In the News




29 September 2017


When the Scheme of Arrangement is set aside, the status quo ante will relive, meaning that the Highveld Syndication companies will return to a state of Business Rescue.

The Business Rescue process has never been uplifted – it has only been replaced by the Scheme of Arrangement.

When the Scheme of Arrangement is set aside, the Business Rescue practitioner will have (once again) a duty to enforce compliance with the business rescue plan.

In that process, we are still the legal representatives of the investors and we will make sure that our clients’ rights are protected.

It is not a prerequisite for enforceability for the Business Rescue plan to be an order of court – it is enforced and controlled by law.


Should the Scheme of Arrangement not be set aside, Orthotouch will be forced to pay interest according to the Court Order sanctioning the Scheme of Arrangement.

If the Scheme of Arrangement does get set aside, the payment of interest will be ruled by the Business Rescue Plan.



29 September 2017


The liquidator will be obliged, as far as possible, to fulfil the obligations of Orthotouch.

In order to do this, all the assets of Orthotouch, including the guarantees and “securities” given by third parties in compliance with the obligations of Orthotouch, will be sold and called up in order to pay the investors’ interest (and capital).



29 September 2017


A written opinion on this legal question was sought from Counsel.

Counsel’s opinion is that the liquidators would not be able to claim back any of the monthly interest/income payments made to HSAG investors.

Here is a summary of Counsel’s reasons:

  • Monthly payments are made to investors under an obligation by Orthotouch, in the Scheme of Arrangement document, in return for acquiring various fixed properties from the Highveld companies. The payments made by Orthotouch were therefore not made “without value” as meant in section 26 of the Insolvency Act of 1936 (“the Act”), and monies cannot therefore be reclaimed;
  • In so far as sections 29 and 30 of the Act are concerned, one creditor (such as an investor) can never be preferred above another as long as payments are made in accordance with the formula set out in the SoA document;
  • Payments made by Orthotouch are made in its “ordinary course of business”. This is a further reason why the liquidators will not be able to reclaim;
  • The creditors of Orthotouch are the Highveld companies. It is the Highveld companies, who upon receipt of payments from Orthotouch, will repay the investors. This means that if Orthotouch were to go into liquidation, the liquidators only have potential claims against the Highveld companies – not against the investors;
  • Should the Highveld companies ever be liquidated, the liquidators will not be able to reclaim payments from investors for similar reasons to those mentioned above.

The HSAG is not per se in favour of liquidations and the HSAG has never threatened or attempted to liquidate Orthotouch or the Highveld Companies.

If you were to peruse all the previous litigation correspondence you would see that it was only Mr Georgiou and his supporters who made the threats of liquidation.  Liquidation would be the last resort of the HSAG.

HSAG Steering Committee



28 September 2017

What is a class action lawsuit?

A class action is a procedural device that permits one or more plaintiffs to file and prosecute a lawsuit on behalf of a larger group with a common interest in a matter.

Put simply, the device allows courts to manage lawsuits that would otherwise be unmanageable if each class member (individuals who have suffered the same wrong at the hands of the defendant) were required to be joined in the lawsuit as a named plaintiff.

While the subject matter of class action lawsuits can vary widely, two factors are almost always present for every class action:

  1. the issues in dispute are common to all members of the class;


  1. the persons affected are so numerous as to make it impracticable to bring them all before the court.

Class actions are difficult and expensive to file and follow through, but the results can be of great help to the people who could not afford to carry a suit alone.

HSAG Admin



28 September 2017

Wat is ‘n klas-aksie regsgeding?

ʼn Klas-aksie is ʼn prosedurele meganisme wat een of meer eisers toelaat om ʼn regsgeding namens ʼn groter groep, met ʼn gemeenskaplike belang in ʼn saak, in te stel.

Die meganisme laat Howe toe om regsgedinge aan te hoor wat andersins onhanteerbaar sou wees, aangesien dit sou behels dat elke lid van die klas (individue wat dieselfde onreg gely het aan die hand van die Verweerder(s)) gevoeg moes word tot die regsgeding in hul persoonlike hoedanigheid as Eisers.

