Pretor Group
Claimed Business
|1|19 Reviews (last 12 months)|This business does not respond to reviews
Pretor Group
Claimed Business
|1
19 Reviews (last 12 months)
Does not respond to reviews
AI Review Summary
Based on recent customer reviews, Pretor Group is facing significant dissatisfaction from property owners and tenants across multiple complexes. Customers consistently mention frustrations around unanswered emails, lack of transparency in levy calculations, and unresolved maintenance issues such as leaking pavements, water damage, and structural cracks. A recurring theme is poor communication from staff and management, with owners reporting that queries go ignored for weeks. Concerns also extend to questionable contractor oversight, disputed deposit deductions, and perceived mismanagement at sectional title schemes, leaving customers feeling unheard and financially exposed.
Performance(last 12 months):
Trustindex Rating
1.8TrustIndex
1.8
Review Distribution
1|19 Reviews
Jul '25 - Jun '26
Recent reviews (19)
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Used this business recently? Share your experience to help others decide.
Share Your ExperienceA
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
4 May 2026, 13:54
Request for Transparency and Itemised Expenses Re: Levy Invoice for Peach Orchard - May 2026 (BPEA00054B)Request for Itemization of Metro Fibre Expense
Dear Ilonka, Good day. I would like to reiterate my request for a clear and fully itemised breakdown of all expenses. Transparency in this matter is essential for accurate accounting and tax compliance. I was not aware, based on discussions at the AGM, that expenses would be incorporated into the levy without detailed disclosure, as you have indicated. Furthermore, I had no understanding that such hidden or undisclosed expenses would affect the fundamental accounting principle of transparency. The inclusion of these amounts within levies, as you mentioned was proposed by the body corporate, may place owners in a position of non-compliance with tax requirements. I would appreciate your clarification on this point. It also appears that this approach was introduced by the Pretor executive managing agent without prior notice, whereas historically, under the trustees, expenses were consistently provided separately and fully itemised. Clarity on the reason for this change in practice would be appreciated. Additionally, the lack of response to both my previous requests and the owners’ attempts to contact you has raised concern. Open and timely communication would help address these issues and maintain trust. I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and a comprehensive response. Kind regards, Very concerned owners
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
4 May 2026, 13:54
Request for Transparency and Itemised Expenses Re: Levy Invoice for Peach Orchard - May 2026 (BPEA00054B)Request for Itemization of Metro Fibre Expense
Dear Ilonka, Good day. I would like to reiterate my request for a clear and fully itemised breakdown of all expenses. Transparency in this matter is essential for accurate accounting and tax compliance. I was not aware, based on discussions at the AGM, that expenses would be incorporated into the levy without detailed disclosure, as you have indicated. Furthermore, I had no understanding that such hidden or undisclosed expenses would affect the fundamental accounting principle of transparency. The inclusion of these amounts within levies, as you mentioned was proposed by the body corporate, may place owners in a position of non-compliance with tax requirements. I would appreciate your clarification on this point. It also appears that this approach was introduced by the Pretor executive managing agent without prior notice, whereas historically, under the trustees, expenses were consistently provided separately and fully itemised. Clarity on the reason for this change in practice would be appreciated. Additionally, the lack of response to both my previous requests and the owners’ attempts to contact you has raised concern. Open and timely communication would help address these issues and maintain trust. I would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter and a comprehensive response. Kind regards, Very concerned owners
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
21 Apr 2026, 08:54
Re: Levy Invoice for Peach Orchard - May 2026 (BPEA00054B)Request for Itemization of Metro Fibre Expense
Dear Sir/Madam, Good day. Please note that the Metro Fibre expense must be itemized separately, as discussed on several occasions. This is required for proper accounting and record-keeping purposes. We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter, as there is growing concern among the owners regarding the lack of transparency. Kind regards, Concerned Owners
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
21 Apr 2026, 08:54
Re: Levy Invoice for Peach Orchard - May 2026 (BPEA00054B)Request for Itemization of Metro Fibre Expense
Dear Sir/Madam, Good day. Please note that the Metro Fibre expense must be itemized separately, as discussed on several occasions. This is required for proper accounting and record-keeping purposes. We would appreciate your prompt attention to this matter, as there is growing concern among the owners regarding the lack of transparency. Kind regards, Concerned Owners
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
1 Apr 2026, 05:28
Deeply concerning management and transparency issues
