A police case was opened against Robertson by Richard Coleman after his belongings were removed from his property by the sheriff.
According to an Affidavit and Coleman, on August 2 at about 09:10, Coleman was informed by his employees that his domestic worker was robbed by unknown men who removed certain movable property from his house.
It was said that one of the men (Robertson) was carrying a firearm.
On his arrival, Coleman first saw that his electric gate was broken and opened forcefully.
ALSO READ: TZANEEN: Chaos and frustration as GTM computers seized by sheriff
Also, a Hyundai LDV vehicle was driving away with his property on the vehicle.
Coleman proceeded to follow and stop the vehicle but the driver, who was unknown to Coleman at the time, pointed a firearm at him. He slowed down and followed the vehicle.
They arrived at the store room of the sheriff. When Coleman asked Robertson why he removed his property, Robertson identified himself as the sheriff and that he was entitled to it.
Coleman asked for a copy of the warrant of execution, he was refused a copy and chased out the storage facility by the deputy. Robertson said that he left a copy at Coleman’s house.
They refused to show Mr Coleman the inventory list and he was told to leave.
The warrant turned out to be for a friend of Coleman who stays in a room at his house.
Coleman’s domestic worker, Maggie Phoshoko said that when the men arrived at the house she was asked to point out what property belonged to the friend. She said that she pointed out his belongings which are a lounge suit and a round table.
The men, however, started loading Coleman’s belongings. According to the Affidavit it was a golf set and a bag, a zebra skin, an LG fridge freezer, a Samsung LCD TV, a microwave, an ice maker and five bar chairs.
The affidavit states that the property removed amounts to plus minus R54 300.
ALSO READ: BREAKING: Sheriff takes GTM assets for non payment
In the writ of execution it states that “And of the same to cause to be realised by public auction:- a) The amount of R6000.00 (six thousand rand) as per paragraph 8 of the deed of settlement”
The affidavit further states that his domestic worker was told to shut up. It also said that the sheriff was told that the belongings he is taking belong to Coleman.
Is the sheriff allowed to take more property than valued on the writ of execution?
More accusations of the same nature were made against Robertson by other residents during the investigation.
The residents did however choose to stay anonymous and didn’t want their stories to go to print.
The South African Board for Sheriffs (SABFS) stated the following in an email to LETABA HERALD:
“SABFS is a regulatory body for the sheriffs’ profession. It has and follows processes and procedures when complaints are lodged against a sheriff. In order to ascertain whether the sheriff is guilty of improper conduct, he/she will be given the opportunity to respond to the allegation. In this particular case, the same process was followed when we received this media query. The complainants can lodge a formal complaint so that the matter can be investigated properly. The SABFS in response to our media enquiry received information from FH Human Attorneys on behalf of Mr Tertius Robertson, the sheriff for Tzaneen.”
Mr Frederick Human, the attorney representing Mr Robertson said that they will not deal with each and every allegation made by the Letaba Herald.
Mr Human stated: “Pertaining to the above matter all our client’s rights are reserved. Our client will not proceed to answer to each and every allegation made in the email to the SABFS, and our client’s refusal to answer same, should not be construed as an admission thereof, but rather as an express denial thereof.” Mr Human stated on the 2nd of August 2017, Mr Robertson visited the premises where the friend was said to live. Mr Robertson’s office received a duly authorised and issued warrant of execution which was to be executed on the moveable property of Coleman’s friend.”
The question arises whether the sheriff has a duty to ascertain whether the property he attaches belong to the execution debtor or not.
Is he entitled to simply attach and remove all the property as he pleases at the address appearing on the warrant, especially when the property is occupied by more than one person.
*Article amended – The South African Board for Sheriffs is an impartial body that regulates the conduct of sheriffs and did not defend Robertson.
