Department moves against alleged scam

The education department is fighting back against what it says are unscrupulous lawyers ripping off the department and the taxpayer to the tune of thousands of rands in legal costs, using a legally questionable lawsuit “cottage industry”.

The department has taken to court East London lawyer Nicolaas du Plessis, whom it says is tricking it out of legal costs by flooding it with hundreds of Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) requests, purportedly on behalf of departmental employees.

The department said Du Plessis then takes it to court, claiming it cannot meet the onerous demands in the required time.

The department’s legal services director, Edward Scheun, says in an affidavit that an investigation had revealed that many departmental employees – whom Du Plessis is purportedly representing – say they know nothing about the lawsuits in their name.

The department suggests in court papers that another lawyer working with Du Plessis may be behind at least some of the inexplicable salary deductions about which Du Plessis is demanding more information.

Du Plessis’ firm NJ Du Plessis and Associates (NDP) specialises in debt collection.

Scheun said in court papers that the number of PAIA requests had crippled the administration to the point where they had investigated what was behind them.

This had revealed that “all was not as it seemed”.

None of the employees who were purportedly Du Plessis’s clients had ever met him or been to his office. They were approached at work by agents of his firm who were inexplicably in possession of the employees’ salary advice slips. They had offered to investigate for free certain deductions from the employees’ salaries;

The litigation that followed the PAIA requests about the deductions was not authorised by the employees;

In many instances the employees knew exactly what the deductions were for or had long since settled their debts and the deductions were no longer in place; and

Many of the affidavits are commissioned by Sean Coetzee, another East London attorney and a friend of Du Plessis.

Some of the salary deductions about which Du Plessis is seeking more information are for minor amounts to “SDCoetzeeincorp”.

Scheun said in his affidavit that the department would lay a complaint against both attorneys with the SA Legal Practice Council.

He described the lawsuits as a “cottage industry” aimed at personally enriching Du Plessis through legal cost orders against the department.

“It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that NDP abuses the PAIA and the court’s process for personal financial gain.”

The department has applied to the Bhisho high court to consolidate several of Du Plessis’ separate PAIA high court applications and hear them as one. This will reduce the costs of the applications while simultaneously allowing the department to argue that Du Plessis is abusing the court process.

The department is also bringing a counter-application against Du Plessis in which it is asking the Bhisho high court to hear oral evidence on whether Du Plessis is abusing the court process by making so many requests.

The matter was postponed on Thursday to a date yet to be decided.