I would like to formally raise concerns regarding the management and governance practices at The Bolton in Rosebank. Firstly, there is a clear mismatch between the levies charged and the standard of maintenance. Myself as an owner, am paying levies in excess of R4,500 per month for a one-bedroom unit, yet the building continues to experience persistent issues, including ****roach infestations and repeated water outages. This is particularly concerning given that the property is marketed as having reserve water tanks to address such disruptions. Secondly, the level of transparency in decision-making processes undermines trust and accountability. Annual and Special General Meetings are conducted via webinar platforms where participants are not visible to one another. This format limits visibility of who is online and raises concerns about the integrity and verification of voting outcomes. A notable example is a recent building repainting project, which was presented to owners at a reported cost exceeding R1 million. Management indicated that the proposal was approved; however, there was no transparent mechanism for owners to verify voter participation or the legitimacy of the outcome. Finally, there appears to be inconsistency in how communication policies are app****. Requests to establish an independent owners’ WhatsApp group have been declined on the basis of the POPI Act, yet management themselves have created a building-wide WhatsApp group (with more than 200 pax) for announcements, where only administrators may post. This suggests that the issue is less about compliance and more about controlling communication and blocking owner engagement. Taken together, the high levies, ongoing maintenance issues, and lack of transparency create a deeply frustrating ownership experience. These concerns warrant urgent attention!
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
1 Apr 2026, 05:28
Deeply concerning management and transparency issues
I would like to formally raise concerns regarding the management and governance practices at The Bolton in Rosebank. Firstly, there is a clear mismatch between the levies charged and the standard of maintenance. Myself as an owner, am paying levies in excess of R4,500 per month for a one-bedroom unit, yet the building continues to experience persistent issues, including ****roach infestations and repeated water outages. This is particularly concerning given that the property is marketed as having reserve water tanks to address such disruptions. Secondly, the level of transparency in decision-making processes undermines trust and accountability. Annual and Special General Meetings are conducted via webinar platforms where participants are not visible to one another. This format limits visibility of who is online and raises concerns about the integrity and verification of voting outcomes. A notable example is a recent building repainting project, which was presented to owners at a reported cost exceeding R1 million. Management indicated that the proposal was approved; however, there was no transparent mechanism for owners to verify voter participation or the legitimacy of the outcome. Finally, there appears to be inconsistency in how communication policies are app****. Requests to establish an independent owners’ WhatsApp group have been declined on the basis of the POPI Act, yet management themselves have created a building-wide WhatsApp group (with more than 200 pax) for announcements, where only administrators may post. This suggests that the issue is less about compliance and more about controlling communication and blocking owner engagement. Taken together, the high levies, ongoing maintenance issues, and lack of transparency create a deeply frustrating ownership experience. These concerns warrant urgent attention!
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
27 Mar 2026, 14:42
Levy Variations and Metro Fibre Itemisation Request
Dear Ilonka, I trust you are well. I am writing to request clarification regarding the variation in levy amounts charged over the past few months. The amounts reflected are as follows: February 2026: R1,394.96 March 2026: R1,891.88 April 2026: R1,645.88 Could you kindly provide a detailed explanation for these differences, and confirm what the standard monthly levy will be going forward? In addition, we would like to formally raise our concern regarding the inclusion of Metro Fibre costs within the overall levy amount. As previously communicated to Pretor on several occasions, and as also outlined by the accountant, the Metro Fibre expense should be itemised separately. This will allow for greater transparency and enable owners to clearly determine the exact cost associated with this service. We kindly request that this matter be addressed and that future levy statements reflect Metro Fibre as a distinct line item. I would appreciate your prompt response, as these discrepancies are a matter of concern. Kind regards, Very concerned owners
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
27 Mar 2026, 14:42
Levy Variations and Metro Fibre Itemisation Request
Dear Ilonka, I trust you are well. I am writing to request clarification regarding the variation in levy amounts charged over the past few months. The amounts reflected are as follows: February 2026: R1,394.96 March 2026: R1,891.88 April 2026: R1,645.88 Could you kindly provide a detailed explanation for these differences, and confirm what the standard monthly levy will be going forward? In addition, we would like to formally raise our concern regarding the inclusion of Metro Fibre costs within the overall levy amount. As previously communicated to Pretor on several occasions, and as also outlined by the accountant, the Metro Fibre expense should be itemised separately. This will allow for greater transparency and enable owners to clearly determine the exact cost associated with this service. We kindly request that this matter be addressed and that future levy statements reflect Metro Fibre as a distinct line item. I would appreciate your prompt response, as these discrepancies are a matter of concern. Kind regards, Very concerned owners
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
26 Mar 2026, 07:05
Issues and concerns were not resolved
Pretor Group doesn’t care about owners complaints or concerns, I had laid a complaint and they don’t give feedback nor do they update you of any details, I personally thought they would do better by addressing issues that concern tenants or owners. I’m from wonderboom south and I would not recommend them, they are negligence of their clients and it’s sad. All they do is just drag the matter even when proof is there!
