FULL RESPONSE: Nicview Investments (Pty) Ltd

1. Van Dyk confirmed that he shared the test results from Wearcheck with your client confirming that the diesel Nicview Investments (PTY) Ltd delivered to him was not in SANS 342 specification for 50 PPM Diesel. Supplying out-of-spec diesel is not legal. How does Nicview Investment respond?

1. Our client denies that the diesel supplied did not conform to the required specifications.
2. Our client denies that the test result referred to above was provided to our client.
3. In fact L.A.P was challenged to provide any proof that conclusively indicates that our clients load/s was substandard.
4. In this regard we refer to a letter sent 7 February 2023 attached hereto in which the following was requested:

 

“In order for our client to consider the allegations against them we request the following further particulars from yourself:

5.1 Please confirm if any preliminary tests were conducted and if so, please provide proof of the tests conducted.

5.2 Please confirm where the samples were collected and also provide proof of same.

5.3 Please confirm when the samples were collected and provide proof of same.

5.4 Please confirm when the samples were tested and provide proof of same.

5.5 Please confirm at which laboratory the samples were tested and provide the formal test results for each tests.

5.6 Please provide proof of the chain of evidence from the collection of the samples to the testing at the laboratory.”

 

5. On 28 February 2023 L.A.P responded via email which email is attached as follows:

 

               “Sir

Our client LAP referred the matter to the insurer who ensured them for public liability due to contaminated diesel supplied by your client. The product did not comply with SANS 342:2016 specifications which resulted in our client suffering damages calculated to over R10 million.

Your letter will be forwarded to them.

Kind regards”

 

6. On 1 March 2023 our office again requested a response from L.A.P the email is attached:

 

“Dear Sir,

Your client has failed to respond to our clients request for information, and demands for payment contained in the letter.

              We will proceed to institute legal action against your client without further notice.

              It is clear that your client has no intention to settle debt due to our client.

              Regards”

 

7. On the same day we received the following response from L.A.P:

 

“Dear Sir

Please take note that your letter is dated 20 November 2022. We place on record that your letter was only received on the 28thFebruary 2023.

              You are welcome to proceed with legal action.

Please take note that Hollard Insurance has a claim against your client and that any legal proceedings against our client ,LAP will be referred to them.

Regards”

 

8. Our client then proceeded to issue summons against L.A.P which summons is attached hereto.

 

9. It is clear that L.A.P failed or refused to provide any evidence that our clients product was substandard.

 

2. Can Nicview Investments (PTY) Ltd share the original bill of loading for the fuel in question delivered to Lebombo Agri Petroleum?

1. 1. Please note that the original signed and accepted delivery notes is attached to the summons.
   2. This is further confirmation that our clients loads were accepted without any objection raised on the quality of the fuel.
   3. Please further note that it was never an agreed requirement that our client should provide a  bill of loading.
   4. L.A.P accepted the loads without the requirement of a bill of loading.

 

3. Please confirm the following:

1. Piet van Dyk from Lebombo Agri Petroleum says he requested the original bill of loading from Nicview Investment (PTY) Ltd and it has not been supplied to him.

1. 1. Our client confirms that this request was only made after our client demanded payment of their outstanding accounts.
   2. We refer to the response in par 2 above which should be incorporated herein.

 

2. Piet van Dyk says he also informed your client that he would consider instituting a counterclaim and that he never heard from your client after that.

 

3.4 In the attached email on 3 March L.A.P he did state the following:

 

“You are welcome to proceed with legal action.

              Please take note that Hollard Insurance has a claim against your client and that any legal proceedings against our client ,LAP will be referred to them.”

 

3.5 This being said our client was never served with any summons in relation to a claim.

 

3. When last did you take instruction or act for your client on the Lebombo Agri Petroleum matter prior to the Carte Blanche enquiry? 

                3.6 As mentioned we are on record for the client in this specific matter.

 

It would be greatly appreciated if we may please have your response by close of business today, 19 October 2023. Alternately, by tomorrow morning, 10.00 – 20 October 2023.

1. Given the fact that no test results was ever provided to our client that confirms our clients fuel load/s was not to the required specifications we submit that any publication by Carte Blanche that indicate otherwise would not be a true reflection of events.
2. Should any such claims be made in the intended publication, our clients rights remain strictly reserved to institute legal action against Carte Blanche.