Photos circulating on social media this week show Hendrik van Wyk Vervoer (HVWV) superlink trailers being hauled away under the supervision of the sheriff of the court, a moment that has reignited questions around the legality and fairness of the repossession process.
The 10 trailers, which were financed by Cape Finance Corporation (CFC), were taken in execution of a court order obtained by the financier earlier this year. The move comes despite HVWV reportedly still being within the grace period granted to find replacement funding under its approved business rescue plan.
Speaking to SA Trucker, HVWV representatives accused CFC of “jumping the gun” by pushing ahead with repossession before the agreed deadline.
“They forced the sheriff to carry out a court order obtained under extremely questionable circumstances,” said a member of HVWV’s business rescue implementation team. “We had confirmed new funding and informed CFC, yet they still uplifted the trailers. This was preplanned — the photos were clearly taken by someone directly involved. The only reason for acting this fast was to pressure us into paying R1.3 million more than what was owed.”
The R1.3 million figure refers to a dispute over settlement values that emerged earlier in the business rescue process. According to correspondence seen by SA Trucker, HVWV’s implementation team challenged CFC’s settlement calculations after discovering a difference of roughly R70 000 per trailer across ten agreements.
Instead of resolving the issue, CFC allegedly increased the settlement figures by a further R60 000 per trailer, taking the total difference to around R1.3 million. HVWV subsequently declared a formal dispute, which they say was never adjudicated despite the rescue plan allowing for such disputes to be heard within 25 days.
Read | How Business Rescue Has Become a Soft Landing for Liquidators
CFC’s High-Cost Refinancing Raises Eyebrows in Transport Sector
CFC had earlier confirmed to SA Trucker that it refinanced ten of HVWV’s trailers in September 2024 through what it described as a financial lease valued at around R4.16 million. The agreement, intended to inject working capital into the business, allowed HVWV to raise cash by refinancing its own unencumbered trailers.
The interest rate of 22.25% per annum attached to the deal raised eyebrows in the transport sector. CFC defended the figure as “reasonable,” arguing that other institutions charge between 2.5% and 4% per month for short-term working capital loans. But when compared with standard truck or trailer finance, which usually ranges between 11% and 14%, the cost of borrowing was significantly higher.
Industry observers told SA Trucker that such high-cost refinancing often provides only short-term relief while deepening a company’s debt burden.
“It’s like paying your bond with a credit card,” one industry analyst said. “You might keep going for a few months, but you’re burning cash faster and risking your last remaining assets.”
Only Creditor to Vote Against HVWV Business Rescue Plan
During the business rescue process, CFC was the only creditor to vote against the adoption of the rescue plan, a decision that, according to sources close to the process, may have signalled the financier’s intention to recover its exposure outside the collective rescue effort. The recent repossession of HVWV’s trailers appears to confirm that position, with CFC moving swiftly to enforce its claim through the courts rather than waiting for the rescue implementation to unfold.
Ex Parte Order vs Business Rescue Protections
In a written response to SA Trucker, CFC denied any wrongdoing and said it had “acted in the most reasonable and legally correct manner.” The company argued that HVWV had breached its lease agreements and was “in unlawful possession” of its assets.
CFC cited recent Supreme Court of Appeal decisions to justify its actions, saying the business rescue moratorium does not prevent a creditor from reclaiming property it legally owns if the company under rescue no longer has a lawful claim to it.
However, HVWV disputes that interpretation, arguing that the order was obtained ex parte — meaning without their participation or that of the business rescue practitioner — and was issued just 15 days after the rescue plan was approved. The company maintains that CFC’s actions undermined the rescue process and left employees in limbo.
HVWV Maintains Business Rescue Progress Despite Setback
Meanwhile, according to the business rescue implementation team, most of the key steps in the plan have been successfully completed. HVWV is expected to emerge from business rescue in the coming months. Implementing a business rescue plan isn’t easy and can hit a few bumps along the way, but the spirit and dedication of the team make it possible. It’s trucking, yes, but people always come first.
Read also:
- Izusa Carriers’ Rescue Plan Approved, Bringing Hope to Workers
- How an OEM Crippled a Transporter – Before a Second OEM Came to Finish Them Off
- Hendrik van Wyk Vervoer: A Case of OEM Overreach or Systemic Industry Cover-Up?
The latest SA Trucking News straight to your inbox!
Do you have more on this story? Click to WhatsApp us. Anonymity guaranteed.
