Key banking practice denotes that the risk the bank takes in a client when granting a bond on a property would be to do the proper due dilligance in respect of the property as well as the client. Standard bank has done the due dilligence on the client but not on the property that was orignally illegally built and sold off. This practice should have been picked up by the bank in their dilligence process but was not.. When contacted the bank on the discrepancys, Standard bank has conveniently taken a step back and have "passed the buck" onto the client. Standard bank is aware that they have financed a property that was orignally built with illigitimate certification, something that would have been prevented if the proper checks had been done. Standard bank has responded to the client with fickle excuses... excuses being that the evaluation and risk of the property is dependant on the locality and the built and finishings of the property. Somehow Standard bank does not check if the property was orignally built with the proper certification, geological etc. This is something that presents difficulty in digesting and one wonders about their competancy.
0 comments