Belinda Beresford Employees of one of the country’s largest banks, Nedcor, have been using legally questionable tactics – ranging from impersonating policemen to threatening arrest – to intimidate petty debtors. Nedcor says such tactics are not part of its debt-collection effort and the matter is being looked into. But a Mail & Guardian investigation has exposed what appears to be a general policy in its card-division legal department to falsely invoke the name of the police in order to pressure debtors. Nedcor employee Wayne de Vos has repeatedly portrayed himself as a sergeant in the South African Police Service fraud squad. In at least one instance he cited a “case number”, implying a charge had been brought, which he later admitted did not exist.
Another employee falsely claimed the police were about to arrest a Nedbank client who was behind on her payments.
The tactics came to light after a part-time domestic worker, Nosipho Ralarala, fell behind on her Nedcor Advantage card repayments. Nedcor invited her to apply for an Advantage card in mid-1996 and gave her a credit limit of R2 500 – more than twice her monthly salary. According to a recent statement, the interest rate was 32%.
Ralarala ran up close to her credit limit and then missed instalments, she says, owing to unexpectedly high school fees for her children. There followed a string of telephone calls from Nedcor demanding settlement.
On July 2 Ralarala says she refused to answer a call from a Nedcor employee, instead asking him to write. A few minutes later another Nedcor debt collector tricked Ralarala into coming to the phone by falsely claiming to be her sister, Dora. Only then did she reveal herself to be Patricia Zakwe of Nedcor’s debt-collection department.
She threatened that if Ralarala did not immediately settle the missing instalments, now totalling R640, she would be arrested by police that afternoon.
After speaking to Zakwe and her boss, Leslie Tarr, Ralarala’s employer was able to establish there was no prospect of arrest.
Ralarala’s employer says: “I asked Zakwe why she had lied to Ralarala and myself about who she was, and to Ralarala about the police action. Zakwe said she was sorry, but that was the way they have been trained to deal with people who will not pay.
“I told Tarr what had happened, and he also confirmed that the way they had treated Ralarala is `the only way to treat the many people who refuse to pay’.”
Ralarala maintains she was always willing to pay, but Nedcor’s debt collectors had declined to discuss ways of resolving the situation.
On July 24 De Vos called, claiming to be a fraud-squad sergeant and leaving “case number” 41600.
Ralarala’s employer says he took the call after she became distressed, and was told “Sergeant de Vos” was from the Brixton fraud unit but working at Nedcor.
Told that Ralarala could only afford to pay back the debt in instalments, “Sergeant de Vos” said he would try to negotiate a settlement agreement with Nedcor. He phoned back and said the bank would accept payments of R200 a month, starting from the end of August.
Ralarala’s employer says between these calls he had put down the phone on a woman from Nedcor’s legal department who said she was calling on the same matter as “Sergeant” de Vos.
A Nedcor representative said in response: “An investigation is already under way, and the individuals concerned will be severely dealt with. We are also implementing steps to ensure incidents of this nature do not happen again.”
When the M&G contacted De Vos, he said he was a police reservist operating from Brixton police station under the command of a Captain van Dyk in the fraud unit. No such captain exists at Brixton – nor is there a fraud unit there. Calls from the M&G to the Nedcor offices were put through to “Sergeant de Vos” without comment. De Vos kept up the pretence to the end. When told Brixton had no record of him, he claimed he had moved to Langlaagte, but said he didn’t know the name of the captain there or the telephone number.
De Vos’s manager, Adrie Weideman, admitted he had been masquerading as a police officer. She said the lies to Ralarala had been an isolated incident which she regretted and would ensure did not happen again.
Asked why De Vos would adopt such tactics solely with Ralarala, Weidenfeld said she was unable to comment without knowing which case was being discussed.
In a conversation with Ralarala’s employer, Weidenfeld said Zakwe, Terr and De Vos were her subordinates, and accepted his account of the interactions with the three. She said she would hold a staff meeting to discuss the issue and tell everyone such behaviour must stop.
Not only has “Sergeant” de Vos apparently committed a criminal act – in terms of the police Act, he could be sentenced to a maximum of two years in jail – but his colleagues may also have a case to answer.
According to the police, if De Vos’s colleagues were aware of what he was doing – for example, by overhearing him misrepresenting himself on the telephone – and did nothing about it, they could be charged as accessories.