in Search (clear all)
Showing 1 to 30
The Registrar of Financial Services Providers (Applicant) and Jacobus Gouws (Respondent) (case number EC16/2014)
Anyone who conducts business with an unauthorised financial services provider while being aware of the status of the provider contravenes 7(3) of the FAIS Act and section 2 of the GCC and is liable to pay a penalty.
Related Tags (New Search): Product & Service Design, Point of Sale
Zakhele G Buthelezi (Complainant) v Actebis 406 CC t/a Pro-Brokers and Louis Kempen (Respondent) (Case number: FAIS 07716/13-14/WC3)
Complainant’s complaint against the respondent was upheld as the insurer did not inform the complainant of the need to fit a tracking device to his motor vehicle
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
Renier Reyneke Transport CC t/a Premium Trucking (Complainant) v Smit Garun Brokers (Pty) Ltd (Respondent) (case number: FOC 769/05/L/(3))
The respondent, Smit Garun Brokers (Pty) Ltd, acting on a mandate by the complainant, Renier Reyneke Transport CC t/a Premium Trucking, in 2004, prepared documentation to be submitted to new prospective insurers for new insurance cover as from 1 January…
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
J P H Victor (Complainant) v Tectum Portfolio Services (Pty) Ltd (Respondent) (case number: FOC 3872/06-07/GP (3))
Complaint upheld in connection with short-term insurance contract where the authorised financial services provider had failed to comply with provisions of the GCC relating to explanations to clients of general nature and material terms of the relevant contract or transaction,…
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
Marlon van Dorsen (Complainant) v P A Zervas Brokers CC t/a Bitline Brokers Pepina Zervas (Defendant) (case number: FOC 1953/07-08/GP 3)
Complaint upheld in a case whether the respondents failed to comply with FAIS Act duties to inform clients in proper language about how to make factually correct representations and to inform clients on information that is required.
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
Fliptrans CC (Complainant) v S & P Insurance Advisors (Pty) Ltd t/a McCrystal and Partners (First Defendant) and E Solmes (Second Defendant) (case number: FAIS 07987/11-12/GP)
Complainant’s complaint pertains to lack of advice. He was not informed that he should fit a tracking device and when his motor cycle was stolen, his claim was repudiated.
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
Johannes Cornellis Bothma Bester v Louise Lee T/A Louise Lee Finansiële Adviseurs (case number: FAIS 0091-13/14 G3)
The complainant’s claim was as a result of the repondent’s failure to in form him that his residence should have been protected by a fully operational, 24-hour controlled alarm that was linked to an armed response. The complaint was upheld…
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale, Information after Point of Sale
Rights and duties of the parties
Article: Common-law principles
Related Tags (New Search): Point of Sale
Contractual quantification
Article: Common-law principles
Related Tags (New Search): Complaints & Claims Handling