www.moneyweb.co.za/in-depth/investigations/nova-breaches-the-compani es-act-for-the-eighth-straight-year/

of:

<www.ndcag.co.za/go/20240917> www.ndcag.co.za/go/20240917

(Slegs in Engels beskikbaar)

Wat hou dit hierdie keer in? Is dit “net” nog ‘n geleentheid van moeilikheid met die ouditeure wat dalk weer nie bereid is om die rekeninge af te teken nie?

Let op in die Moneyweb-teks dat daar geen definitiewe verklaring is wat bevestig dat die state selfs aan hulle voorgelê is nie

Sal die kommentaar van CIPC enige vroeë optrede teen Nova beteken? In die lig van hul geskiedenis en hierdie jongste versuim om aan die vereistes van die Maatskappywet ten opsigte van publikasie van die finansiële state te voldoen, kan die CIPC-reaksie hierdie keer ernstiger wees

Aan die ander kant, gegewe die (vermeende) eersdaagse vrystelling van hul tussentydse verslag oor hul ondersoek na Nova en die Sharemax-sluiting, sal enige aksie dalk uitgestel word totdat die ondersoekuitkomste gefinaliseer is en gevolglike aksies begin?

<www.moneyweb.co.za/in-depth/investigations/nova-breaches-the-compan ies-act-for-the-eighth-straight-year/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTAAAR1xLgkGIRr0y UNqBw3TjHCkOfVvlDaYtMGC6rjvGdU3T3Rj5S4tQjGDmwU_aem_rtMAnDGWjxZk_vFyUSolRw> www.moneyweb.co.za/…/nova-breaches-the…/

or:

<www.ndcag.co.za/go/20240917> www.ndcag.co.za/go/20240917

What does this hold this time around? Is it “just” another occasion of trouble with the auditors who, yet again, may not be willing to sign off the accounts?

Note in the Moneyweb text that there is no definite statement confirming that the statements have even been submitted to them

Will the comments out of CIPC mean any early action against Nova? In light of their history and this latest failure to meet the requirements of the Companies Act regarding publication of the financial statements the CIPC response could be more serious this time

On the other hand, given the (supposed) imminent release of their Interim Report on their investigation into Nova and the Sharemax shut-down, perhaps any action will be delayed until the investigation outcomes are finalised and consequent actions begin?
<www.moneyweb.co.za/in-depth/investigations/nova-breaches-the-compan ies-act-for-the-eighth-straight-year/?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR1-CnyGgyERl 9yTbPj5AhhEum6K-EFBNBBty4coyypNY0mRMOzyWI0MM4Y_aem_RRsraCDUuH9KWYuRQcNjeQ>

(Slegs in Engels beskikbaar)

Interview with Cuma Zwane, lead investigator into Nova Property and the shut-down of the PSPC industry

Onderhoud met Cuma Zwane, hoofondersoeker na Nova Property en die sluiting van die PSPC-industrie

www.cipc.co.za/?p=21307

Dit is nie die Tussentydse Verslag oor die ondersoek waarop so lank gewag word nie. Dit kan eerder gesien word as ‘n bevestiging dat die ondersoek na Nova en die PSPC-industrie-sluiting gereed is vir die volgende stappe.

Miskien is dit ook uitgereik om die kommer en frustrasies wat ontstaan ​​het oor die oënskynlike gebrek aan vordering na uitkomste wat tot verligting vir die PSPC-beleggers behoort te lei, te besweer en om geaffekteerdes en belangstellendes te verseker dat CIPC ten volle van voorneme is om dit tot ‘n punt te neem waar toepaslike bevindings en aanbevelings geformuleer is en dan om enige aangeleenthede wat bestempel word as onreëlmatig en/of onwettig in terme van historiese aksies wat gelei het tot die PSPC-bedryfssluiting, voor toepaslike reguleerders en owerhede te plaas vir oorweging en moontlik verdere optrede.

