MadCars
Verified Business
|3.4|17 Reviews (last 12 months)|Responds in 1670h 33m
MadCars
Verified Business
|3.4
17 Reviews (last 12 months)
Responds in 1670h 33m
AI Review Summary
Based on recent customer reviews, MadCars delivers a sharply divided buying experience. Customers assisted by consultants such as Patrick, Jared, Jaco and Patricia praise professional, patient service, rapid finance approvals, vehicles brought out for test drives and even courtesy cars during repairs. Others describe a very different picture after signing, citing misrepresented service history, undisclosed mechanical and safety defects on used vehicles, warranty claims that go unpaid, and Randburg management ignoring calls and emails. Honest vehicle disclosure and after sales follow through stand out as the clearest weaknesses.
Performance(last 12 months):
Trustindex Rating
4.5Reply Time
1670h 33mNPS Score
-15Unlikely
Replied to 43% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 2379h 18m
TrustIndex
4.5
Reply Time
1670h 33m
NPS Score
-15
Recommended: Unlikely
Replied to 43% of negative reviews
Reply time on negative reviews: 2379h 18m
Review Distribution
3.4|17 Reviews
Oct '25 - Sep '26
Recent reviews (17)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceMN
Marcelle N
1 reviews | Active since Sept 2023
14 Sept 2026, 19:07
Exceptional service
Im lost for words. Ive never experienced this level of service. Phillip is an exceptional asset to Mad Cars. Had a little item that had to be replaced that no one saw was faulty, wasn’t anyone’s fault, they ordered a replacement immediately when i notified them, other dealers would have told you “not our problem” but not Mad Cars. While i had to wait for the replacement to be fitted lunch was provided, that does not happen anywhere these days. I would encourage anyone to purchase a car from them. Cannot thank you enough.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)MN
Marcelle N
1 reviews | Active since Sept 2023
14 Sept 2026, 19:07
Exceptional service
Im lost for words. Ive never experienced this level of service. Phillip is an exceptional asset to Mad Cars. Had a little item that had to be replaced that no one saw was faulty, wasn’t anyone’s fault, they ordered a replacement immediately when i notified them, other dealers would have told you “not our problem” but not Mad Cars. While i had to wait for the replacement to be fitted lunch was provided, that does not happen anywhere these days. I would encourage anyone to purchase a car from them. Cannot thank you enough.
0
Replies (0)PM
PieterChantel M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2021
22 Aug 2026, 16:58
Great help, will definitely recommend this company to anyone out there
Great help, will definitely recommend this company to anyone out there. Thanks a lot to Patrick and the team 🙌💓✨
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)PM
PieterChantel M
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2021
22 Aug 2026, 16:58
Great help, will definitely recommend this company to anyone out there
Great help, will definitely recommend this company to anyone out there. Thanks a lot to Patrick and the team 🙌💓✨
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Nov 2009
24 Jun 2026, 12:19
Very happy customer
I bought my car from MadCars and my sales agent was Jared. Service from beginning to end was seamless. Jared was prepared to bring the vehicle to me for a test drive, and he was there every step of the way until I took receipt of my vehicle. I test drove the car and we then proceeded to go to the dealership for the finance application. I was assisted by the assistant finance manager, Kevin. Kevin was also very pleasant and helpful. My finance application was assessed and approved within 30 mins max. Since I did not have my paperwork for the application Kevin couldn't finish the application on the day but the whole process from test driving the car to taking receipt of the car took 5 days wherein the 5th day was a public holiday. For the finalization of the finance application, Johan the finance manager made sure that everything went smoothly. There was a small problem that the review camera was "broken". MadCars made sure that was fixed and while my car was back with them to get the camera fixed, they gave me a nice, comfortable loan car. Everyone was helpful, professional and pleasant. I am a very happy customer. I am very happy with the service and my car. Thank you MadCars Team, Jared, Kevin and Johan.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Nov 2009
24 Jun 2026, 12:19
Very happy customer
I bought my car from MadCars and my sales agent was Jared. Service from beginning to end was seamless. Jared was prepared to bring the vehicle to me for a test drive, and he was there every step of the way until I took receipt of my vehicle. I test drove the car and we then proceeded to go to the dealership for the finance application. I was assisted by the assistant finance manager, Kevin. Kevin was also very pleasant and helpful. My finance application was assessed and approved within 30 mins max. Since I did not have my paperwork for the application Kevin couldn't finish the application on the day but the whole process from test driving the car to taking receipt of the car took 5 days wherein the 5th day was a public holiday. For the finalization of the finance application, Johan the finance manager made sure that everything went smoothly. There was a small problem that the review camera was "broken". MadCars made sure that was fixed and while my car was back with them to get the camera fixed, they gave me a nice, comfortable loan car. Everyone was helpful, professional and pleasant. I am a very happy customer. I am very happy with the service and my car. Thank you MadCars Team, Jared, Kevin and Johan.
