Johannesburg - The struggling SA Post Office must defend itself against a claim for damages by a Pretoria business that claims it did research on the state-owned enterprise’s contribution to and impact on the South African public and economy.
Urban-Econ, a specialist consulting firm in Hatfield, Pretoria, is claiming damages of just under R600 000 from the Post Office in the North Gauteng High Court.
Responding in court papers, the Post Office said it was in the dark about the claim.
Urban-Econ this week applied for a summary judgment and a punitive costs order against the Post Office. The court, however, granted the Post Office leave to defend itself.
On Monday, in a deposition before the court, Cynthia Mofokeng, manager of the Post Office’s legal services, denied that the enterprise received any invoices from Urban-Econ.
She said the invoices Urban-Econ mentioned in its claim were sent to “an unknown postal address”.
According to Mofokeng, Urban-Econ “doesn’t even mention when and where the alleged tender” for the research project was advertised by the Post Office. The corporation does not mention when it handed in its submissions to tender and its quotations for the project. It also did not supply the alleged letter of appointment as the preferred bidder.
Urban-Econ said it was represented by Marika Cook when the service agreement was concluded on January 22 last year in Silverton, Pretoria, with Post Office CEO Chris Hlekane.
The agreement stipulated that Urban-Econ measure the economic impact of the Post Office on all its stakeholders, the public and the country’s economy.
The company had to measure the Post Office’s impact on the communities in which it delivers a service. It also had to determine the spin-offs of the Post Office’s activities and develop a framework or model to measure the enterprise’s impact on the economy.
Urban-Econ said Leslie Singh and Heetesh Patel of the Post Office were also present when the agreement was made.
The agreement allegedly stipulated that the work had to be completed within a year and that researchers would have access to the Post Office’s premises.
Despite requests, the Post Office did not supply Urban-Econ with a copy of the signed agreement, said the firm.
The company said it did the research and sent the Post Office five invoices for payment between May 9 and November 17 last year.
But the Post Office did not pay the full amount of R587 100.
In her deposition before the court, Mofokeng denied that Urban-Econ was chosen as the successful bidder.
“These allegations are suspicious since [Urban-Econ] didn’t even attach a copy of the alleged letter [of appointment], which I see as crucial for its application [for summary judgment].”
She denied that any negotiations had taken place between Urban-Econ and the Post Office because something like that would have been in the Post Office’s records.
Mofokeng said she could not get statements from Hlekane, Singh or Patel to support her deposition.
“Hlekane has been suspended and is currently undergoing a disciplinary process.”
Singh was not at the Post Office “any more” and Patel “was only a consultant”.
She said that despite “diligent” enquiries, Singh and Patel could not be tracked down.
Mofokeng insisted there was no agreement between the parties. Even if there was, the invoices did not meet the conditions of the agreement because they did not contain enough information about the services rendered.