4th April 2011: We would like to respond to Sambala’s latest letter to investors as follows:
First of all, we offer no apologies to Sambala for failing to keep from the public the many issues and concerns that they had until recently conveniently managed to contain within a closed investor forum. Their latest bluster is yet another attempt to intimidate any investor daring to speak out against their mishandling of the Sambala project. This does not intimidate us – it motivates us further. We are bemused that, having recently advised investors to contact the local Cape Verde authorities to check on a supposed court case they claim to have won, they now complain that we as investors have contacted various other authorities to validate this and other claims that they have made. We can comment on their points as follows:
1. We called Sambala’s bluff and instructed our lawyers to check with the courts in Cape Verde. Our lawyers confirmed the case in question and have intimated to us that Sambala have NOT won the case as they have claimed, but the case is still ongoing. Separately, several other investors have been advised of the same and have passed their information on to us. We therefore invite Sambala to provide full and documented proof to all investors of the claim they are making. We have asked our lawyer to intimate Sambala’s potentially false public claim to the Cape Verde courts.
2. We made initial contact with BCA but did not proceed to supply them with any information or requests. This was due to the fact that several other investors advised us that they had already recently contacted BCA to determine the status of the loan which is due to expire in April 2011 as this would have a direct bearing on their investment. From the correspondence we have seen, no adverse comments were intimated to BCA regarding the many issues at hand. It is clear that BCA have not passed on contact names or content to Sambala and Sambala are wrongly guessing that AAG are responsible. Sambala have now advised some VS investors that the loan has been extended for another 24 months but not for all properties. This suggests that part of the loan may have to be paid back to BCA by the end of April but Sambala have not admitted this or stated where any such money may have to come from. Any investor is therefore fully justified in seeking answers regarding this loan to ensure that their stage payments are not being used to pay it off.
3. AAG did not contact CVI. However, we understand that CVI has been contacted by an investor and provided with a copy of the letter (included in our dossier) issued by Sambala to all investors which blames CVI for the financial mess they are now in. We do intend to also seek clarification on this issue from CVI as it is legitimately pertinent to our legal action and validity of any force majeure claim. We are surprised that Sambala object to us seeking clarification on this and we deny contacting anyone with ‘vitriol’. We are more intelligent than that and realise that we must be professional and non-libelous in order to get the best co-operation from people.
4. We have highlighted undeniable issues with build quality on the resort and attach just a few pictures below to show that we are not lying. These pictures have not been doctored by us. Several well respected members of the Sambala Friends forum have since pointed out that the alleged rising damp that some investors have commented on is unlikely to be present and that all damp and mildew is more likely to be due the issue of poorly constructed roof and lack of guttering which has led to substantial water ingress to many properties. Apparently it is still unclear whether all of the affected properties have been repaired and whether build methods have been modified to prevent this issue occurring with future properties – something that Sambala have failed to advise all investors about. If we are making these issues up then many other investors must be making them up too. We acknowledge the publication of a statement from Sambala’s construction engineer on foundation work but this is not independent so we still suggest investors employ their own engineer, particularly to inspect the Village properties which other investors outside of AAG claim to have past and ongoing issues with regard to build design and quality as we have highlighted.
5. Sambala claim we are lying to investors but have so far not attempted to explain how and where. Our dossier and updates contain facts and opinion clearly differentiated and we are always at pains to stress when something is alleged or not yet proven in court or otherwise. It seems to be Sambala that are constantly lying to investors. For example, Sambala only last week denied any investors were taking legal action against them. Now there are suddenly nine. They also denied that Sambala had no connection whatsoever with SJC. However, several independent investors have since publicly stated that an employee of Sambala’s for the last 2 years is now heading up that company and there has thus far been no denial of this. We could cite many more lies, as all investors know…
6. We cannot confirm whether any of the nine investors now admitted to by Sambala as taking legal action are members of AAG. We will remain anonymous at this time and will not confirm or deny any of our members and whether they have yet instigated legal proceedings against Sambala. This is to safeguard all investors taking legal action. We understand that, in total, there are more than this at various stages, either instigating or progressing legal action. Judging by the emails we have received there are many more who wish to go the same route and have asked for our help. We are sharing information and experiences with other current litigants and will be putting together a framework document to assist other investors with the legal route. This will hopefully lead to a speedier progression of future cases by avoiding potential obstacles and pitfalls. We do not encourage or discourage anyone to go the legal route but, as with any type of contract, committed parties are fully entitled to do so if they feel a contract has been breached and we are perfectly entitled to help fellow investors that choose that option.
Unfortunately Sambala continue to show their arrogance by claiming to have achieved so much during the past year when they have failed miserably yet again to progress with the Village construction (in fact the existing Village’s condition has deteriorated through neglect) and have not even come close to completing one of the many Vivendas properties by December 2010 as promised to both groups of IPO investors who are now more financially and contractually exposed than all others. It is also insulting to investors that they deny all the many frustrations that investors have experienced during the past four years by implying that only those that are financially overstretched could possibly want to claim breach of contract. They cannot know that and it is hypocritical given that they admit their own finances have been in a perilous situation.
We have no undisclosed agenda as suggested by Sambala and have only ever contacted them to ask for comments on our information. We will continue with our action as long as we see fit, whether it is convenient to Sambala or not. As investors will see from Sambala’s letter and our response, our action has led to some more truth being made available to all investors from both us and Sambala
Dear Sambala Investors
As stated previously AAG has no wish to engage in online “tit for tat” matches on this, or any other forum. However following Friday evenings email by Sambala to their investor base and the posting on the Friends forum, we have published an update on our website.
