After an alleged scandalous vehicle auction conducted five years back and whose investigations have gone under the bridge even though a case was opened at Batlharos police station by the opposition, a fishy deal was reached to replace them at Joe Morolong local municipality the following year under the old administration but carrying its own conundrums too.
The new fleet bought through a privately-owned company by the same old management of the municipality has ushered a can of worms again for the new administration at the helm, disclosed concerned councillors at the centre of the controversy. The company which reached concessional terms with the Joe Morolong local municipality to supply it with a full fleet lease on a three-year maintenance agreement is called Ho Tla Ba Tata (ironically meaning, it is going to be tough).
The municipality entered into this contractual agreement on September 2015 where the service provider was supposed to deliver 57 vehicles both yellow and white fleet but only delivered 54. The municipality entered into this agreement with this service provider in 2015. Sources say that the municipality could not justify the deposit of R7.4-million paid upfront between July and September 2017. On this matter there were addendums that were concluded without council resolutions.
The administration could not give supporting documents on the transaction that justified the non-delivery of the three vehicles as was stipulated on the contract. Against the lease agreement, the municipality had and is still servicing and maintaining the fleet because the service provider never showed up to fulfil his obligation. According to internal sources money for this important aspect is still deductible as part of the package. Intriguingly, said impeccable sources, Ho Tla Ba Thata was placed under business rescue some time in 2017.
The item was brought to council in October 2018 where the imprudent service provider demanded a whooping R5.4 million for excess kilometres and the bogus maintenance it offered. The new administration through its council resolved not to entertain the demand by the service provider. The council went further and appointed attorneys to find out who between the two parties was owing the other. The attorneys found that the service provider was instead owing Standard Bank about R3 million which council resolved to pay direct to the bank to avoid the fleet being confiscated by the bank and in fear of the service provider going under liquidation.
At the end of the contract in October 2018 the municipality paid the service provider R94 million, an amount the opposition councillors believe was supposed to be less than R69 million which is far beyond reason to justify and the administration is not forthcoming to give justifiable explanations to that effect. Lastly the EFF councillors claim they demanded the contract agreement as early as January 2017, four months after the new council was sworn-in, so that they get clarity on why the monthly repayment was so high or seismic.
