Because the events described are in all
probability going to form part of litigation, some vagueness will be used to
avoid compromising the matter. The event which gave rise to this was an
agreement between Nedbank and another prominent bank in 2009 that resulted in
Nedbank assuming the role of credit provider, as well as debt generator on my account.
When I discovered the collusion and demanded
the mandate that Nedbank must have had from me, in order to transact on my
account, my requests and demands went unanswered for 10 months, despite between
15 to 20 written requests and numerous fruitless telephone calls to various
departments within the organization.
Towards the end of this period, I received a
summons (incomplete and incorrectly addressed) for the amount in dispute. I
immediately forwarded said summons to my legal representative, and due to the
highly contentious nature of the dispute, filed a motion to defend. Unknown to
me at that point, was that Nedbank had already written the spurious “debt” off,
but the reason for the summons was that they had in turn “sold” the debt to a bottom
feeding collection agency. Nedbank had
also at the same time, very kindly listed me with Trans-Union ITC for “bad debt
written off” in July of 2012.
Bear in mind, that there exists no reply to the
requests for documentation repeatedly submitted to Nedbank, in fact, no correspondence
whatsoever was ever received in reply. Neither form Nedbank, nor from their
fellow colluders at a Major Bank, although the Major Bank knew full well of
their part in the scam. I have e-mails on record to prove they were active
participants in that. Bear in mind as well, that when Nedbank sold the debt on to
the collection agency, they were no longer the owners of the original debt, and
had no claim any longer as they had “written it off” but still saw fit to sell
it on as part of probably a whole trache of other “written off debt”. No doubt
the last acrimonious telephone conversation I had with a faceless manager at
their credit card center was too much for them to handle and they decided that
a blacklisting would put in me in my place.
Nedbank’s first proper reaction to all of my
communication, came after I started posting about this issue on Twitter, it
appears from their reaction that public scrutiny on a social media platform is
something they wish to avoid. What I would have wanted was for them to have
engaged with me ten months ago when this issue became pressing, and they
started by sending me threatening SMS messages instead of replying to
correspondence, which was not only delivered and opened, it was read and
ignored. All credit to the people in charge of Nedbank’s Social media platforms
for being able to respond in the time that they did, regrettably they were not
able to reverse the ITC listing immediately, and toward the latter part of the
day their input decreased dramatically, although I went to the extent of
arranging drop-box facilities to allow them to review the extensive documents I
have on the matter, as Nedbank’s mailboxes still have a 2Mb mail message limit
when most mail systems today cater for 10 Mb. Banking hours after all
are the subject of a certain degree of sanctity, it appears.
Despite the efforts to get documentation to
them, and numerous unanswered telephone calls to ensure they had received the information,
that matter remained unresolved on Friday and I remained, at least to the best
of my knowledge, blacklisted for a “written off” allegedly bad debt. In reality I remained a victim of an
institution too arrogant to admit it was wrong.
So Nedbank, decided that the best way to cover
up their errors was to act in a vindictive manner, by utilizing their access to
Trans-Union ITC and blacklisting me. I am in the process of acquiring vendor accreditation
with Trans-Union ITC to enable me to also blacklist individuals, the question
is, will I use spurious reasons to do so?
