Sutcliffe takes on Sithole

Former Durban municipal manager Michael Sutcliffe questioned the way his successor S’bu Sithole was doing his job.

|||

Durban - Former municipal manager Michael Sutcliffe on Wednesday questioned the way his successor S’bu Sithole was doing his job as he slammed the city’s decision to pay R2.4 million to a company over an eight-year-old contract dispute.

In an e-mail to The Mercury, Sutcliffe questioned a matter in which the executive committee recommended on Tuesday that building contractor DKS Holdings be paid the money it claimed it was owed, despite the shoddy work it had performed.

Sutcliffe questioned why the city agreed to pay when it had already been successful in litigation against the company.

He said when he was alerted to the exco report on Tuesday, he called Sithole to ask him why a report on the issue, which was signed by Sithole, had not been countersigned by the city’s legal services head and chief financial officer to ensure that, legally, the matter could be dealt with in this way and that it was supported by the chief financial officer.

“He hasn’t yet been able to call me back, but I am concerned about the fact that it is unprecedented that the city wins an award which allows for some recouping of monies and instead of receiving that money legally, makes an “out-of-court” settlement which ignores that court order and results in the city losing even more money. This could create a serious precedent, and in this matter is completely unjustified.”

When approached for a response, Sithole declined to comment and said “nor do I want to know what he (Sutcliffe) said”.

This is not the first time the two have locked horns.

In March 2012, Sutcliffe took issue when Sithole told the media the city would pursue criminal charges and legal action against Sutcliffe to recover R1.1 million lost as a result of Sutcliffe’s alleged failure to report fraud.

Sutcliffe brought a R10.5 million defamation suit against Sithole in October 2012 for damage to reputation and “special damages” because of loss of income as he was unable to secure employment.

The matter was settled last October, in the week it was due to go to trial, when Sithole issued an apology and it was agreed that either he or the city would pay Sutcliffe’s legal costs.

DKS Holdings worked on an R18 million contract in 2007, but when defects in the work were revealed and not fixed as ordered, the city cancelled the contract.

The company challenged the cancellation in court but lost and was ordered to pay the city’s costs.

It tried to bring another action against the municipality, but that was abandoned.

The company’s director Mandla Khumalo then approached the city for a settlement on R2.4 million which had been withheld to cover shoddy work. The payment was sanctioned after an investigation by the city’s integrity and investigations unit, which said DKS had not been appropriately dealt with by city officials, had suffered prejudice and was now in financial difficulty.

Sutcliffe questioned a recommendation that the city register a criminal case to investigate why a second contractor was paid close to the original contract price to fix the defects. He said legitimate processes were followed in the original award and the tender award to the second contractor.

“If there is any evidence otherwise, then clearly that should be properly investigated before being pronounced upon.”

The Mercury