Former escort sues sugar daddy
Johannesburg - She was an expensive escort from Germiston with aspirations. He was her new squeeze who was prepared to help.
He bought her first one, then another new home. She got jewellery, a BMW X5 and a VW Caravelle.
But then they split up and are now in court, fighting over whether she can sell the house and what, if anything, she owes him. At stake is more than R1 million.
Last month, the Johannesburg High Court didnt stop the sale of the house but effectively froze the proceeds of the sale, ordering that the money be held in trust until the main court action was finalised. That matter is still in progress.
The reportable judgment sets out what happened.
Vernon Krog and Mary-Ann Botes started a relationship in October 2008, according to his version to the court.
She was an escort, living in Primrose, Germiston, and told him she no longer wanted to be an escort.
Krog suggested that he would look after her and support her and would, in effect, become her only client, and she agreed.
After a few months, Botes, then renting a property in Primrose, told Krog she no longer wanted to live there.
They found a home in Wychwood, Primrose, which Krog bought for R860 000 through a business he owned, showing the court documents as proof.
She moved in, but in 2010 decided the area was unsafe.
They found another property in Sunnyrock, Germiston, and Botes told Krog that she wanted to buy it with the proceeds of an investment she had that would soon mature. She asked him to lend her the money R1.2m which he did.
The Sunnyrock property was registered in Botess name.
Krog told the court that he lent her money to buy jewellery, a BMW X5 and a VW Caravelle. She didnt repay any of it. Last year, they fell out.
Krog found that she had put the house on the market, and moved to stop her.
Botes told the court that Krog was trying to stop her from dealing freely with her assets, and that he was effectively bringing an anti-dissipation action against her which would require him to show she was likely to hide the proceeds of the sale.
She blamed the break up on Krogs aggressive attitude. He had assaulted her, so she brought a domestic violence interdict against him; Krog had disputed the assault, and the interdict was withdrawn.
Botes said Krog took away the Caravelle and a Kia vehicle. The Kia was hers and she had bought the Caravelle from him.
Botes said she now worked as a nail technician, but did not provide proof of employment to the court.
She said she had earned in the region of R300 000 to R400 000 a month, and from that her escort income bought the Sunnyrock property, but failed to provide the court with bank statements regarding this.
She said there was never a loan agreement, so she had no obligation to repay Krog.
Botes confirmed wanting to sell the property so she could use the money to buy another home where Krog couldnt find her and couldnt harass her.
The court raised concern over Botess version of the source of money used to buy both the Wychwood and Sunnyrock homes, saying there was a conflict between her version in her domestic violence affidavit which said she bought Wychwood with an inheritance and Sunnyrock with the Wychwood proceeds and in this matter, when she said she bought Sunnyrock with her escort income.
The court said there were disputes over who paid for Wychwood, whether Krog funded Sunnyrock, whether Botes had the right to deal freely with the Sunnyrock property, and whether there was an imminent threat of dissipation of the Sunnyrock proceeds.
The court found that Krog had a case on the face of it, was entitled to the Sunnyrock proceeds, and that this property was Botess only asset, so he would not otherwise be able to get the money he claimed from her.
The court noted Botess wish to sell and live somewhere Krog couldnt find her, and said that if Sunnyrock was sold, she will have achieved what she sought, even if the proceeds are interdicted. The court thus ruled that the proceeds be interdicted and paid to Krogs lawyers to hold in trust until the dispute over who was entitled to the money was resolved.
Former escort sues sugar daddy - Crime & Courts | IOL News | IOL.co.za
Johannesburg - She was an expensive escort from Germiston with aspirations. He was her new squeeze who was prepared to help.
He bought her first one, then another new home. She got jewellery, a BMW X5 and a VW Caravelle.
But then they split up and are now in court, fighting over whether she can sell the house and what, if anything, she owes him. At stake is more than R1 million.
Last month, the Johannesburg High Court didnt stop the sale of the house but effectively froze the proceeds of the sale, ordering that the money be held in trust until the main court action was finalised. That matter is still in progress.
The reportable judgment sets out what happened.
Vernon Krog and Mary-Ann Botes started a relationship in October 2008, according to his version to the court.
She was an escort, living in Primrose, Germiston, and told him she no longer wanted to be an escort.
Krog suggested that he would look after her and support her and would, in effect, become her only client, and she agreed.
After a few months, Botes, then renting a property in Primrose, told Krog she no longer wanted to live there.
They found a home in Wychwood, Primrose, which Krog bought for R860 000 through a business he owned, showing the court documents as proof.
She moved in, but in 2010 decided the area was unsafe.
They found another property in Sunnyrock, Germiston, and Botes told Krog that she wanted to buy it with the proceeds of an investment she had that would soon mature. She asked him to lend her the money R1.2m which he did.
The Sunnyrock property was registered in Botess name.
Krog told the court that he lent her money to buy jewellery, a BMW X5 and a VW Caravelle. She didnt repay any of it. Last year, they fell out.
Krog found that she had put the house on the market, and moved to stop her.
Botes told the court that Krog was trying to stop her from dealing freely with her assets, and that he was effectively bringing an anti-dissipation action against her which would require him to show she was likely to hide the proceeds of the sale.
She blamed the break up on Krogs aggressive attitude. He had assaulted her, so she brought a domestic violence interdict against him; Krog had disputed the assault, and the interdict was withdrawn.
Botes said Krog took away the Caravelle and a Kia vehicle. The Kia was hers and she had bought the Caravelle from him.
Botes said she now worked as a nail technician, but did not provide proof of employment to the court.
She said she had earned in the region of R300 000 to R400 000 a month, and from that her escort income bought the Sunnyrock property, but failed to provide the court with bank statements regarding this.
She said there was never a loan agreement, so she had no obligation to repay Krog.
Botes confirmed wanting to sell the property so she could use the money to buy another home where Krog couldnt find her and couldnt harass her.
The court raised concern over Botess version of the source of money used to buy both the Wychwood and Sunnyrock homes, saying there was a conflict between her version in her domestic violence affidavit which said she bought Wychwood with an inheritance and Sunnyrock with the Wychwood proceeds and in this matter, when she said she bought Sunnyrock with her escort income.
The court said there were disputes over who paid for Wychwood, whether Krog funded Sunnyrock, whether Botes had the right to deal freely with the Sunnyrock property, and whether there was an imminent threat of dissipation of the Sunnyrock proceeds.
The court found that Krog had a case on the face of it, was entitled to the Sunnyrock proceeds, and that this property was Botess only asset, so he would not otherwise be able to get the money he claimed from her.
The court noted Botess wish to sell and live somewhere Krog couldnt find her, and said that if Sunnyrock was sold, she will have achieved what she sought, even if the proceeds are interdicted. The court thus ruled that the proceeds be interdicted and paid to Krogs lawyers to hold in trust until the dispute over who was entitled to the money was resolved.
Former escort sues sugar daddy - Crime & Courts | IOL News | IOL.co.za
simp gonna simp 
