Wonders never cease to amaze. The bank goes after Robert Marawa’s Mercedes-Benz AMG. He has been making all sorts of headlines of late. Well, in the wake of all the headlines, sports personality Robert Marawa is topping trends for the wrong reasons. Reports have it that one of the biggest finance providers in Mzansi is reportedly after Robert Marawa’s Mercedes-Benz AMG. The repossession comes after he allegedly failed to make a balloon payment of more than R1 million.
The award-winning sports personality Robert Marawa has allegedly been taken to the Pretoria High Court after failing to pay the balloon payment of more than R1 million to his Mercedes-Benz. Reports have it that Mercedez-Bens was granted a court order to cancel the agreement and repossess the car in August. On top of that, the courts also gave the dealership permission to apply for an order to obtain any outstanding balance on the loan following the car’s resale.
The repossession comes after Marawa allegedly missed a payment of the balloon amount in December 2021. He was asked to refinance his balloon payment, according to court papers. However, he failed to strike a common ground with the dealership. The courts later denied Marawa’s request to refinance the balloon payment.
Bank goes after Robert Marawa’s Mercedes-Benz AMG
t is believed Marawa received the car on 29 November 2018, and its initial price tag was R1 431 304 when it was delivered.
“He paid R28 982 monthly instalments for 36 months and was left with a once-off balloon payment due on 1 December last year”.
Mercedes-Benz financial services informed the sports personality about his arrears in writing, approached the court in February to cancel the sale agreement, applied for the car to be repossessed, and requested he pays the cost of the court application. The court documents read:
“An order authorising the plaintiff [Mercedes-Benz financial services] to apply to the court on the same papers, supplemented insofar as may be necessary for judgment in respect of any damages and further expenses incurred by the plaintiff in the repossession of the said vehicle, which amount can only be determined once the vehicle has been repossessed by plaintiff and has been sold.”
Marawa’s argument read:
“The defendant denies that the above honourable court has jurisdiction to adjudicate this matter and puts the plaintiff to proof. The defendant denies material breach of the loan agreement and puts the plaintiff to proof thereof.”
Read more: