×

We've got news for you.

Register on SowetanLIVE at no cost to receive newsletters, read exclusive articles & more.
Register now

A flood of fishy deals

SINCE the publication of an article about investors who were given a raw deal by a franchisor, complaints of a similar nature have been pouring in like the recent floods >>

Consumer Line received 12 more complaints from investors who also accused Old Fashioned Fish and Chips of unreasonably withholding their deposits after failing to set up their stores as promised.

Last Monday Sowetan published an article about Robert Magwaza and Nomsa Mkhwanazi, who claimed they were battling to get their money from Emilia de Sousa, the company's director.

Magwaza sold his franchise for R550,000 last October and has been battling to get what was due to him.

Mkhwanazi paid R100,000 to invest in the fish and chips franchise but only has a deposit slip to show for it though the deal was closed in 2009.

These franchisees have no hope of getting their money because De Sousa has never bothered to respond to their demands and the Franchise Association of South Africa is not helping them.

All these franchisees said they were battling to get their deposits after cancelling their contracts.

  • Leslie Maistry of Pretoria paid the full franchise amount of R513,000 but has no store running.

De Sousa has also not responded to his demand and has ignored his attorney's letter of demand, he said.

"I have learnt that she has taken millions from unsuspecting consumers and she cannot be allowed to get away with it," Maistry said.

These consumers claim they have paid almost R2 million for their franchise but have nothing to show for it.

Those who have started operating said they were faced with challenges of directly competing with another franchisee that operated within a one kilometre radius from them.

Some claimed that De Sousa exaggerated gross profits and increased prices on a regular basis while the franchisees have not had a price increase at their stores.

Making contact with one of the directors was futile since no one answers e-mails or calls, said the franchisees.

Those who are still in business said De Sousa was a "bully and did not address their problems when asked".

"She threatened to shut me down and take away my assets because I complained about a franchise she had opened close to me without telling me," said one franchisee who wanted to remain anonymous.

Clause 5.1 of their agreement says the franchisor undertakes not to grant similar rights for other franchise outlets within a kilometre radius of the premises, but De Sousa has contravened her agreement and granted contracts to five franchisees in some instances.

  • Sandra Olivier claimed that five franchisees that have mushroomed in her area.

She said she had never before experienced what she had gone through the past three years while running her franchise.

"Our franchise agreement says we have rights on the one kilometre radius, but she opened three more shops in my area, without giving us first option on those sites," Olivier said.

"She has given me the runaround for more than a year. I have driven hundreds of kilometres trying to find another site because she can't come up with any. But wherever I found something, it had already been booked by Old Fashion."

  • Don Shashaoka, deposited R100,000 in April 2009 and nothing was done until he cancelled his contract.

"After three months without word from them, I decided to cancel the deal. I was penalised with a R10,000 administration fee though they could not show what they had done," he said.

All those who have since received a portion of their initial deposits claimed Old Fashioned Fish and Chips was running a scam.

They said De Sousa earned interest on their money and did not pay it back to them when they cancelled their deals.

She further deducted an administration fee though she caused them to withdraw from the contract by delaying the process, they said.

  • Mthuthuzeli Makoba paid R100,000 deposit after he was told there was no fish and chips frachisees in QwaQwa, Free State when it was actually not so.

"I discovered that there was already someone who was promised the same site six months before us and the franchisor neglected to reveal this," Makoba said.

He has sent e-mails suggesting alternative sites with no luck.

Writing to Fasa has not helped either, he said.

He said he was scared to cancel his contract because he would lose R10,000 on administration fees or R50,000 of his deposit. He said the contract favoured the franchisor as there was nothing that protected them when the franchisor was in breach of contract.

Makoba said he has endured the most appalling and disgusting customer service in his life.

  • One franchisee, who only introduced himself as Pedro, said after paying his deposit he identified his business area. But De Sousa gave the site to another franchisee.

"She kept on doing this until I cancelled my contract. But getting my money back was another fight," Pedro said.

  • Xolisa Njikelana said De Sousa once told him she had lost his file and had to resubmit his details.

"This is a scam because this woman uses delaying tactics. She does not honour her appointments and when you cancel the deal and demand your money back she would only then tell you about her administration fees," said Njikelana, who has been waiting for his refund since last July.

Njikelana and his partner said they were assured that their franchise would be up and running before the 2010 World Cup.

"And that was lie. She has not refunded our money even though she had undertaken to do so it in two days," he said.

Njikelana also said Fasa has failed him.

He said their one-sided contract also allows the franchisor to retain money paid in pursuant to the franchise agreement.

Clause 39.4.5 says the franchisee shall not be entitled to receive any rebate or refund of any money paid in pursuant to this agreement.

  • Mathabo Hlongwane, who operated her franchise at Yeoville, said after she sold her store De Sousa decided to take R40,000 from her sales, claiming R25,000 was her commission and R15,000 was payable for the door that was wrongly installed by the landlord of the premises she had rented.

There is no clause in their agreement which says De Sousa would be entitled to a R25,000 commission but she nevertheless took it.

Hlongwane only received R90,000 of his deposit and is battling to recover the balance plus the interest, he said.

  • Investor Bridget Kekana also received a refund of R90,000 of her initial deposit.
  • Another franchisee, who has now secured another Fish and Chips franchise, said he would not have received his money if he did not stage a scene at the franchisor's offices. He too still wants a refund of R10,000 plus interest.
  • Lebone Dinake only received R70,000 of his deposit.
  • Richard Ledwaba also recovered R90,000.

De Sousa said Hlongwane signed an agreement which allowed her to deduct a commission of R25,000. But the contract in Sowetan's possession does not have that clause.

On the matter regarding Magwaza's refund, De Sousa now says she did not demand a R250,000 commission but Magwaza was just thanking her for her kindness.

She said Olivier knew that more franchisees would be opened in her area and did not protest or notify her about them.

Though she requested an urgent meeting with Consumer Line she later rushed to her attorneys who cancelled the meeting and have now ordered Sowetan not to talk to De Sousa anymore.

"We believe that a consultation was arranged between yourself and Emilia de Sousa our client for this morning. This e-mail serves merely as courtesy to notify you that our client will not be attending the meeting. We will supply you with a formal letter during the course of today," read an e-mail her attorney Groenewalt van Dyk sent on Thursday morning.

At 3.15pm another e-mail landed. It read: "Our client is currently obtaining legal advice in this matter and as a direct consequence of which, our client has been advised not to make any further contact with or entertain any further correspondence with the Sowetan or any of its staff.

"We kindly request that you refrain from contacting our client or any of its members."

Her lawyers did not say who would comment on subsequent complaints from investors.

Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.