1 reviews | Active since Sept 2016
Terrible assistance from agent - potential ************** of clients
We first got really good service from the agent whom was assisting us ( Tanja) upon our viewing and we absolutely loved her . We eventually got back to her on the property and opted to proceed with our lease via our company as we’re both business people ( farming/property and a marketing company ( both London and SA based) . Thats when the service literally changed, they dragged their feet with sending us the correct forms for this process, we then started sharing documents of which our emails wouldn’t be rep**** to - people require customer service ie, are the docs in order , generally checking in with serious clients . None of that. At some point I had to call their offices as our agent was just non responsive for some days of us emailing and sending sms’s and WhatsApp messages. The office staff was polos but basically not helpful either.
Fast forward, we keep sending documents to be ignored - if we didn’t badger the agent she wouldn't respond to confirm receipt of documents or help us or guide us if need be.
I eventually send an email to follow up once again after silence, only for her to reply to us to casually tell us the owner has now approved another tenant( 3days after receiving more documents and only because I had to once again badger her)
Had she been an agent and helped us the process would have moved smoother and faster. Had she not ignored us for weeks at times, I am 3 weeks from giving birth and this is what we’re subjected to. She never once followed up or checked on us, she never once rep**** to emails promptly in order to guide or assist us where she could.
This is generally a trend in South africa , more so the west rand of Johannesburg , where we’re not taken seriously based on our skin colour , ages and I wonder what else. We had been working with this lady for a while showing her we are serious and constantly looking to her for guidance but it seems she had written us off long before she cared to tell us.
We have a zero tolerance policy on ****** and ************** of any form and take these accusations / insinuations extremely seriously. If this is true we would not hesitate to dismiss the person involved. We therefore ask that you please immediately provide the proof to substantiate your insinuation as this is a very serious charge. We will contact you to provide the channel to do this.
We do provide the "accused" with a right of reply and she paints a very different picture to what you have described. She has provided context to the email communication between you:
14 October (initial application sent)
20 October (received your application and your requested a to change to a company application, which was sent)
22 October (request for supporting documents)
26 October (received the company application and again requested additional supporting documents)
3 November (received some company documents, but still waiting for financials, copies of IDs and current proof of residence for company and signatory = FICA docs)
14 November (received further company documents, but still not the FICA docs as requested)
23 November (received balance of documents, but by this time the Landlord had received another application without any outstanding documents)
This proves, contrary to your claim that there was communication with you and that it took you from 20 October to 23 November to send all the required documents. These documents are required in terms of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA), which prevents us from starting a business relationship with any client who has not provided the required documents in order for us to complete an identification and verification exercise. This is not an internal company policy but a legal obligation that we are bound to, in terms of FICA.
We do however concede that Tanja should have been more pro-active in her communication with you and more persistent in keeping you appraised of the situation. For that we do apologise, but from what we have seen, this most definitely had nothing to do with your skin colour or age. If you can prove differently, we will await that proof.
We have a zero tolerance policy on ****** and ************** of any form and take these accusations / insinuations extremely seriously. If this is true we would not hesitate to dismiss the person involved. We therefore ask that you please immediately provide the proof to substantiate your insinuation as this is a very serious charge. We will contact you to provide the channel to do this.
We do provide the "accused" with a right of reply and she paints a very different picture to what you have described. She has provided context to the email communication between you:
14 October (initial application sent)
20 October (received your application and your requested a to change to a company application, which was sent)
22 October (request for supporting documents)
26 October (received the company application and again requested additional supporting documents)
3 November (received some company documents, but still waiting for financials, copies of IDs and current proof of residence for company and signatory = FICA docs)
14 November (received further company documents, but still not the FICA docs as requested)
23 November (received balance of documents, but by this time the Landlord had received another application without any outstanding documents)
This proves, contrary to your claim that there was communication with you and that it took you from 20 October to 23 November to send all the required documents. These documents are required in terms of the Financial Intelligence Centre Act (FICA), which prevents us from starting a business relationship with any client who has not provided the required documents in order for us to complete an identification and verification exercise. This is not an internal company policy but a legal obligation that we are bound to, in terms of FICA.
We do however concede that Tanja should have been more pro-active in her communication with you and more persistent in keeping you appraised of the situation. For that we do apologise, but from what we have seen, this most definitely had nothing to do with your skin colour or age. If you can prove differently, we will await that proof.