discrepancy,Inhumane

In the case of I and my Wife, we are only in defualt of our homeloan for just two months wereas the above was in arrears for four months plus.I personally contacted FNB when I noticed that I was about to defualt on my home loan for any assistance and asked that we be granted a three months period to get things in order.This plea was turned down by FNB,we were never afforded any oppurtuinity to explain or meet with a banker niether did FNB agreed to offer us any restructuring plans on our home loan.We have emails to proof this fact written to FNB,we were never served with a section 129 letter as my banker informed me that the bank has alledged that this was served on us on 14 July 2018 which we have disputed that this was'nt served on us,when we pressed further the banker accept to nthe fact that indeed during this alledged period by the bank that the post office was on a month strike and that it was possible that the letter was returned. The bank did not call us on phone or notified us by email as to the fact that we have been served with a section 129 letter and to confirm if we were in reciept of it,niether did the bank Attorney's. All this while we have been in negotiation with the bank and have at all time comp**** by paying the home loan defualt during the approved date.Is just that when we pay off the outstanding defualt a month adds up immiedaitely and this we have pleaded with the bank about but our plea fell on deaf ears. The Bank has never sat with myself and my wife to dicuss how to assist us in getting this home loan restructured,considering the facts that we made a huge down payment of a Hundred Thousand Rand when we purchasing this property.We feel we are been treated inhumanely by this bank. As the banker has informed that a summons has been issued againts us,I then questioned the banker that how can this be becuase the bank has never sent us a letter of demand,the bank or thier Attorneys did not send to us a section 129 notice or meet with us all the bank did was emails and calls which they informed us that we were either in arrears of a month or two months and arrangements and time was given by us to the bank of which we paid.I then asked the banker why are we been treated differently and asked if every customer of the bank whom are in arears of a month or two months are issued with summons and he said no.I then asked why then is summons been issued againts us,and he simply could not give me any answer.This is inhumane,and I have heard that it is a common hidden practice in FNB where certain races and houses are on the radars of some of thier staffs whom operate with ******** syndicates and property speculators whom force on forclosure on this houses in collusion with thier Attorneys whom then sell the property at sheriff’s auctions for a pittance amount and payments are shared between this Attorneys and certain bankers it is called collusion.South Africa has a shameful history of evictions, beginning in the apartheid years and continuing up to the present by banks such as FNB which is well known and registered in court documents and cases,” I have requested from the banker to provide me via email a copy of the alledged section 129 letter which was posted to me and that they request thier Attorneys to give to FNB the tracking number of the section 129 letter which was alledged to have been posted to me via a registered mail as all registered mails have a tracking number which will state if the psoted mail was recieved by the reciepient or returned to the addressee as the post office was on strike during this period they alledged to have posted this mail.And if the mail was't recieved by me and returned or if not posted then it means FNB is not precedural.Till date am yet to get any response,of a copy of the 129 section letter or the tracking number.I am now appealing to any official of the bank or staff whom will be reading my greviance to provide to me the tracking number of the alledged section 129 letter which was alledged to have been posted to me as this will have the exact date when the notice was posted and if recieved by me or returned.If this cannot be proven to have been recieved or mailed to me then why are we now been threathened to be served with summons.We then humbly request that such actions be reversed for it will be inhumane of this bank to further impose finacial stress on customers whom are making efforts to simply payoff a one month arrears. We have informations of other customers whom are in arrears for two or more months whom are not been served with summons so why is our own case different.This Bank is inhumane and might this be racial profiling how else can one explain this is the banker whom I spoke to can't seem to know the reason why this is so.I am only in a one month arrears as of present. In a recent case that went to the Supreme Court of Appeal, First National Bank (FNB) was obliged first to take steps to engage and negotiate with a defaulting consumer before being granted a court order to sell the consumer’s house in execution. According to the Supreme Court judgment, in 2009 Mr M bought a house with the aid of a home loan of R432 000 from FNB. The loan was to be paid back over 20 years, and the initial monthly payment was R3 337. In 2015, Mr M fell into arrears with his repayments. FNB sent him a letter, which was hand delivered on July 6, 2015, informing him that he was almost R13 000 in arrears and therefore in breach of the loan agreement. Mr M did not respond to the letter. Subsequently, on July 23, 2015, the bank sent a notice in terms of section 129 of the National Credit Act. Section 129 of the Act sets out a number of requirements for how credit providers must deal with defaulting debtors. It reads: “If the consumer is in default under a credit agreement, the credit provider … may draw the default to the notice of the consumer in writing and propose that the consumer refers the credit agreement to a debt counsellor, alternative dispute resolution agent, consumer court or ombud with jurisdiction, with the intent that the parties resolve any dispute under the agreement or develop and agree on a plan to bring the payments under the agreement up to date.” According to the judgment, Mr M still did not respond or communicate in any way with the bank. As a result, in August 2015, FNB sued Mr M in the Gauteng High Court for the total remaining amount of R262 331. In addition, the bank sought an order declaring Mr M’s property executable. The summons was served on Mr M’s wife, with the return of service reflecting that Mr M was “temporarily absent”. Mr M did not defend the action, so the bank app**** for a default judgment. The matter was heard by the High Court on October 8, 2015. The decision by the court was to postpone the hearing for six months, in which period FNB was to attempt to engage with Mr M to prevent foreclosure. The bank was directed to provide an affidavit detailing these efforts to enable Mr M to keep his home at the rescheduled hearing. The court noted that the summons was not served personally on Mr M, as required by the High Court, and the amount by which Mr M was in arrears was relatively low and had not been outstanding for a very long period. FNB took the case on appeal to the Supreme Court. Judge Jeremiah Shongwe ruled that the High Court’s decision to postpone the case was not appealable, because it was not a final judgment. The appeal was struck off the roll.