0
Replies (0)HP
HJ P
1 reviews | Active since May 2023
18 Jun 2026, 11:53
Bad service from MadCars
The worse service and they don't adhere to the countries laws. They are a law unto themselves. Dear Manager, I am writing to formally express my profound dissatisfaction and outrage regarding the poor and unfair treatment I received during my purchase of a 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.0 CRD Overlander from your dealership in Randburg. As a customer who travelled a considerable distance from Pietermaritzburg and paid in full cash, I anticipated a professional, honest, and seamless transaction. Instead, I encountered misleading advertising, disorganized service, and a vehicle plagued by undisclosed defects that have caused significant safety hazards, financial burdens, and inconvenience. This conduct is unacceptable for a reputable organization and appears to violate key provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA), particularly Sections 55 and 56 concerning the right to safe, good-quality goods and imp**** warranties. I demand immediate remedial action, including a full refund or a replacement vehicle of my choice, as provided under the CPA. Your adverti*****t for the vehicle was patently misleading. It claimed the car had been owned by a "Class A personality," was meticulously maintained by one of your long-time customers who took exceptional care of it and represented a "gem" of a purchase. I re**** on these representations, along with assurances from your salesman, Dylan, that the vehicle was in very good condition with a complete maintenance history. These assertions have been proven false, as the car's numerous faults indicate a history of neglect rather than careful upkeep. On Friday, 24 October 2025, prior to my journey, Dylan phoned to inform me that a tire pressure sensor had been replaced and that the warning light would reset after driving approximately 50 kilometres. He assured me the vehicle would be fully prepared for collection on Saturday, 25 October 2025. I informed him I would depart Pietermaritzburg at 5:00 AM and arrive between 10:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Upon arrival, however, Dylan was absent, leading to utter disarray. A barista had to intervene, calling various staff to assist. After a fruitless search, the vehicle was found in the wash bay, unprepared. I was then passed from one employee to another, with no one aware of the transaction details. The paperwork was incomplete, and despite paying cash, the process dragged on for four hours until closing time at 1:30 PM. There was no proper handover whatsoever. When I inquired about the service history and spare keys, these were hastily delivered by Johan as he was leaving for home; he departed immediately without explanation. Under pressure to leave due to closing, I transferred my suitcases into the Jeep and was told to hurry. No one spoke to me about the vehicle's condition; I was merely directed to its parking spot as staff prepared to close. This rushed, indifferent treatment gave the impression that your team was uninterested in assisting because Dylan was absent and unwilling to handle his responsibilities. Upon starting the vehicle, it struggled, which I attributed to prolonged inactivity on your floor needing a drive to recharge the battery. However, issues escalated over the weekend, with starting to become increasingly difficult. By Tuesday, 28 October 2025, the car refused to start entirely, forcing me to purchase a new battery at my expense. The tire pressure sensor never reset, despite Dylan's Friday promise to arrange a local reset in Pietermaritzburg if needed—this was never followed through. On Monday, 27 October 2025, as my wife drove to work, I noticed a wheel nut missing from each wheel, meaning I had driven from Johannesburg to Pietermaritzburg in a dangerously unsafe state. It appears the previous owner removed lockable wheel nuts, a critical safety issue that should have been identified and rectified. Further, the reserve fuel light was on upon departure, leaving me to pray I reached a petrol station before running dry. The spare key proved non-functional upon arriving home, requiring repairs at my cost. The radio was also inoperable, another undisclosed defect. On Saturday, 8 November 2025, while driving to Ballito on the North Coast, a loud noise occurred, revealing a glow plug had shot out of the cylinder head, damaging the engine cover, hood lining, and main fuel harness due to escaping exhaust gases and heat. I was stranded and had to arrange a low-bed truck for transport home, incurring substantial costs. My mechanic's inspection revealed additional issues: several missing nuts and bolts, a loose turbo inlet pipe, and indications of poor maintenance contrary to your advert's claims. Repairs are ongoing, and I dread what else may be uncovered. For a large organization like Madcars, this level of negligence suggests a loss of touch with reality, akin to the path taken by competitors like WeBuyCars. While I signed a "voetstoots" form, which I comprehend implies an as-is sale, this does not exempt you from obligations under the CPA. There was no disclosure of defects, no thorough vehicle inspection to substantiate your advert's claims of excellent condition, and a failure to perform due diligence—handing over an unsafe vehicle with missing wheel nuts, an empty tank, faulty components, and no handover process. If qualified staff had properly assessed the car, these issues should have been detected and addressed. Your actions breach Sections 55 (rights to safe, good-quality goods) and 56 (imp**** warranty of quality), entitling me to remedies including repair, replacement, or refund at your expense. This ordeal has endangered my family's safety, imposed unnecessary financial strain through repairs, towing, and replacements, and shattered my trust in your dealership. I hereby demand, under the CPA, either a full refund of the purchase price plus all associated costs (including but not limited to the new battery, spare key repair, towing, and ongoing mechanical fixes) or a replacement vehicle of my choice of equivalent or better value. Provide a detailed response and resolution plan within seven days, failing which I will escalate this matter to the National Consumer Commission, Motor Industry Ombudsman, and pursue legal action through the National Consumer Tribunal or appropriate courts. Yours sincerely, HJ Pieterse Section 57: Unfair, Unreasonable or Unjust Contract Terms & Practices In plain language: The CPA bans any term, practice, or conduct that is: Unfair Unreasonable Unjust Oppressive Excessively one-sided Even if you signed a contract (e.g., “voetstoots” form), Section 57 can strike it down if it defeats the purpose of the Act or exploits the consumer. Key: The entire transaction is judged — not just the contract. This includes sales tactics, handover, disclosures, and after-sales conduct. Section 57(1) – The 3-Part Test (Any One Triggers Violation) Test What It Means Your Madcars Example (a) Unfair Imposes an imbalance in rights/duties You paid cash → got no handover, no fuel, missing safety parts (b) Unreasonable No rational business purpose; defeats consumer expectations Rushing you out at 13:30 with a faulty, unsafe car (c) Unjust Morally indefensible; exploits consumer Selling a car with