Twenty-three police officers have petitioned the High Court seeking an order to compel the Commissioner-General of Police, Godwin Matanga, to allocate then residential stands with built houses after paying the required deposits in terms of an agreement between the two parties.
According to court papers, Nicholas Charumangwe and twenty-two other police officers accuses the Commissioner-General of Police of failing or neglecting to allocate them the residential stands with built houses as fully paid up members in terms of an agreement between the two parties despite numerous demands.
“On 17 February 2012, the plaintiffs entered into a contract with the Commissioner-General of Police under the name ZRP Hatcliffe Housing Scheme where the plaintiff as the beneficiaries were supposed to receive built houses from the defendant(Matanga). Once the mortgage terms and other preliminaries were concluded the beneficiaries will be asked to sign mortgage documentation.
“There was an agreement between CABS and the Commissioner-General of Police under the name ZRP Hatcliffe Housing Scheme that CABS was going to build houses for the beneficiaries since the deposit was to be paid into the ZRP CABS account, however, this never materialised,” read part of the declaration filed along with the summons.
The police officers also said they paid a deposit of $4 473.00 and were expected to pay $202.00 as installments for the next 10 years according to the agreement.
“The plaintiffs had an undertaking to pay a total cost of $17 632,98 and to pay a deposit of $4 473.00 and monthly installments of $202.00 for 10 years. The agreement also stipulated that members may pay deposits in excess of the minimum stipulated amount. Further, the plaintiff paid their deposits in full but the defendant did not fulfill his end of the bargain which was to locate the plaintiff their built houses thereby breaching a material term of the contract.
“Despite numerous demands, the defendant has failed, refused or neglected to allocate the plaintiffs their built houses as fully paid up members in terms of the agreement, and a such has rights to build houses. Wherefore the plaintiffs claim for the defendant the allocation of the stands with the built houses to the plaintiffs as they have paid the required deposits in terms of the agreement and as such has rights to their built houses. Alternatively, the defendant to allocate the serviced stands to the plaintiffs if they cannot give them the built houses,” read part of the declaration.
The matter is still pending.