They are the gate keepers set by oppressors to keep the under privileged from participating in the economy with stunts like this

To whom it may concern

My name is Mr Marvin John Cloete (ID: ***) I would like to obtain guidance in lodging a complaint against the attorneys as identified Esterhuyze Inc Attorneys.

I was approached by them in their capacity as debt collectors at my place of work last year. I explained to the said representative that my medical aid had covered for these types of expenses and that I will follow up with the medical scheme as to why payment was not made against the claim. I also agreed that I would pay the said amount if for some reason my medical aid did not pay the amount as did receive the actual service.

The original service cost was R484 which in comparison with the alleged liability represents a mere 12% of the total liability they are claiming for. I was never sent any correspondence to provide me with any form of notice that a judgement is pursued against me. The number used within the statement was in fact in working at the time of the judgement yet no form of contact was expressed in this regard. I do recognize that I stipulated that my medical aid had to resolve the issue which was communicated yet not resolved as I had more than sufficient funds in my medical savings. A representative of the attorneys stipulated as per the attached email that they are not required to bring me before Court yet in normal circumstances I would expect that some form of notice thereof be provided. This in itself I find completely unacceptable and a violation of my right to information that have a financial consequence to this extent.

Upon dissecting their statement of account I find these costs to be excessive and not a true reflection of cost. The track and trace costs are costs of signing a document to adhere to a repayment plan which was open to me resolving the issue with my medical aid as discussed. It appears that their representative was merely interested in my signature. I would not avoid the said liability due to the service provided nor did I have any intent to do so. In addition when they app**** for judgement their costs were not allowed as their costs was well in excess of what was app**** for at the date of the judgement. What I do not understand is why a debt of R484 will be pursued at a cost of R 4000. The intention is therefore not in fact to collect the debt but its a means of raising revenues. How does that even make any economical sense.

There are many South Africans that stare down the barrel of huge debts that are granted exorbitant amounts of settlement discounts against the said debts documented in our case law yet we pursue the previously disadvantaged in this manner giving rise to additional legal costs almost ten fold the size of the original liability. Instead of compromising on their debts they are adamant in pursuing their full cost as I was willing to offer them 3 times the original liability just to clear the judgement.

I understand that the enacted legislation allows for such costs to be recovered yet from an economical perspective does this achieve the goals as intended or does this line up attorney firms with revenue pursuing debts of such nature. We need to apply economic substance to these types of scenarios as I feel I would not be part of a select few in this position and I would like the NCA to consider possible intervention in cases of a similar nature.

The lack of communication of this matter before the institution of legal proceedings is indicative of a risk that consumers may potentially be facing legal charges that are completely unwarranted.

I hope this email finds you well

Kind Regards Marvin Cloete