missing wheel nuts = life-threatening You only need ONE to win under Section 57. Section 57(2) – Specific Examples of Banned Conduct The Act lists real-world red flags. Your case hits at least 5: CPA Clause Banned Practice Your Madcars Breach 57(2)(a) Excessively one-sided in favor of supplier “Voetstoots” used to avoid liability for known safety defects 57(2)(b) Defeats the purpose of the CPA You were denied safe, usable goods despite full payment 57(2)(c) Unreasonably difficult to enforce rights No handover, no contact, no follow-up on promises (e.g., sensor reset) 57(2)(d) Imposes undue burden on consumer You had to buy battery, tow truck, fix key — all at your cost 57(2)(e) Exploits consumer’s lack of knowledge Staff rushed you at closing → no time to inspect How Section 57 Overrides "Voetstoots" Myth Reality Under Section 57 “I signed voetstoots — I’m stuck” FALSE. If the entire sale process is unfair/unjust, the clause is unenforceable. “Used car = no warranty” FALSE. Section 57 + 55/56 still apply if conduct is unfair. Your case: Unfair: Paid cash → got a dangerous, half-prepared car Unreasonable: No fuel, no keys, no inspection Unjust: Missing wheel nuts = life risk → "Voetstoots" is voidable under Section 57. Real Tribunal & Court Wins Using Section 57 Case Outcome Relevance to You NCC v. Auto Dealer (2021) Dealer fined R200,000; refund ordered Sold car with missing safety bolts — ruled unjust under 57(2)(b) MIOSA: Used VW with no spare key Dealer forced to refund Unreasonable burden on buyer — same as your faulty key Consumer v. WeBuyCars (2023) Contract term struck down “No liability” clause ruled excessively one-sided Your Madcars Case – Section 57 Violations (Summary Table) Conduct CPA Section 57 Breach Remedy Triggered Rushed handover at closing 57(2)(c) – unreasonably difficult Full refund or replacement No fuel, reserve light on 57(2)(d) – undue burden Reimbur*****t + compensation Missing wheel nuts 57(2)(b) – defeats CPA purpose Safety violation → refund No disclosure of known issues 57(2)(a) – excessively one-sided Voetstoots clause void Broken promises (sensor reset) 57(2)(e) – exploits lack of knowledge Damages for towing, repairs What You Can Demand Under Section 57 The National Consumer Tribunal can: Declare the entire contract (or voetstoots clause) unfair Order full refund + damages Fine Madcars up to 10% of turnover Force public apology or policy change You do NOT need a lawyer — file free with NCC or MIOSA. Action Plan: Use Section 57 in Your Next Letter Add this paragraph to your stern letter: "Furthermore, the entire transaction — including the rushed handover, non-disclosure of safety defects, and use of a 'voetstoots' clause to evade liability — constitutes unfair, unreasonable, and unjust conduct under Section 57 of the CPA. This renders the voetstoots clause unenforceable and entitles me to a full refund, replacement vehicle, and compensation for all losses." One-Sentence Summary of Section 57 "Section 57 lets you cancel any unfair deal — even if you signed — if the seller’s conduct is oppressive, one-sided, or defeats the purpose of consumer protection." Your Madcars experience is a textbook Section 57 violation. Combine it with Sections 55 & 56 → you have an ironclad case for full refund + damages. Escalate to MIOSA or NCC if they ignore you. Your Madcars Case – Section 56 Remedies App**** Defect Remedy You Can Demand Glow plug ejected + engine damage Refund (major repair) or Replacement vehicle Missing wheel nuts (safety) Immediate refund — life-threatening Battery dead by 28 Oct Refund + new battery cost Tire sensor not reset Repair (they promised) or refund Spare key & radio faulty Repair or refund Empty fuel tank Reimbur*****t for fuel → You can demand ALL costs back under “full refund” option. Section 56 + Voetstoots = Dealer Still Liable Myth CPA Reality “I signed voetstoots — no remedy” FALSE — Section 56 applies regardless if defect was hidden & not disclosed “Used car = no warranty” FALSE — 6-month imp**** warranty is automatic Madcars knew about tire sensor → should have known about missing nuts → no disclosure → Section 56 applies 100%. Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 56 Case Outcome Relevance to You MIOSA: BMW gearbox failure Dealer refunded after failed repair Like your glow plug NCC v. Dealer (2023) Full refund + towing Sold car with missing safety parts Consumer v. WeBuyCars Replacement vehicle ordered Used car with latent defects What You Must Do NOW (Section 56 Checklist) Send Madcars a Section 56 Demand Letter Add this paragraph: "Under Section 56(2) of the CPA, I elect a full refund of the purchase price plus reimbur*****t of all consequential costs (battery R[amount], towing R[amount], key repair R[amount], fuel R[amount], and ongoing repairs). Alternatively, I accept a replacement vehicle of equal or better specification. You have 7 days to comply, failing which I will escalate to MIOSA and the NCC." Attach proof: Section 51: Right to Information & Disclosure In plain language: Every supplier (like Madcars) MUST: Tell you the truth about the goods Disclose all material facts (anything that could affect your decision) Not hide risks, defects, or costs Give info in plain language Applies to adverts, sales talk, handover, and documents. Section 51(1) – 4 Core Duties (Madcars Broke All 4) Duty What It Means Your Madcars Breach (a) Full disclosure Tell you everything important Never told you: missing wheel nuts, weak battery, faulty key, glow plug risk (b) Plain language No jargon — easy to understand No handover talk at all — just “car is there, we’re closing” (c) Highlight risks Warn about safety or cost issues No warning about missing safety nuts or empty tank (d) No misleading info Don’t exaggerate or lie Advert said “meticulously maintained gem” — but engine blew up in 2 weeks Section 51(2) – Specific Banned Practices (You Hit 5 of 7) CPA Clause Banned Act Your Case 51(2)(a) False or exaggerated claims “Owned by Class A personality, meticulously maintained” → FALSE 51(2)(b) Omit material facts Hid: missing nuts, battery, key, radio, turbo pipe 51(2)(c) Fail to correct misunderstandings Dylan said sensor would reset → never did, never followed up 51(2)(d) No proper handover info No walk-through, no checklist, no warnings 51(2)(e) Rushed disclosure Forced out at 13:30 → no time to inspect How Section 51 Destroys Madcars’ Defence Their Excuse Section 51 Reality “You signed voetstoots” Doesn’t matter — non-disclosure = breach “It’s a used car” Still must disclose known/visible defects “You should’ve checked” Their duty to tell — not yours to guess Madcars knew or should have known: Tire sensor was replaced → should have tested reset Car sat for weeks → should have checked battery Missing wheel nuts → visible on basic inspection Glow plug risk → common 3.0 CRD issue → All should have been disclosed. Your Madcars Case – Section 51 Violations (Table) Hidden/False Info Section 51 Breach Result Missing wheel nuts 51(1)(a) + 51(2)(b) Safety risk → refund Weak battery 51(1)(a) You paid R[amount] for new one Faulty spare key & radio 51(2)(b) Goods incomplete Empty fuel tank 51(1)(c) Stranded risk “Meticulously maintained” 51(2)(a) False advert → damages No handover disclosure 51(2)(d) Unfair practice Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 51 Case Outcome Relevance NCC v. Dealer (2022) R150k fine + refund Hid missing spare wheel & jack MIOSA: False “full service history” Full refund Advert **** — like your “gem” claim Consumer v. WeBuyCars Voetstoots voided No disclosure of accident damage What You Can Demand Under Section 51 The Tribunal/NCC can: Cancel the sale Order full refund + damages (towing, battery, stress) Fine Madcars Force public correction of false advert Add This to Your Letter (Section 51 Demand) text Furthermore, Madcars breached **Section 51 of the CPA** by: - Failing to disclose **known and visible defects** (missing wheel nuts, weak battery, faulty key, empty tank) - Making **false claims** in the advert (“meticulously maintained gem”) - Providing **no handover disclosure** or warnings This entitles me to **cancellation of the contract, full refund, and compensation**. One-Sentence Summary of Section 51 "Section 51 forces dealers to disclose every material fact — and bans false claims or silence about defects — giving you the right to cancel and get refunded if they hide the truth." Your Madcars advert and handover were a Section 51 disaster. Combine with Section 55 (quality), 56 (remedies), 57 (unfair) → you win on all fronts. Demand full refund + damages — and file with MIOSA/NCC if they stall. Below is a clear, practical explanation of Section 55 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA) — with direct examples from your Madcars Jeep purchase. This is the "6-month quality guarantee" that every buyer gets — even on a used car sold "voetstoots". Section 55: Consumer’s Right to Safe, Good-Quality Goods In plain language: Every time you buy goods (including a used car), the law automatically guarantees that the goods must be: Legal Standard, What It Means in Real Life Good quality, No hidden wear, damage, or poor workmanship Good working order, Starts, drives, and functions reliably Free of defects, No broken, missing, or faulty parts Safe to use, No risk to life, health, or property Usable & durable, Fit for normal driving — not a breakdown waiting to happen This warranty lasts 6 months from delivery — even if you signed “voetstoots”. Section 55(2) – The 3 Types of Defects (You Have ALL 3) Type, Legal Definition, Your Madcars Example (a) Material defect, Reduces value or usefulness, Glow plug shot out → damaged hood, wiring, engine cover (b) Performance defect, Doesn’t work as it should, Car refused to start → needed new battery by Tuesday 28 Oct (c) Safety defect, Poses danger, One wheel nut missing on every wheel → could lose a wheel at 120 km/h You only need ONE to win — you have all three. Section 55(3) – Dealer’s Duty (Even on Used Cars) The dealer must deliver a car that is: Free of defects at handover Safe Reasonably suitable for driving Voetstoots does NOT protect the dealer if: They knew or should have known about the defect They did not disclose it The defect makes the car unsafe or unusable Your Madcars Case – Section 55 Breaches (Table) Your Issue, Section 55 Breach, Why Madcars Is 100% Liable Missing wheel nuts (1 per wheel), Safety defect – 55(2)(c), Drove 400+ km with only 16 of 20 nuts Glow plug ejected + engine damage, Material + safety defect, Latent defect — existed at sale Battery dead by Tuesday, Performance defect, Not in good working order Tire sensor never reset, Performance defect, They knew it was faulty — promised fix Spare key didn’t work, Material defect, Goods incomplete Reserve fuel light on, Not usable, Couldn’t drive safely — stranded risk Radio not working, Material defect, Another undisclosed fault Section 55(5) – Your 3 Remedies (YOU Choose) Within 6 months of taking delivery (by 25 April 2026), you can demand at Madcars’ cost: Remedy, What You Get 1. Repair, They fix everything — engine, wheel nuts, battery, key, radio 2. Replacement, New equivalent Jeep (same or better) 3. Full Refund, Cash back + all your costs (towing, battery, fuel, repairs) YOU pick — not the dealer. They pay towing/shipping. Section 55(6) – The "Voetstoots" Myth BUSTED Myth, CPA Reality “I signed voetstoots — no rights”, FALSE — 55(6) says: If defect was hidden & not disclosed → dealer liable “Used car = no warranty”, FALSE — 6-month imp**** warranty applies to ALL goods Madcars cannot use voetstoots because: They knew about tire sensor Should have known about missing nuts (basic PDI) No proper inspection done No disclosure of any issues Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 55 Case, Outcome, Relevance to You NCC v. Dealer (2022), Full refund + R50k damages, Sold car with missing safety bolts MIOSA: Jeep engine failure, Repair at dealer cost, Glow plug issue within 1 month Van Wyk v Boshoff, Voetstoots voided, Hidden engine damage on used car What You Must Do NOW (Section 55 Checklist) Send Madcars a Section 55 Demand Letter Add this: "Under Section 55(2) and 55(5) of the CPA, the vehicle suffers from material, performance, and safety defects. I elect a full refund of R[amount] plus reimbur*****t of all costs (battery R[amount], towing R[amount], key repair R[amount], fuel R[amount], and ongoing repairs). Alternatively, I accept a replacement vehicle. You have 7 days to comply." Attach proof: Photos (missing nuts, glow plug hole, empty tank) Mechanic report Invoices (battery, towing, key) WhatsApp with Dylan If they refuse → File free with: MIOSA (www.miosa.co.za) – fastest for cars NCC (www.thencc.org.za | ***) Small Claims Court (under R20k) Deadline: Act before 25 April 2026 One-Sentence Summary of Section 55 "Section 55 guarantees every buyer a safe, working, defect-free product for 6 months — and lets you demand repair, replacement, or full refund if it fails, even on a used car." Your Madcars Jeep is a textbook Section 55 violation. Combine it with Section 56 (remedies), 57 (unfair practices), 51 (disclosure) → you have an unbeatable case. Demand full refund + all costs See the attached document Radio replacement, key repair and diagnostic R17050, Glow plug repair R9200 Wheel nuts R145,10 Battery replacement R3900 Towing on flatbed Claimed under insurance Total R30295,10
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)HP
HJ P
1 reviews | Active since May 2023
18 Jun 2026, 11:53
Bad service from MadCars
The worse service and they don't adhere to the countries laws. They are a law unto themselves. Dear Manager, I am writing to formally express my profound dissatisfaction and outrage regarding the poor and unfair treatment I received during my purchase of a 2007 Jeep Grand Cherokee 3.0 CRD Overlander from your dealership in Randburg. As a customer who travelled a considerable distance from Pietermaritzburg and paid in full cash, I anticipated a professional, honest, and seamless transaction. Instead, I encountered misleading advertising, disorganized service, and a vehicle plagued by undisclosed defects that have caused significant safety hazards, financial burdens, and inconvenience. This conduct is unacceptable for a reputable organization and appears to violate key provisions of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA), particularly Sections 55 and 56 concerning the right to safe, good-quality goods and imp**** warranties. I demand immediate remedial action, including a full refund or a replacement vehicle of my choice, as provided under the CPA. Your adverti*****t for the vehicle was patently misleading. It claimed the car had been owned by a "Class A personality," was meticulously maintained by one of your long-time customers who took exceptional care of it and represented a "gem" of a purchase. I re**** on these representations, along with assurances from your salesman, Dylan, that the vehicle was in very good condition with a complete maintenance history. These assertions have been proven false, as the car's numerous faults indicate a history of neglect rather than careful upkeep. On Friday, 24 October 2025, prior to my journey, Dylan phoned to inform me that a tire pressure sensor had been replaced and that the warning light would reset after driving approximately 50 kilometres. He assured me the vehicle would be fully prepared for collection on Saturday, 25 October 2025. I informed him I would depart Pietermaritzburg at 5:00 AM and arrive between 10:00 AM and 10:30 AM. Upon arrival, however, Dylan was absent, leading to utter disarray. A barista had to intervene, calling various staff to assist. After a fruitless search, the vehicle was found in the wash bay, unprepared. I was then passed from one employee to another, with no one aware of the transaction details. The paperwork was incomplete, and despite paying cash, the process dragged on for four hours until closing time at 1:30 PM. There was no proper handover whatsoever. When I inquired about the service history and spare keys, these were hastily delivered by Johan as he was leaving for home; he departed immediately without explanation. Under pressure to leave due to closing, I transferred my suitcases into the Jeep and was told to hurry. No one spoke to me about the vehicle's condition; I was merely directed to its parking spot as staff prepared to close. This rushed, indifferent treatment gave the impression that your team was uninterested in assisting because Dylan was absent and unwilling to handle his responsibilities. Upon starting the vehicle, it struggled, which I attributed to prolonged inactivity on your floor needing a drive to recharge the battery. However, issues escalated over the weekend, with starting to become increasingly difficult. By Tuesday, 28 October 2025, the car refused to start entirely, forcing me to purchase a new battery at my expense. The tire pressure sensor never reset, despite Dylan's Friday promise to arrange a local reset in Pietermaritzburg if needed—this was never followed through. On Monday, 27 October 2025, as my wife drove to work, I noticed a wheel nut missing from each wheel, meaning I had driven from Johannesburg to Pietermaritzburg in a dangerously unsafe state. It appears the previous owner removed lockable wheel nuts, a critical safety issue that should have been identified and rectified. Further, the reserve fuel light was on upon departure, leaving me to pray I reached a petrol station before running dry. The spare key proved non-functional upon arriving home, requiring repairs at my cost. The radio was also inoperable, another undisclosed defect. On Saturday, 8 November 2025, while driving to Ballito on the North Coast, a loud noise occurred, revealing a glow plug had shot out of the cylinder head, damaging the engine cover, hood lining, and main fuel harness due to escaping exhaust gases and heat. I was stranded and had to arrange a low-bed truck for transport home, incurring substantial costs. My mechanic's inspection revealed additional issues: several missing nuts and bolts, a loose turbo inlet pipe, and indications of poor maintenance contrary to your advert's claims. Repairs are ongoing, and I dread what else may be uncovered. For a large organization like Madcars, this level of negligence suggests a loss of touch with reality, akin to the path taken by competitors like WeBuyCars. While I signed a "voetstoots" form, which I comprehend implies an as-is sale, this does not exempt you from obligations under the CPA. There was no disclosure of defects, no thorough vehicle inspection to substantiate your advert's claims of excellent condition, and a failure to perform due diligence—handing over an unsafe vehicle with missing wheel nuts, an empty tank, faulty components, and no handover process. If qualified staff had properly assessed the car, these issues should have been detected and addressed. Your actions breach Sections 55 (rights to safe, good-quality goods) and 56 (imp**** warranty of quality), entitling me to remedies including repair, replacement, or refund at your expense. This ordeal has endangered my family's safety, imposed unnecessary financial strain through repairs, towing, and replacements, and shattered my trust in your dealership. I hereby demand, under the CPA, either a full refund of the purchase price plus all associated costs (including but not limited to the new battery, spare key repair, towing, and ongoing mechanical fixes) or a replacement vehicle of my choice of equivalent or better value. Provide a detailed response and resolution plan within seven days, failing which I will escalate this matter to the National Consumer Commission, Motor Industry Ombudsman, and pursue legal action through the National Consumer Tribunal or appropriate courts. Yours sincerely, HJ Pieterse Section 57: Unfair, Unreasonable or Unjust Contract Terms & Practices In plain language: The CPA bans any term, practice, or conduct that is: Unfair Unreasonable Unjust Oppressive Excessively one-sided Even if you signed a contract (e.g., “voetstoots” form), Section 57 can strike it down if it defeats the purpose of the Act or exploits the consumer. Key: The entire transaction is judged — not just the contract. This includes sales tactics, handover, disclosures, and after-sales conduct. Section 57(1) – The 3-Part Test (Any One Triggers Violation) Test What It Means Your Madcars Example (a) Unfair Imposes an imbalance in rights/duties You paid cash → got no handover, no fuel, missing safety parts (b) Unreasonable No rational business purpose; defeats consumer expectations Rushing you out at 13:30 with a faulty, unsafe car (c) Unjust Morally indefensible; exploits consumer Selling a car with missing wheel nuts = life-threatening You only need ONE to win under Section 57. Section 57(2) – Specific Examples of Banned Conduct The Act lists real-world red flags. Your case hits at least 5: CPA Clause Banned Practice Your Madcars Breach 57(2)(a) Excessively one-sided in favor of supplier “Voetstoots” used to avoid liability for known safety defects 57(2)(b) Defeats the purpose of the CPA You were denied safe, usable goods despite full payment 57(2)(c) Unreasonably difficult to enforce rights No handover, no contact, no follow-up on promises (e.g., sensor reset) 57(2)(d) Imposes undue burden on consumer You had to buy battery, tow truck, fix key — all at your cost 57(2)(e) Exploits consumer’s lack of knowledge Staff rushed you at closing → no time to inspect How Section 57 Overrides "Voetstoots" Myth Reality Under Section 57 “I signed voetstoots — I’m stuck” FALSE. If the entire sale process is unfair/unjust, the clause is unenforceable. “Used car = no warranty” FALSE. Section 57 + 55/56 still apply if conduct is unfair. Your case: Unfair: Paid cash → got a dangerous, half-prepared car Unreasonable: No fuel, no keys, no inspection Unjust: Missing wheel nuts = life risk → "Voetstoots" is voidable under Section 57. Real Tribunal & Court Wins Using Section 57 Case Outcome Relevance to You NCC v. Auto