A new sign outside a Port Elizabeth traffic court warning people not to solicit business on its premises has angered a businessman who gets motorists’ fines scrapped or reduced, saying it goes against a high court judgment.
Pieter Swanepoel – who runs Traffic Violation Specialther ists – has a history of clashing with the municipality, which has previously turned to the high court to stop him from saving erring motorists money by softening the squeeze on their pockets when it comes to traffic violations.
His counsel argued in court previously that there was no evidence to prove Swanepoel’s business harmed the municipality, adding that clients signed a power of attorney before he took fines to the prosecutor who would then withdraw – or reduce – the fine.
He uses his knowledge of traffic laws and regulations to do this at a minimal fee.
On Monday last week, the municipality put up the blue and white signboard at the Sidwell municipal traffic court – which is a stone’s throw away from Swanepoel’s offices.
The signboard says: “Warning: No hawkers or loitering allowed on these premises. Being harassed outside these premises?
“Do not do business with unauthorised persons! Soliciting or canvassing is prohibited on these premises!”
While it is uncertain whethe erection of the new signboard is directed at him personally, Swanepoel says it flies in the face of a judgment handed down a year ago.
The municipality had sought through the court to prevent Swanepoel and his company touts from soliciting potential clients inside and up to 20m outside the municipal premises.
But handing down judgment in March 2018, acting judge Sarah Sephton said there was no evidence to prove that Swanepoel acted unlawfully as alleged by the municipality.
“On the evidence before me, the municipality has not made out a case to support an order that Swanepoel touts should not be allowed to solicit clients inside the premises and up to 20m outside the parameter of the municipal offices in Sidwell,” she said.
Municipal spokesperson Mthubanzi Mniki refuted claims the municipality was in violation of the judgment.
“The municipality complies with the court order and its merits.
“We have a right to erect notices in the buildings that warn and give guidance to residents and clients.
“Failure to do so will lead us to the issue that ended up in court,” he said.
Swanepoel said: “In terms of that [court] order, we can do business at the Sidwell traffic court considering that it’s a public property. What the municipality should have done was bring a counter application in the high court prior to the erection of the board.
“It is in contempt of court. “We will ask them to remove that board through our application we will make at the courts,” he said.
Attorney Carolyn Ah SheneVerdoorn, who represents Swanepoel, said she would return to court to challenge the legitimacy of the signboard.