Scenematic One (Pty) Ltd was a manufacturing company and a client of First National Bank (FNB). Its director and employee, Mr Thomas Johannes Naude, concluded a personal instalment sale agreement with Wesbank (a division of FirstRand Bank Ltd) in May 2007 for the purchase of a motor vehicle. Before signing, Naude altered the agreement to substitute Scenematic’s bank account number for his own, resulting in monthly debit orders of R4 362.23 being deducted from Scenematic’s account between July 2007 and May 2011, totalling R195 661.94. Scenematic was unaware that the debit orders related to Naude’s personal vehicle and assumed they related to business equipment financing. During an audit in 2008, Scenematic unsuccessfully sought documentation from Wesbank. Only in March 2011 did FNB/Wesbank provide the agreement, revealing the unauthorised debits. Scenematic sued FNB for negligent debiting of its account without authority and Naude for fraudulent misrepresentation. Both defendants raised special pleas of prescription.
The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the High Court’s order holding FNB and Naude jointly and severally liable to pay Scenematic R195 661.94, together with costs, was confirmed.
The case clarifies the application of prescription in situations involving fraud and concealed unauthorised debit orders, emphasising the role of creditor knowledge under s 12(3) of the Prescription Act. It reinforces the duty of banks to exercise care in processing debit orders and confirms that banks may be held delictually liable for pure economic loss caused by negligent account administration.