Mpumalanga Man Fights to Access Pension After Heineken Claims R647,000

Bitter dispute over alleged liquor fraud

For Bongani Prince Makhubela, a former Heineken sales representative from Mpumalanga, the dream of a secure retirement has turned into a legal headache. Makhubela was dismissed in March 2021 after Heineken accused him of fraudulently acquiring liquor from the company’s clientsclaims that Heineken says cost the company over R647,000.

The dispute centers on allegations that Makhubela misrepresented Heineken’s credit arrangements to clients, enabling him to acquire alcohol under false pretences.

Pension frozen amid legal battle

In September 2024, Heineken formally requested the Distell Provident Fund to withhold Makhubela’s pension benefits while it pursued civil action to recover the claimed losses. The fund complied, invoking its discretionary powers under the Pension Funds Act.

Makhubela immediately challenged the decision, appealing to the Pension Fund Adjudicator (PFA). He argued that there was no clear evidence linking him to the alleged fraud and that freezing his pension was causing severe financial strainparticularly impacting his daughter’s schooling and his ability to fund a legal defence.

Tribunal sides with the pension fund

The PFA ruled against Makhubela, upholding the fund’s decision to withhold his benefits. Disappointed, he escalated the matter to the Financial Services Tribunal (FST), claiming procedural irregularities and bias in the PFA’s handling of his case.

Advocate Kagiso Dulcie Magano, presiding over the tribunal, acknowledged Makhubela’s financial difficulties but found that he had failed to provide evidence countering Heineken’s claims. Magano concluded that the Distell Provident Fund had acted reasonably and within its discretion:

“The tribunal finds no evidence that Distell’s discretion was just a rubber-stamp of Heineken’s request. Instead, it was a reasonable and documented response based on the information supplied by all parties involved. Therefore, the tribunal upholds the PFA’s decision.”

The human toll

While the legal outcome favours Heineken and the pension fund, Makhubela’s case highlights the broader human impact of employer-driven claims on employee retirement savings. Social media reactions have reflected sympathy for Makhubela, with many South Africans questioning the fairness of freezing a pension before the conclusion of civil proceedings.

Legal experts note that cases like this are not uncommon, especially in disputes involving large corporations and pension funds. They stress that employees must carefully document their side of the story early, as tribunals and adjudicators often rely heavily on the evidence presented.

A cautionary tale

For Makhubela, the battle is far from over. While the tribunal’s decision stands, the case underscores the delicate balance between protecting corporate interests and safeguarding workers’ rights to their retirement savings.

As South Africans watch, this pension dispute serves as a reminder that even after leaving a job, financial security can be vulnerable to protracted legal battles.

{Source: The Citizen}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com