Photo evidence contradicts fmFirst for Women’s explanation about damage to my vehicle

Back on April 11, I posted here on Hello Peter about how my car was damaged while in the custody of First for Women and their service provider first help , and how they refused to take responsibility.

Following that post, their so-called internal ombudsman promised an investigation and said they would revert back to me within 10 days. We are now in mid-May, and I only heard from them last week.

Instead of taking accountability, I received calls and emails blaming me, blaming the car, and alleging “pre-existing damage.” However, their own explanations now expose serious contradictions.

When I specifically asked Harold from the ombudsman’s office how and why my car ended up damaged while in their custody, he responded in writing saying the bumper became dislodged “when the vehicle was moved.” This explanation does not make sense.

The photos taken on 6 January 2026 at 06:11 a.m. in the yard of First help their custody, clearly show the rear bumper still externally intact. (The photo posted). I only picked up the vehicle on January 07 with the damage.

The visible damage and separation only became apparent later when I collected the vehicle. This directly contradicts the explanation that the damage only happened after the vehicle was moved.

First for Women is now also claiming the damage was “pre-existing” because *****s had allegedly been used before on the bumper. Even if previous repairs existed, that still does not explain why the bumper appeared intact in photos taken on day two after the vehicle arrived at their yard, but appeared damaged afterwards.

My nightmare with First for Women started on 05 January 2026 after I hit a pothole on Main Reef Road in Johannesburg. I contacted them expecting assistance with the tyre, but instead the vehicle was towed to their partner yard. I later collected the vehicle on 7 January and immediately noticed damage at the rear bumper area. Since then, I have spent months going back and forth with First for Women, only to be met with shifting explanations, blame, and refusal to take responsibility for damage that occurred while my car was in their custody.

I have photos of the photos of the vehicle taken on 06 January with no visible damage at all and another photo taken on January 07 which shows moving the car from rhe scene to rhe yard did not result in.damage as claimed by 1st For Women. They are available.