Terwyl die gronde vir die instel van ‘n klas-aksie regsgeding grootliks kan wissel, is daar twee faktore wat amper altyd teenwoordig is:

  1. Die kwessies in dispuut is gemeenskaplik vir al die lede in die klas;


  1. Die getalle geaffekteerde persone is so groot dat dit onprakties sal wees om almal voor die hof te bring;

Klas-aksies is moeilik en baie duur om te voer, maar die resultaat kan van groot hulp wees vir diegene wat nie kan bekostig om ‘n regsgeding op hulle eie te voer nie.

HSAG Admin


Important Notice!

HSAG Members!

25 September 2017


It is of utmost importance that investors use the correct email addresses (as indicated on the website and emails) for all communication as well as their reference numbers (i.e. identity number etc.).

Should an investor send an email to the wrong email address such correspondence might not be attended to ending up to be time consuming and costly.

Important email addresses that are being used by the HSAG are as follows:

  • ‪ for all general enquiries about the HSAG class action;
  • ‪ for all specific enquiries concerning the class action;
  • ‪ for the registration of new members of the class action;
  • ‪ for all confidential information that you would like to send to us anonymously;
  • ‪ for all HSAG estate enquiries and estate matters.

HSAG Admin


Belangrike Kennisgewing!

HSAG Lede!

26 September 2017


Dit is van uiterste belang dat beleggers die korrekte e-pos adresse (soos vervat op ons webtuiste en e-posse) asook hul verwysingsnommers (bv. identiteitsnommer ens.) vir alle kommunikasie gebruik.

Indien ’n belegger ’n e-pos na die verkeerde adres sou stuur kan dit daartoe lei dat daardie e-pos nie die nodige aandag geniet nie wat aanleiding sal gee tot vermorsing van tyd en koste.

Bestaande e-pos adresse is as volg:

  • ‪ en ‪ vir alle navrae rakende die klas-aksie en skikkingsproses;
  • ‪ vir die registrasie van nuwe lede van die klas-aksie;
  • ‪ vir alle skikkingsooreenkomste en verwante dokumentasie;
  • ‪ vir alle vertroulike inligting wat anoniem aan ons gestuur moet word.

HSAG Admin




Did you know that:

  1. The HSAG Class Action is making new law in South Africa;
  2. That Mr Nic Georgiou has secretly and unlawfully settled the erstwhile Class Action Applicants;
  3. The HSAG membership has grown in numbers since Mr. Nic Georgiou has paid off the former HSAG Applicants;
  4. The delays in the certification of the HSAG Class Action and setting aside of the S155 Scheme of Arrangement is caused by Nic Georgiou / Orthotouch;
  5. The HSBF/HSIF is only a front for Mr. Nic Georgiou / Orthotouch and run by Mr. Helgard Hancke;
  6. The HSBF/HSIF does not have a Steering Committee;
  7. The claims of people who are not members of the HSAG or sued Mr. Nic Georgiou individually before September 2017 on the buy-back agreements have prescribed. (i.e cannot be instituted anymore);
  8. People who settle with Orthotouch through Mr Helgard Hancke, Elna Visagie and Herman Lombaard cannot recover their investments from Mr. Nic Georgiou and others;
  9. The HSAG are suing Mr. Nic Georgiou and others for 100% of their capital plus interest plus costs;
  10. If you are a member of the HSAG, the legal costs are more than a thousand times less than if you act individually.

The HSAG wish to thank every HSAG member for their loyal support. We can ensure all that without this support it would not be possible to carry on with this process to recover investors’ claims.

We hope you have a wonderful long weekend!



14 September 2017

HSAG members have once again received letters / text messages and Whatsapps from the so-called HSBF (a Georgiou front run by Helgard Hancke), which has only one purpose: to cause division, distrust and conflict among the HSAG supporters and to try to discredit the attorneys of record on behalf of the HSAG.

The HSBF seeks to persuade HSAG members to support the alleged “HSBF Petition” (which has failed to date).