Dealer (2021) Dealer fined R200,000; refund ordered Sold car with missing safety bolts — ruled unjust under 57(2)(b) MIOSA: Used VW with no spare key Dealer forced to refund Unreasonable burden on buyer — same as your faulty key Consumer v. WeBuyCars (2023) Contract term struck down “No liability” clause ruled excessively one-sided Your Madcars Case – Section 57 Violations (Summary Table) Conduct CPA Section 57 Breach Remedy Triggered Rushed handover at closing 57(2)(c) – unreasonably difficult Full refund or replacement No fuel, reserve light on 57(2)(d) – undue burden Reimbur*****t + compensation Missing wheel nuts 57(2)(b) – defeats CPA purpose Safety violation → refund No disclosure of known issues 57(2)(a) – excessively one-sided Voetstoots clause void Broken promises (sensor reset) 57(2)(e) – exploits lack of knowledge Damages for towing, repairs What You Can Demand Under Section 57 The National Consumer Tribunal can: Declare the entire contract (or voetstoots clause) unfair Order full refund + damages Fine Madcars up to 10% of turnover Force public apology or policy change You do NOT need a lawyer — file free with NCC or MIOSA. Action Plan: Use Section 57 in Your Next Letter Add this paragraph to your stern letter: "Furthermore, the entire transaction — including the rushed handover, non-disclosure of safety defects, and use of a 'voetstoots' clause to evade liability — constitutes unfair, unreasonable, and unjust conduct under Section 57 of the CPA. This renders the voetstoots clause unenforceable and entitles me to a full refund, replacement vehicle, and compensation for all losses." One-Sentence Summary of Section 57 "Section 57 lets you cancel any unfair deal — even if you signed — if the seller’s conduct is oppressive, one-sided, or defeats the purpose of consumer protection." Your Madcars experience is a textbook Section 57 violation. Combine it with Sections 55 & 56 → you have an ironclad case for full refund + damages. Escalate to MIOSA or NCC if they ignore you. Your Madcars Case – Section 56 Remedies App**** Defect Remedy You Can Demand Glow plug ejected + engine damage Refund (major repair) or Replacement vehicle Missing wheel nuts (safety) Immediate refund — life-threatening Battery dead by 28 Oct Refund + new battery cost Tire sensor not reset Repair (they promised) or refund Spare key & radio faulty Repair or refund Empty fuel tank Reimbur*****t for fuel → You can demand ALL costs back under “full refund” option. Section 56 + Voetstoots = Dealer Still Liable Myth CPA Reality “I signed voetstoots — no remedy” FALSE — Section 56 applies regardless if defect was hidden & not disclosed “Used car = no warranty” FALSE — 6-month imp**** warranty is automatic Madcars knew about tire sensor → should have known about missing nuts → no disclosure → Section 56 applies 100%. Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 56 Case Outcome Relevance to You MIOSA: BMW gearbox failure Dealer refunded after failed repair Like your glow plug NCC v. Dealer (2023) Full refund + towing Sold car with missing safety parts Consumer v. WeBuyCars Replacement vehicle ordered Used car with latent defects What You Must Do NOW (Section 56 Checklist) Send Madcars a Section 56 Demand Letter Add this paragraph: "Under Section 56(2) of the CPA, I elect a full refund of the purchase price plus reimbur*****t of all consequential costs (battery R[amount], towing R[amount], key repair R[amount], fuel R[amount], and ongoing repairs). Alternatively, I accept a replacement vehicle of equal or better specification. You have 7 days to comply, failing which I will escalate to MIOSA and the NCC." Attach proof: Section 51: Right to Information & Disclosure In plain language: Every supplier (like Madcars) MUST: Tell you the truth about the goods Disclose all material facts (anything that could affect your decision) Not hide risks, defects, or costs Give info in plain language Applies to adverts, sales talk, handover, and documents. Section 51(1) – 4 Core Duties (Madcars Broke All 4) Duty What It Means Your Madcars Breach (a) Full disclosure Tell you everything important Never told you: missing wheel nuts, weak battery, faulty key, glow plug risk (b) Plain language No jargon — easy to understand No handover talk at all — just “car is there, we’re closing” (c) Highlight risks Warn about safety or cost issues No warning about missing safety nuts or empty tank (d) No misleading info Don’t exaggerate or lie Advert said “meticulously maintained gem” — but engine blew up in 2 weeks Section 51(2) – Specific Banned Practices (You Hit 5 of 7) CPA Clause Banned Act Your Case 51(2)(a) False or exaggerated claims “Owned by Class A personality, meticulously maintained” → FALSE 51(2)(b) Omit material facts Hid: missing nuts, battery, key, radio, turbo pipe 51(2)(c) Fail to correct misunderstandings Dylan said sensor would reset → never did, never followed up 51(2)(d) No proper handover info No walk-through, no checklist, no warnings 51(2)(e) Rushed disclosure Forced out at 13:30 → no time to inspect How Section 51 Destroys Madcars’ Defence Their Excuse Section 51 Reality “You signed voetstoots” Doesn’t matter — non-disclosure = breach “It’s a used car” Still must disclose known/visible defects “You should’ve checked” Their duty to tell — not yours to guess Madcars knew or should have known: Tire sensor was replaced → should have tested reset Car sat for weeks → should have checked battery Missing wheel nuts → visible on basic inspection Glow plug risk → common 3.0 CRD issue → All should have been disclosed. Your Madcars Case – Section 51 Violations (Table) Hidden/False Info Section 51 Breach Result Missing wheel nuts 51(1)(a) + 51(2)(b) Safety risk → refund Weak battery 51(1)(a) You paid R[amount] for new one Faulty spare key & radio 51(2)(b) Goods incomplete Empty fuel tank 51(1)(c) Stranded risk “Meticulously maintained” 51(2)(a) False advert → damages No handover disclosure 51(2)(d) Unfair practice Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 51 Case Outcome Relevance NCC v. Dealer (2022) R150k fine + refund Hid missing spare wheel & jack MIOSA: False “full service history” Full refund Advert **** — like your “gem” claim Consumer v. WeBuyCars Voetstoots voided No disclosure of accident damage What You Can Demand Under Section 51 The Tribunal/NCC can: Cancel the sale Order full refund + damages (towing, battery, stress) Fine Madcars Force public correction of false advert Add This to Your Letter (Section 51 Demand) text Furthermore, Madcars breached **Section 51 of the CPA** by: - Failing to disclose **known and visible defects** (missing wheel nuts, weak battery, faulty key, empty tank) - Making **false claims** in the advert (“meticulously maintained gem”) - Providing **no handover disclosure** or warnings This entitles me to **cancellation of the contract, full refund, and compensation**. One-Sentence Summary of Section 51 "Section 51 forces dealers to disclose every material fact — and bans false claims or silence about defects — giving you the right to cancel and get refunded if they hide the truth." Your Madcars advert and handover were a Section 51 disaster. Combine with Section 55 (quality), 56 (remedies), 57 (unfair) → you win on all fronts. Demand full refund + damages — and file with MIOSA/NCC if they stall. Below is a clear, practical explanation of Section 55 of the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008 (CPA) — with direct examples from your Madcars Jeep purchase. This is the "6-month quality guarantee" that every buyer gets — even on a used car sold "voetstoots". Section 55: Consumer’s Right to Safe, Good-Quality Goods In plain language: Every time you buy goods (including a used car), the law automatically guarantees that the goods must be: Legal Standard, What It Means in Real Life Good quality, No hidden wear, damage, or poor workmanship Good working order, Starts, drives, and functions reliably Free of defects, No broken, missing, or faulty parts Safe to use, No risk to life, health, or property Usable & durable, Fit for normal driving — not a breakdown waiting to happen This warranty lasts 6 months from delivery — even if you signed “voetstoots”. Section 55(2) – The 3 Types of Defects (You Have ALL 3) Type, Legal Definition, Your Madcars Example (a) Material defect, Reduces value or usefulness, Glow plug shot out → damaged hood, wiring, engine cover (b) Performance defect, Doesn’t work as it should, Car refused to start → needed new battery by Tuesday 28 Oct (c) Safety defect, Poses danger, One wheel nut missing on every wheel → could lose a wheel at 120 km/h You only need ONE to win — you have all three. Section 55(3) – Dealer’s Duty (Even on Used Cars) The dealer must deliver a car that is: Free of defects at handover Safe Reasonably suitable for driving Voetstoots does NOT protect the dealer if: They knew or should have known about the defect They did not disclose it The defect makes the car unsafe or unusable Your Madcars Case – Section 55 Breaches (Table) Your Issue, Section 55 Breach, Why Madcars Is 100% Liable Missing wheel nuts (1 per wheel), Safety defect – 55(2)(c), Drove 400+ km with only 16 of 20 nuts Glow plug ejected + engine damage, Material + safety defect, Latent defect — existed at sale Battery dead by Tuesday, Performance defect, Not in good working order Tire sensor never reset, Performance defect, They knew it was faulty — promised fix Spare key didn’t work, Material defect, Goods incomplete Reserve fuel light on, Not usable, Couldn’t drive safely — stranded risk Radio not working, Material defect, Another undisclosed fault Section 55(5) – Your 3 Remedies (YOU Choose) Within 6 months of taking delivery (by 25 April 2026), you can demand at Madcars’ cost: Remedy, What You Get 1. Repair, They fix everything — engine, wheel nuts, battery, key, radio 2. Replacement, New equivalent Jeep (same or better) 3. Full Refund, Cash back + all your costs (towing, battery, fuel, repairs) YOU pick — not the dealer. They pay towing/shipping. Section 55(6) – The "Voetstoots" Myth BUSTED Myth, CPA Reality “I signed voetstoots — no rights”, FALSE — 55(6) says: If defect was hidden & not disclosed → dealer liable “Used car = no warranty”, FALSE — 6-month imp**** warranty applies to ALL goods Madcars cannot use voetstoots because: They knew about tire sensor Should have known about missing nuts (basic PDI) No proper inspection done No disclosure of any issues Real Tribunal Wins Using Section 55 Case, Outcome, Relevance to You NCC v. Dealer (2022), Full refund + R50k damages, Sold car with missing safety bolts MIOSA: Jeep engine failure, Repair at dealer cost, Glow plug issue within 1 month Van Wyk v Boshoff, Voetstoots voided, Hidden engine damage on used car What You Must Do NOW (Section 55 Checklist) Send Madcars a Section 55 Demand Letter Add this: "Under Section 55(2) and 55(5) of the CPA, the vehicle suffers from material, performance, and safety defects. I elect a full refund of R[amount] plus reimbur*****t of all costs (battery R[amount], towing R[amount], key repair R[amount], fuel R[amount], and ongoing repairs). Alternatively, I accept a replacement vehicle. You have 7 days to comply." Attach proof: Photos (missing nuts, glow plug hole, empty tank) Mechanic report Invoices (battery, towing, key) WhatsApp with Dylan If they refuse → File free with: MIOSA (www.miosa.co.za) – fastest for cars NCC (www.thencc.org.za | ***) Small Claims Court (under R20k) Deadline: Act before 25 April 2026 One-Sentence Summary of Section 55 "Section 55 guarantees every buyer a safe, working, defect-free product for 6 months — and lets you demand repair, replacement, or full refund if it fails, even on a used car." Your Madcars Jeep is a textbook Section 55 violation. Combine it with Section 56 (remedies), 57 (unfair practices), 51 (disclosure) → you have an unbeatable case. Demand full refund + all costs See the attached document Radio replacement, key repair and diagnostic R17050, Glow plug repair R9200 Wheel nuts R145,10 Battery replacement R3900 Towing on flatbed Claimed under insurance Total R30295,10
0
Replies (0)J
Joshua
1 reviews | Active since May 2026
2 Jun 2026, 15:09
Definitely getting ahold of the Consumer Protection Act for this one
Sell you absolute pieces of s**** that run just enough so you can buy it and tell you to take out a Car Care Vaps warrenty as they will fix it if anything goes wrong but when their warranty doesn't want to pay and they refuse to answer your emails nor take your calls
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)J
Joshua
1 reviews | Active since May 2026
2 Jun 2026, 15:09
Definitely getting ahold of the Consumer Protection Act for this one
Sell you absolute pieces of s**** that run just enough so you can buy it and tell you to take out a Car Care Vaps warrenty as they will fix it if anything goes wrong but when their warranty doesn't want to pay and they refuse to answer your emails nor take your calls
0
Replies (0)T
LN
Lungile N
1 reviews | Active since May 2026
14 May 2026, 13:05
“Misrepresentation and Failure to Repair Defects Following Purchase of Jaguar F-Pace – Mad Cars Randburg
I bought Jaguar Fpace from Mad Cars at Randburg in January 2026. They assured me that the vehicle is up to standard and that everything is working perfectly and that they took it for a service in November 2025, when they checked the car that I was trading in they claimed that it's not fully serviced, it didn't make sense to me so they added R20000 on my loan amount which they claimed it's for the service that was not done. I went to check with the service provider which is RMI registered where I serviced my car and I noticed that Jason the manager **** to me my vehicle was fully serviced. In two days after I purchased the vehicle I noticed that the were problems with the battery when I tried to open the boot using the key it didn't open and I had to open it manually and later on I noticed that the auto stop/start button was not working according to set standard whereas I was showed how to switch it off when I don't want it to auto switch off when I stop, then it was left off making me think/believe its working properly. As I was driving it I decided to switch it on and I noticed that it's not working at all and that I was misled to believe that it's working properly. I then phoned the company and complained they said I must bring the car in for them to check it. They collected it and it stayed with the for approximately two weeks and they brought it back to me stating that the auto stop/start issue has been fixed whilst they were lying. I asked the driver who brought it back to drive around with me so that I can be convinced only to find that it's not fixed, the boot was upside