1. Mr Mapeka referred his case to the National Consumer Tribunal alleging that Wesbank failed to sell his vehicle as soon as reasonably possible and at the best price reasonably possible. On 5 November 2009 the National Consumer Tribunal handed judgement wherein it directed the National Credit Regulator to investigate the matter and provide a report within three (3) months. The National Credit Regulator complied with the judgement and submitted the required report on 26 January 2010. Wesbank offered to write off the outstanding balance and delist Mr Mapeka at the credit bureaus. The offer was accepted by Mr Mapeka on 06 May 2010 and the matter was regarded as finalized.
Mr Mapeka subsequently sued Wesbank in the Bloemfontein High Court demanding compensation for pain and suffering caused by Wesbank. The Court dismissed his application. Mr Mapeka then approached the National Consumer Tribunal again seeking damages. On 11 November 2014 the National Consumer Tribunal dismissed Mr Mapeka’s case. When the Bloemfontein High Court and the National Consumer Tribunal dismissed his applications, Mr Mapeka, if still in disagreement with the judgements, should have referred his case to the Supreme Court of Appeal.
The NCR has no legal mandate to adjudicate over claims for damages concerning pain and suffering. Ordinary courts of law are the most appropriate fora to decide on such matters.
2. In dealing with Mr Mapeka’s case, the National Credit Regulator fully complied with its legislative mandate as per the National Credit Act 34 of 2005.