into Zimbabwe by Africa Vehicle Clearance Specialists (Avecs) when the floods struck.
Information gathered by The Standard showed that an estimated 80 cars suffered extensive damage, which resulted in the cars failing to start after the engines were submerged in flood water.
Some of the cars, which were valued at up to US$8 000, have been written off after they grew moulds while in the warehouse, while others had grown weeds inside.
After the damage, the cars have been devalued to between US$500 and US$1 000 each.
Civil servants and others who had bought the vehicles told The Standard they had made several efforts to get compensation for the damaged cars, but to no avail.
According to correspondence between Avecs and the car buyers seen by The Standard, the clearance company said it had been trying to have its insurance company settle the claims without success.
In an email dated February 3, 2023, an Avecs manager only identified as Kiben told one car buyer that it was taking legal action against its insurance company to compel it to compensate the buyers.
“On April 11, 2022, we had a major flood in Durban in which cars were damaged,” Kiben wrote.
“We have been talking with the insurance company over the last few months unsuccessfully.
“We are currently submitting all documents to the insurance via our lawyer DMI.
“We are still positive that we will get a settlement. The latest correspondents are attached to the mail.
“However, after the floods, the warehouse was damaged extensively and thereafter closed.”
Avecs said it was given an ultimatum by the customs and excise authorities to either deliver the cars to the buyers or hand over the vehicles to the state without compensation.
Avecs notified the buyers that the cars could be forfeited to the state if they did not want to accept them in their bad condition.
“If your vehicle arrived on or before October 11, 2022, your vehicle stayed in South Africa more than six months, which is not allowed,” Avec said.
“We will, however, try to get compensation from the insurance firm.
“If your vehicle is over 10 years old before April 11, 2022, this vehicle would not have been allowed in Zimbabwe.
“These would have to be handed over to the state. If you did not pay duty before April 1, 2022, your claim might be rejected.
“Considering the above, you will have the following options: You will be required to settle the full outstanding amount on your vehicle owed to Avecs and we will deliver your vehicle as it is.
“Regardless of the options set out above, we will still continue to try and get the insurance company to pay out the claim.”
In an interview with The Standard, Avecs CEO KubenPillaysaidthecompanyhadfiled for an insurance claim with First National Bank.
He confirmed that some of the cars were affected by the floods and that they “were over 10 years old and not allowed into Zimbabwe”.
He said some customers had not paid duty on time and their cars stayed in South Africa for an extended period.
“The problem lies with the insurance claim with First National Bank,” Pillay said.
“They have not refuted the claim, but are just not settling.
“Customers think we are stealing their cars. However, we have engaged lawyers at great expense to handle this as we have failed. “
Pillay added: “It might end up as being settled or the insurance calling it as an act of God and dismissing the claim.
“We just don’t know. “Customers are talking to the media and spreading rumours and sending out hate messages on public platforms without knowing the situation.”
But the car buyers raised fears that they could be prejudiced of their funds by the clearance company.
They complained that the company was demanding that they pay some extra storage fees until the matter was finalised.
“Why should we pay for costs incurred by the damaged car?” one buyer asked.
“The issue should have been resolved soon after the flood problem occurred.
“Dragging resolving the issue by the responsible parties has complicated the problem.”