The irony of the matter is that participation in the HSAG is completely voluntary and that no one outside the HSAG can force its members to stop their legitimate action in order to recover their billions.

Registration forms to join the HSAG are only sent to members who contact us to request a form, or can be found on our website by individuals who wish to register on their own behalf. The HSAG thus does not force anyone to be part of the process, which is very cheap for investors and with which the HSAG is busy.

Because participation in the HSAG is voluntary, the HSBF Petition will not bear any weight in any court case. Any member of the HSAG who signs the petition’s membership will unfortunately be summarily terminated.

The HSAG does not intend to become involved in a mud slinging battle with Helgard Hancke, and focuses on the litigation process to recover the approximately R4.6 billion, which investors paid to Mr Nic Georgiou.

Helgard Hancke and Elna Visagie constantly steer away from the question of what has become of the R4.6 billion.

The HSAG has an ethical and moral obligation to point out to it’s faithful and appreciated members the risks of doing business with Mr Georgiou again.

For this reason, investors are welcome (in response to our previous warnings) to request answers to the following questions / statements from Helgard Hancke:

  1. Who is the “us” of which Helgard speaks so often? Is it himself and Orthotouch’s directors that consist of Nic Georgiou (who received R4.6 billion but did not return it or even give any account thereof) or Hans Klopper (the BRP supporting Georgiou in his court case and was not yet able to save the HS Companies) or maybe Connie Myburgh (who is very central to Orthotouch)?;
  2. It seems that Helgard did not listen properly to what was said or read carefully what was written about the “R1 per day cost”? There is certainly a very big difference between what the HSAG has “asked” and what the HSAG has “received”. At R1 per day, an investor can buy two white breads a month! Thus his statements of + – R15,000,000 are unfounded and again based on mere speculations or a misunderstanding of the simple facts before him;
  3. What the HSAG and Theron & Partners are busy doing, is to claim back the investors’ R4.6 billion from Nic Georgiou and his business. Since Helgard Hancke was kicked out of the HSAG, it could be assumed that he knows less. The scale of economy was explained to him, but he has not realised that the process is economical for the investor;
  4. Hancke is not an attorney or a financial advisor and he acts illegally when he gives legal and / or financial advice;
  5. The HSAG and Theron are not fighting personally against Hancke. On the contrary, he’s just another pawn to keep Nic Georgiou out of court or to wipe out investors’ claims. It is not the HSAG or Theron who are launching web sites that say “STOP HANCKE”! He makes himself guilty of tgat. In due course Helgard Hancke will be called to be accountable for the innocent and vulnerable elderly that he encourages with desperate motives to settle with an empty shell like Orthotouch. The risk of contributing R1 per day to Theron & Partners in fees is surely a much lower risk than that of a liquidator who one day sues for monies paid by Orthotouch or even wants to claim their homes?;
  6. Helgard Hancke should come clean and tell everyone who is on the “management” of the so-called HSBF. Did he also forget to put their names on the first newsletter, as when he forgot to sign his own name and called it a “printing devil”?


HSAG Admin

14 September 2017




Mr Helgard Hancke and his entity, Aprobase CC (which entity is in the process of deregistration), withdrew their Application to Intervene and support for the Leave to Appeal by Mr Nic Georgiou and others, merely a day before the matter was set to be heard.

Mr Helgard Hancke and Aprobase CC tendered to pay the party-party costs of the HSAG.

Due to the fact that Mr Nic Georgiou / Orthotouch would petition the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) against any favourable decission for the HSAG, the HSAG decided on 5 September 2017 that the Johannesburg matter, before the Honourable Judge Ismail, also be referred to the Supreme Court of Appeal to be heard on a speedy basis. Judge Ismail was accordingly requested, with the consent of the opposing parties, to make an Order to that effect.

The parties’ legal representatives also committed to a request to the Registrar of the SCA that both the Pretoria and Johannesburg appeals be heard simultaneously.

We thank every HSAG member for their continuous support and shall keep you posted on future developments.

HSAG Steering Committee