It doesn’t rain but pours for actress and businesswoman Sophie Ndaba-Lichaba.
The former Generations actress, who has been battling ill health due to diabetes in recent years, is now facing the marauding repo man.
This after her bank filed papers at the High Court in Joburg asking for a default judgment to help them repossess a truck she uses for one of her businesses.
The court papers reveal that the 43-year-old screen queen purchased a Hyundai Mighty workhorse for her company called Sophla Trading (PTY) Ltd.
The documents also show that the actress owes the creditor more than R685 000, by means of surety for the principal debt which was given to the enterprise in February 2015.
Sophie has not responded to questions from the SunTeam.
The documents read in part: “The principal debt would be financed at a vehicle interest rate of 13,75% linked by a margin of 4.5%.
“The total collectable amount would be payable by the first respondent to the applicant in 72 instalments as follows: First instalments in the amount of R9 742.43 on 07 April 2015, 70 monthly instalments in the amount of R9 514.43 commencing on 07 May 2015. Final instalment in the amount of R9 514.43 on 07 March 2021.
“The vehicle purchased with the loan belongs to the applicant until the first respondent has settled all the financial obligations towards the applicant. Provided the first respondent is not in default, the first respondent is entitled to possession and use of the vehicle.
“When the first respondent has settled all its financial obligations to the applicant, the applicant will transfer ownership of the vehicle to the first respondent.”
The bank also seeks the court to grant an order to compel Sophie to return the truck.
“I hereby request that the applicant is granted leave to approach the above Honourable Court on the same papers, but duly supplemented, to claim any amount which may be outstanding subsequent to the sale of the vehicle.
“Despite demand, the first respond has failed, refused and/or neglected to return the vehicle to the applicant, alternatively the applicant hereby demands the return of the vehicle.”