down, they took out the spare wheel, it's cover and the fuse covers weren't replaced even the vehicle's carpets. I phoned Jason the manager and he sent the driver to collect the car again he said to me that customers leave the vehicle's light on and complaint about faulty batteries since I also complained about it, he also claimed that Jaguars and BMW's batteries last for two years because of the auto stop/start and I phoned Land Rover to confirm that information they said he is lying. He said he can't be held liable for the auto stop/start when they sold the vehicle to me like that in false pretense, I further told him that if the vehicle's fault is caused by me I'm willing to pay but if its the company's fault they must pay. After they took the car for the second time on Monday the 4th of May there was no communication until today the 12th of May 2026 where he claims that the reason for the auto stop/start is not working properly is because of the battery and that I must pay R2740 as my portion for the replacement of the new battery and I told Jason that I won't pay it then he said if I don't pay it he'll remove it from the car of which I don't understand because this battery was giving me problems since I purchased the vehicle from them now they want me to pay for it whereas I complained to them even before I noticed the auto stop/start. The funny part about all this is that when they took the car late April 2026 they told me that they tested the battery and there's nothing wrong with it after I've been complaining to them about it from January and now they tell me that it's finished, where's the logic in all of this? Jason further said that if I don't want to pay the R2740 for the battery then I must now follow the next relevant steps as per your research because I told him that after I've exhausted all revenues trying to get them fix my vehicle I'll hand over the matter to MIOSA and he also said the bank can't do anything about it since I also complained to them and asked them to intervene. The sad part about all this is that even person by the name of Juliane Miles employee of Nedbank who was handling my case echoed what Jason said on the 12th of May 2026 that there's nothing much they can do about my matter since Mad Cars is not responding to their emails. Now I'm back to square one with my vehicle stuck at Mad Cars since the 4th of May 2026. Written by: Simone Ndweni
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)LN
Lungile N
1 reviews | Active since May 2026
14 May 2026, 13:05
“Misrepresentation and Failure to Repair Defects Following Purchase of Jaguar F-Pace – Mad Cars Randburg
I bought Jaguar Fpace from Mad Cars at Randburg in January 2026. They assured me that the vehicle is up to standard and that everything is working perfectly and that they took it for a service in November 2025, when they checked the car that I was trading in they claimed that it's not fully serviced, it didn't make sense to me so they added R20000 on my loan amount which they claimed it's for the service that was not done. I went to check with the service provider which is RMI registered where I serviced my car and I noticed that Jason the manager **** to me my vehicle was fully serviced. In two days after I purchased the vehicle I noticed that the were problems with the battery when I tried to open the boot using the key it didn't open and I had to open it manually and later on I noticed that the auto stop/start button was not working according to set standard whereas I was showed how to switch it off when I don't want it to auto switch off when I stop, then it was left off making me think/believe its working properly. As I was driving it I decided to switch it on and I noticed that it's not working at all and that I was misled to believe that it's working properly. I then phoned the company and complained they said I must bring the car in for them to check it. They collected it and it stayed with the for approximately two weeks and they brought it back to me stating that the auto stop/start issue has been fixed whilst they were lying. I asked the driver who brought it back to drive around with me so that I can be convinced only to find that it's not fixed, the boot was upside down, they took out the spare wheel, it's cover and the fuse covers weren't replaced even the vehicle's carpets. I phoned Jason the manager and he sent the driver to collect the car again he said to me that customers leave the vehicle's light on and complaint about faulty batteries since I also complained about it, he also claimed that Jaguars and BMW's batteries last for two years because of the auto stop/start and I phoned Land Rover to confirm that information they said he is lying. He said he can't be held liable for the auto stop/start when they sold the vehicle to me like that in false pretense, I further told him that if the vehicle's fault is caused by me I'm willing to pay but if its the company's fault they must pay. After they took the car for the second time on Monday the 4th of May there was no communication until today the 12th of May 2026 where he claims that the reason for the auto stop/start is not working properly is because of the battery and that I must pay R2740 as my portion for the replacement of the new battery and I told Jason that I won't pay it then he said if I don't pay it he'll remove it from the car of which I don't understand because this battery was giving me problems since I purchased the vehicle from them now they want me to pay for it whereas I complained to them even before I noticed the auto stop/start. The funny part about all this is that when they took the car late April 2026 they told me that they tested the battery and there's nothing wrong with it after I've been complaining to them about it from January and now they tell me that it's finished, where's the logic in all of this? Jason further said that if I don't want to pay the R2740 for the battery then I must now follow the next relevant steps as per your research because I told him that after I've exhausted all revenues trying to get them fix my vehicle I'll hand over the matter to MIOSA and he also said the bank can't do anything about it since I also complained to them and asked them to intervene. The sad part about all this is that even person by the name of Juliane Miles employee of Nedbank who was handling my case echoed what Jason said on the 12th of May 2026 that there's nothing much they can do about my matter since Mad Cars is not responding to their emails. Now I'm back to square one with my vehicle stuck at Mad Cars since the 4th of May 2026. Written by: Simone Ndweni
0
Replies (0)BM
Bongani M
1 reviews | Active since Feb 2013
24 Apr 2026, 17:55
I was helped by Patrick Betha
I was helped by Patrick Betha. He was absolutely fantastic with putting the deal through. Kept me updated and took less than 6 hours to get approval and in 28 hours I took delivery of the car. Thank you Mad Cars and to Patrick.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)BM
Bongani M
1 reviews | Active since Feb 2013
24 Apr 2026, 17:55
I was helped by Patrick Betha
I was helped by Patrick Betha. He was absolutely fantastic with putting the deal through. Kept me updated and took less than 6 hours to get approval and in 28 hours I took delivery of the car. Thank you Mad Cars and to Patrick.
0
Replies (0)