Vodacom took our home from us, says family
November 2, 2008
By Wiseman Khuzwayo
Johannesburg - The Law Society of the Northern Provinces will hear a complaint of professional misconduct against three attorneys next week.
The attorneys represented Vodacom in a case in which a Johannesburg family alleges that the cellular operator took possession of the family home by "making" family members sign purchase papers "under duress".
Dino Anastassiou, a son of the owners of the house, George and Teresa Anastassiou, has named the attorneys: Eleni Christodolou, George Michaelides and Lesley Cohen.
The law society says that the complaint by the Anastassiou family was forwarded to Christodolou but was returned to its offices. It had appointed tracers to establish her whereabouts.
Dino Anastassiou says in his submission to the Law Society, that he, his father, who suffers from Alzheimer's disease, and his mother, who is illiterate and suffers from bipolar disorder, signed papers relating to the sale of their house to Vodacom. These papers contained confidentiality clauses.
Anastassiou told Business Report that Vodacom had promised to pay R7 million for the house in Hurlingham, but had paid only R2.5 million.
He said that in the early early 1990s his parents bought a piece of land in a cul de sac to have peace and tranquillity and operate a business.
He alleged that on January 27 1998 the family arrived home to find a cellular mast with electronic equipment had been erected 15m away from the house. He went to the Johannesburg Metro Council to inquire about the structure, only to discover that it had been erected illegally in contravention of town planning laws.
Anastassiou said two orders were sent by council officials to Vodacom to dismantle the structure. Both were ignored.
According to court papers, on January 6 1998, Vodacom submitted plans to the then Greater Johannesburg Eastern Metropolitan Council for what it termed "minor building works". The cellular operator stated that it had submitted the plans because it had been advised that the council regarded the mast as being akin to telephone poles. Masts were accordingly treated as infrastructural and not as land use.
In anticipation of approval, Vodacom had erected the mast by January 27 1998. About three years later, the plans were approved by the then Greater Johannesburg Northern Municipal Council (GJNMC).
On September 10 2001, LKC Motors, the owner of the plot where the mast had been erected, applied to the City of Johannesburg, the successor to the GJNMC, to rezone the plot to permit the mast. Despite the opposition of 127 residents, the application was approved by Johannesburg's town planning tribunal. The Anastassiou family lodged an appeal against this decision.
The grounds were that Vodacom was seeking de facto approval for what it had done without any prior approval; that the mast had been illegally erected; that it was a health hazard; and that it was an unsightly addition to the neighbourhood.
The appeal was heard by the Gauteng townships board. The evidence was not recorded and no notes were taken of the hearings. Despite this, the appeal was upheld.
The attorney for Vodacom asked the board for written reasons for its decision. The board later said that it had not received such communication, which had been sent by fax.
On the basis of this, Vodacom lodged an appeal to the Johannesburg high court, which found in its favour.
However, four days later, the council made an application for an interdict against the decision at the same court.
Anastassiou alleged that on April 21 2006, while the council's application was yet to be heard, Dot Field, the chief communications officer at Vodacom, phoned him and told him the council had lost its application and that Alan Knott-Craig, then the Vodacom chief executive, needed to talk to him urgently.
Although he had no idea what Field and Knott-Craig wanted, Anastassiou said he agreed to meet them at a pizzeria in Hurlingham. He alleged that at the meeting Knott-Craig was afraid that the mast would have to come down if the council obtained an interdict.
Anastassiou alleged that Knott-Craig first offered him R4 million for the house, then R4.5 million and finally R7 million. Anastassiou said he agreed to R7 million, subject to the approval of his parents. The R7 million comprised R4.5 million as compensation plus R2.5 million for the house - the price at which it was valued at the time, said Anastassiou.
The Vodacom chief and he then shook hands, he alleged.
According to Anastassiou, a few days later Field phoned him several times to find out if the agreement still stood, but he said he told her that his mother did not want to sell because of her business.
Anastassiou alleged that on April 24 2006, Field phoned him at home and asked him to open the gate. He said that when his mother opened the gate she was shocked, as a "whole bunch of people came into our home".
He said these people were Christodolou; Field; Cohen; Peter Uys, then the group chief operating officer at Vodacom; Christina Fernandes, whom he believed to be an attorney in Michaelides' firm; and several body guards.
Six members of the family who were present at the time signed a paper, albeit under protest, Anastassiou alleged. He said that his father was incapable of signing, so Dino Anastassiou signed on his behalf.
The agreement, which Business Report has in its possession, says Vodacom will undertake payment of R2.5 million.
In return, the family undertakes to withdraw its appeal against the rezoning application and will procure written certification to this effect from the town planning and townships board.
Fielding told Business Report: "Vodacom does not wish to engage in a debate in the media regarding this matter. Suffice to say that the allegations contained in your query are not correct. We reserve our rights in this regard."
|
|
