Some more interesting reading :
On 5 December 2008, Safe Hermanus effectively stole more than R 215 000.00 of our money that was due to us by our clients.
Reck contended that we repudiated the agreement between us and cancelled our agreement.
Safe Hermanus further shut us off from our clients by not alerting us of alarm signals received at their control room and sent their own vehicles and unqualified personnel to Gansbaai to compete with us and to attend to our clients' alarm signals (sound like De ja vu?).
We rejected this ridiculous claim of repudiation and AGAIN launched an urgent application under High Court case number 20361/2008 to resolve this issue.
FACT : Safe Hermanus (tellingly) did not even oppose this application. On 10 December 2008 an order was granted in which, among others, it was ordered that :
1. Safe Hermanus pay us the full amount as stated.
2. Safe Hermanus refrain from interfering in our business
3. Safe Hermanus refrain from contacting our personnel with job offers.
Does this sound like a case, as Reck now contends, that was abandoned?
What on earth MORE would there be to go to court for apart from a cost order?
We got everything we asked for.
AGAIN, why would Reck's version differ so drastically from the truth?
ANOTHER honest mistake?
You be the judge ...... (This is also public record and easily verifiable)
Secma vs Safe Security Hermanus
What i do not understood is in truth how you're now not really a lot more well-preferred than you may be now. You are so intelligent. You know therefore considerably on the subject of this subject, produced me individually imagine it from numerous various angles. Its like women and men aren't
ReplyDeleteinterested unless it's something to accomplish with Girl gaga! Your individual stuffs great. At all times maintain it up!
Also visit my homepage :: Heidelberg Kindergeburtstag