Let ook daarop dat die uiteindelike uitkomste ook Nova se aktiwiteite en mislukkings sal dek, wat in die eerste plek tot die ondersoek gelei het, asook bevindinge en aanbevelings oor die maatskappy se lewensvatbaarheid en toekoms insluit.

Maar daar word ook daarop gewys dat sommige van die bevindings heel moontlik tot litigasie en hofsake kan lei wat tot verdere vertragings kan veroorsaak voordat finale oplossing bereik word

<www.cipc.co.za/?p=21307> www.cipc.co.za/?p=21307
It is not the investigation Interim Report that has been awaited for so long. Rather, it can be seen as a confirmation that the investigation into Nova and the PSPC industry close-down is ready for the next-steps
Perhaps, it has also been issued to allay the concerns and frustrations that have arisen over the apparent lack of progress towards outcomes that should lead to relief for the PSPC investors and to assure affected and interested parties that CIPC fully intends to take it to a point where appropriate findings and recommendations have been formulated and then to place any matters which are labelled as having been irregular and/or illegal in terms of historic actions that led to the PSPC industry shutdown, before appropriate regulators and authorities for consideration and possibly, further action
Note also that the eventual outcomes will also cover Nova’s activities and failures which led to the investigation in the first place and should include findings and recommendations on the company’s, viability and future
But, it is also pointed out that some of the findings may well lead to litigation and court cases which could result in further delays before final resolution is achieved

On Friday 2 August, Ryk van Niekerk of Moneyweb has expressed his frustration at these ongoing delays via this post:

www.moneyweb.co.za/news/south-africa/cipc-investigation-into-who-san k-sharemax-and-other-schemes-has-ground-to-a-halt/.

But, his frustration cannot be greater that that of the people who have been fighting for justice for the Sharemax and other PSPC company investors, for so long.

More so, it cannot be greater than the frustrations of the Sharemax investors/the Nova Debenture Holders, who (or most of whom) have been waiting for delivery of funds repayment out of the Sharemax Business Rescue Plan (BRP) for so many years.

It has now been advised that the CIPC Commissioner wants the Department of Trade, Industry & Competition (DTIC) brought into the loop by way of them having to be informed of where the investigation stands and what, if any, their (DTIC’s) involvement in the PSPC industry back in the day, might have been.

This, of course, means yet another delay whilst DTIC addresses the matter.

The investigation has been on the go for some two years now and the CIPC report which should originally have been released late in 2023 is still awaited.

How much longer before the Sharemax investors get what’s rightfully due to them? Will we now even see any such outcome this year?

Ryk van Niekerk van Moneyweb het Vrydag 2 Augustus sy frustrasie oor hierdie voortdurende vertragings uitgespreek via hierdie pos:

www.moneyweb.co.za/news/south-africa/cipc-investigation-into-who-sank-sharemax-and-other-schemes-has-ground-to-a-halt/.

Maar sy frustrasie kan nie groter wees as dié van die mense wat so lank vir geregtigheid vir die Sharemax en ander PSPC-maatskappybeleggers geveg het nie.

Meer nog, dit kan nie groter wees as die frustrasies van die Sharemax-beleggers/die Nova-skuldbriewehouers nie, wat (of die meeste van wie) al vir soveel jare wag vir terugbetaling van hul skuldbriewe onder die Sharemax Besigheidsreddingsplan (BRP).

Daar is nou in kennis gestel dat die CIPC-kommissaris wil hê dat die Department of Trade, Industry & Competitiion (DTIC) in die lus gebring moet word deurdat hulle ingelig moet word oor waar die ondersoek staan ​​en wat, indien enige, hul (DTIC) se betrokkenheid by die PSPC-industrie destyds sou gewees het.

Dit beteken natuurlik nog ‘n vertraging terwyl DTIC die saak aanspreek.

Die ondersoek is nou al sowat twee jaar aan die gang en daar word nog gewag op die CIPC-verslag wat oorspronklik laat in 2023 vrygestel moes word.

Hoe lank nog voordat die Sharemax-beleggers kry wat regmatig aan hulle toekom? Sal ons nou selfs hierdie jaar so ‘n uitkoms sien?