[imagesource:wallpaperflare]

Many dream of living in Camps Bay. However, paradise is completely lost when you have a neighbour that ends up costing you almost R2 million in legal fees.

Two neighbours of Cape Town’s affluent suburb have apparently been hashing it out for nine years now, with resident Trevor Forster (69) accusing Kirst (52) of various annoyances and inconveniences.

The offences pitted against Kirst range from shining bright lights into Forster’s bedrooms, shouting, finger-pointing, and even causing Forster to suffer a heart attack.

It got to a point where Forster took legal action against Kirst, allowing him to be granted an interim nuisance interdict, which was unsuccessfully rescinded by Kirst in 2020.

Now, Kirst has to pay for all the legal fees that were racked up over the years after the harassed Forster slapped him with his hefty R1,8 bill. Forster successfully obtained a warrant of execution from the high court allowing him to seize Kirst’s ‘movable goods’ and sell them at an auction to cover his own legal expenses.

At the time (earlier this year), Kirst was accused of trying to dodge the payments by arguing that he was financially strapped, and claiming that all his assets and funds came from his ex-wife/wife, depending on his mood when referring to her.

Cape Town ETC reported that the latest development involves the court sheriff seizing vehicles owned by Kirst’s ex-wife as he neglected to fulfil paying for Forster’s legal expenses.

In June, the warrant of execution was reissued and some days later, the court sheriff proceeded to attach various assets found on Kirst’s property, including a Volkswagen Kombi, a Subaru, VW Polo, an Audi and two motorbikes.

Forster told the Sunday Times, ‘Relief obtained by attachment of assets is indicative that Kirst has no intention of ever paying the judgment debts, now exceeding R500,000.

‘The remainder of the total costs, now around R2m, will have to be recovered in additional litigation, also involving effective deterrent measures. My experience of Kirst as an immediate neighbour and litigation since 2018 has been one of immense costs, financially, mentally and emotionally, and contributing still to ongoing direct health impairment.

‘I have no doubt that the results would be worse if Kirst’s conduct is tolerated in any community and in the justice system. I hope there will be an effective deterrent by enforcement in due process, however long it takes.’

Perplexingly, Kirst is again claiming that these assets do not belong to him:

He said, ‘The rightful owners do not wish to have their assets or information published due to potential security concerns as well as criminal conduct that could emanate against them from publishing their assets, in the form of hijacking and robbery, as they have nothing to do with this matter whatsoever.’

Kirst’s lawyer Andrew Ginsberg is claiming that some of the assets actually belong to Kirst’s ex-wife, Sharmn, as well as her landlord.

In response, Forster’s lawyer, Pieter van der Riet, stated that Sharmn’s assertions would be examined and contested in court. In a letter directed to Ginsberg, Van der Riet clarified that Forster did not acknowledge Sharmn’s claims.

He stated, ‘Our client will undertake not to instruct the sheriff to remove any of the claimed items, against your client’s undertaking that no attempt will be made to dispose thereof. Execution will, however, proceed against items not claimed.’

It doesn’t look like this dispute will dissipate any time soon. Vet your neighbours, folks, nobody wants a Kirst living next door.

[source:capetownetc]