Incidentally as a result of Sambala notifying all their investors of our existence we have taken a number of fresh enquiries and received additional information from disillusioned investors over the weekend, many thanks Sambala!
Action Against Grepne
LOL, LOL, LOL;
Can Sambala do anything right? This only shows they have No common sense at all, and still being paid for nothing.
They have just encouraged ALL investors now to make enquiries, LOL Have you ever !!!
isnt that what we wanted,to get things in the open and hopefully to dispel all these rumours [?]stogMember
but AAG had to be there, to get it out of them! no one else does!
Ulluvator, dispel? if your brains were dynamite you’d not have enough to blow your nose!
Boy, are you in for a shock!
Are the damp, cracks and problems with the foundations rumours?
anyone know what “Sambala who have had to take some very difficult decisions ” refers to.
I have it on good authority the damp problems may well be with a broken or cracked slab. If as sambala say it is through the roof, or broken guttering! it would have affected all the properties on its way down, as water finds the quickest way down and out! For that to be it would of course have to have rained heavy over a regular period. Not in Cape Verde eh! It’s more than likely sucked upward with capillary attraction, from a ground water source. This is why Surveying is so important to get the levels right. There is NO surveying markers, or indicators on the VS site, and from memory of our trips, we never seen any on the village site too.
As I reported with the pictures there is no doubt the foundation slab is not thick enough to carry that much weight! As a joke I said look at the foundation of your garden shed! That’s the severity of it. The slab is not connect to the walls of that square, so not only does a 2″ slab carry the weight of the property, it’s carrying the weight of that Square box that only serves to raise the level.
The Foundations are fact! not rumours! the pictures cannot lie. Why do you think they rendered and polished them, especially when they are underground, unseen? Further to this, why will they not let them be inspected? Fact, not rumour.
“”Sambala who have had to take some very difficult decisions ” I’m sure refers to the cut backs they had to make to keep the site going. Yeh I know, it was stopped. They blamed the government for their financial mess, nothing said about the missing 30 million either. They at the time changed builders for working ahead of schedule. They were the difficult times for sambala. A normal developer would take that in it’s stride, but then again, no one at sambala has any building background including their Construction Manager, so in hind sight it’s none of the wonder this turned out to be such a mess!crazydudeMember
More $h1t stirring KK on a development you don’t even own on & probably never did, pathetic, but eh its only the Dirty Dozen who read this garbage.
Come on, own up to being a rival developer…………….
I see your back Peter,,I see all [}:)]sherpyMember
Cool those jets crazy dude.
KK is only trying to be helpful, even though the information/claims are old news now.
I note that no one has come on here yet to say the surveyor who recently issued a 3 page report, together with a checklist on the foundations is either a liar, un-qualified or lacking any professionalism.
Whats wrong, scared he sues the ass of you.
“I have it on good authority the damp problems may well be with a broken or cracked slab”
If you are referring to a foundations slab, unless you can back that up, its a disgraceful statement to make. Too much third, fourth, fifth party, anonymous rumour from KK. The word “may” also indicates a reluctance to put your money where your mouth is.
The owners concerned with damp issues have discussed it at their block meeting and are happy for the time being to accept Sambala’s promise to sort out the issue. Also, the reason for some furniture being on blocks is said to have been at the request of owners, as this is what happened in the warehouse to ensure ventilation to avoid any musty atmosphere as the apartments are not getting much use and so ventilation that would normally occur with use is not happening.
I agree with a lot of points that you have made on this forum, but sometimes you go in like a tabloid newspaper and go for sensationalism, also you like the use LOL quite a lot, which can look like you are laughing at the situation the Sambala customers are in. A little bit more objectivity wouldnt go amiss.
I think there has been some criticism of the surveyor. More because he was appointed by the builder and therefore lacks credibility to be completely objective. Like a solicitor, you need to appoint your own. A solicitor would use all legal means to represent a side to best advantage and generally accept that their client is 100% truthful (or innocent in criminal matters), until proven or convinced otherwise by admission or evidence. In other words, they adopt a “la la la I’m not listening attitude” even when a client appears to be a rogue.
In a similar way, a build spec could be the very minimum and cheapest legal solution that is allowed in Cape Verde, but the surveyor is not going to tell us that, because we dont pay his wages.
Therefore, Sambala should have said that a budget has been made available and you as a buyer group are free to choose an independent surveyor to check some properties. For example, when I remortgaged my house, the bank sent over a bloke who drove past the house to make a valuation and didnt get out of the car. If, I was buying a new house, that I didnt already know about, I would obviously arrange a proper independent survey.
Smiffy very sensible, i think that is all anyone has wanted, indepndent assessments – then all speculation can be ended one way or another.
I would think the earlier this is done the better, rather than waiting for the complete build to iddntify any potential problems.
Personally i can not see any drawbacks in having an independent assessment. I for one have said i am happy to contribute towards this.
Surely having all the facts is a good thing?karlMember
Hi Smiffy you quote.
Also, the reason for some furniture being on blocks is said to have been at the request of owners, as this is what happened in the warehouse to ensure ventilation to avoid any musty atmosphere as the apartments are not getting much use and so ventilation that would normally occur with use is not happening.
This is a daft quote Smiffy
Why was the up stairs furniture NOT on blocks as well.
Before you say it was, double check your facts.
We don”t want you catching somethink like Domboys has now do we.
Sean and as always,when push comes to shove when i brought up about sending someone out there,Nothing from you lot,you talk the talk but dont walk the walk,KK read my post again numbnuts,i said hopefully,meaning that i do not know if the allegations are true or false, now why dont you go and bury you head somewhere as you do not belong on here any more.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.