Tweet
STEVE FROM XYZ BANK IS MISLEADING HIS MANAGING DIRECTOR
I had a telephonic discussion with an attorney “ Steve” on Monday from XYZ bank with specific regards to a prescription claim that we served on them on behalf of our client Mr’s Joubert.
1. I was utterly and completely mesmerized by “Steve’s” understanding of the prescription act 68 of 1969 or rather lack of understanding;
2. Let me explain, we served a prescription claim and followed up on it, we required as a common courtesy a letter to the effect that the prescription claim is acknowledged, processed and their systems updated accordingly. This debt is more than 5 years old, no acknowledgement of debt tacit or otherwise has taken place in this regard, no payments have been made by the debtor within a 5 year period;
3. In order to process a prescription claim, the creditor simply has to check ITC, XDS and Experian to ascertain whether that account is still listed, this will be prima facie evidence that the debt is indeed prescribed; the creditor will then establish whether any acknowledgement of debt has taken place tacit or otherwise as well as whether payments were made within that 3 year period which would cause prescription to run a fresh. If all is in order the creditor is legally, morally and ethically obliged to update their internal systems and indicate on that account that a prescription claim was submitted, that it was processed and that the debt is indeed now prescribed. They should as a courtesy confirm this in writing on their letterhead. They may well not be obligated to confirm this in writing but in my opinion should;
4. “Steve” from xyz bank an attorney by the way telephonically informed me that prescription can only be claimed if you go to court! I was left breathless,” where did “Steve” from xyz bank get his LLB degree, did he perhaps buy it!
5. What is more troubling is that he has mislead hid md in believing that this is indeed the case;
6. A case in point, we all know that Governmental departments are lacking in service delivery and that there is a difference between the billing system and the meter readings and that generally people are dissatisfied with the way that they are treated by the local councils, but guess what, even the Mookgophong Local Municipality has a policy document on the prescription act and procedures on how to process a prescription claim..go figure..see attached!!!!
7. In a case such as this we simply complete an affidavit to the effect that we have served a prescription claim in a proper manner endorsed by the magistrates court rules service of documents rules(even though the that act is not applicable for service of a prescription claim, we still ensure proper service). We then give the client this affidavit to keep for their records and if the creditor is dumb enough to sue out summons, the client will simply enter a special plea of prescription and yes, we will come and testify that we served the prescription claim on the creditor….
I had a telephonic discussion with an attorney “ Steve” on Monday from XYZ bank with specific regards to a prescription claim that we served on them on behalf of our client Mr’s Joubert.
1. I was utterly and completely mesmerized by “Steve’s” understanding of the prescription act 68 of 1969 or rather lack of understanding;
2. Let me explain, we served a prescription claim and followed up on it, we required as a common courtesy a letter to the effect that the prescription claim is acknowledged, processed and their systems updated accordingly. This debt is more than 5 years old, no acknowledgement of debt tacit or otherwise has taken place in this regard, no payments have been made by the debtor within a 5 year period;
3. In order to process a prescription claim, the creditor simply has to check ITC, XDS and Experian to ascertain whether that account is still listed, this will be prima facie evidence that the debt is indeed prescribed; the creditor will then establish whether any acknowledgement of debt has taken place tacit or otherwise as well as whether payments were made within that 3 year period which would cause prescription to run a fresh. If all is in order the creditor is legally, morally and ethically obliged to update their internal systems and indicate on that account that a prescription claim was submitted, that it was processed and that the debt is indeed now prescribed. They should as a courtesy confirm this in writing on their letterhead. They may well not be obligated to confirm this in writing but in my opinion should;
4. “Steve” from xyz bank an attorney by the way telephonically informed me that prescription can only be claimed if you go to court! I was left breathless,” where did “Steve” from xyz bank get his LLB degree, did he perhaps buy it!
5. What is more troubling is that he has mislead hid md in believing that this is indeed the case;
6. A case in point, we all know that Governmental departments are lacking in service delivery and that there is a difference between the billing system and the meter readings and that generally people are dissatisfied with the way that they are treated by the local councils, but guess what, even the Mookgophong Local Municipality has a policy document on the prescription act and procedures on how to process a prescription claim..go figure..see attached!!!!
7. In a case such as this we simply complete an affidavit to the effect that we have served a prescription claim in a proper manner endorsed by the magistrates court rules service of documents rules(even though the that act is not applicable for service of a prescription claim, we still ensure proper service). We then give the client this affidavit to keep for their records and if the creditor is dumb enough to sue out summons, the client will simply enter a special plea of prescription and yes, we will come and testify that we served the prescription claim on the creditor….
Comment