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
26 Mar 2026, 07:05
Issues and concerns were not resolved
Pretor Group doesn’t care about owners complaints or concerns, I had laid a complaint and they don’t give feedback nor do they update you of any details, I personally thought they would do better by addressing issues that concern tenants or owners. I’m from wonderboom south and I would not recommend them, they are negligence of their clients and it’s sad. All they do is just drag the matter even when proof is there!
0
Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Feb 2026, 20:19
Galloway Irene. Do not buy here whatever you do!
I regret buying an apartment at Galloway and cannot wait to get rid of it! I lived here for 2 years prior to the purchase as a happy tenant. In a corner top floor apartment and a block in quiet block. Little did I know I was heading for a disaster by purchasing a ground floor apartment. The walls are so thin you hear everything your neighbors are doing and saying. Nevermind above you, there is a gym rat that excerises and jumps rope away through the entire night. It's hell you can barely sleep. The first sign I should have had of this terrible purchase was when I moved in within the first week the stove wasn't working and the fuse had been blown out, the water pressure in the bathrooms is extremely low it takes a good 3 flushes just to clear everything. My outside tap doesn't run any water and I have asked for this to be sorted since October 2025. The caretaker just shrugs his shoulders and say it's in the hand of Pretor. Clearly the cheapest materials were used to build these apartments. Don't bother. Unless it's a quiet top floor corner unit where you are not distracted by any chatter from next door and crazy gym rats doing jumping jack's above you. The kids here also have absolutely no boundaries despite that being a parenting issue they open the gates to your garden and just play around as they please. Despite the understanding of what a sectional title means and access thereof this is extremely frustrating. Stay away for your sanity. 💔😭
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
13 Feb 2026, 20:19
Galloway Irene. Do not buy here whatever you do!
I regret buying an apartment at Galloway and cannot wait to get rid of it! I lived here for 2 years prior to the purchase as a happy tenant. In a corner top floor apartment and a block in quiet block. Little did I know I was heading for a disaster by purchasing a ground floor apartment. The walls are so thin you hear everything your neighbors are doing and saying. Nevermind above you, there is a gym rat that excerises and jumps rope away through the entire night. It's hell you can barely sleep. The first sign I should have had of this terrible purchase was when I moved in within the first week the stove wasn't working and the fuse had been blown out, the water pressure in the bathrooms is extremely low it takes a good 3 flushes just to clear everything. My outside tap doesn't run any water and I have asked for this to be sorted since October 2025. The caretaker just shrugs his shoulders and say it's in the hand of Pretor. Clearly the cheapest materials were used to build these apartments. Don't bother. Unless it's a quiet top floor corner unit where you are not distracted by any chatter from next door and crazy gym rats doing jumping jack's above you. The kids here also have absolutely no boundaries despite that being a parenting issue they open the gates to your garden and just play around as they please. Despite the understanding of what a sectional title means and access thereof this is extremely frustrating. Stay away for your sanity. 💔😭
0
Replies (0)A
A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
30 Nov 2025, 09:20
Concerns Regarding Remote Management, Caretaker Duties, and Duplicated Charges at Goldenfields
Dear Pretor Executive Management, We would like to raise several concerns regarding the current management approach at Goldenfields, particularly the reliance on remote supervision and the resulting operational, financial, and administrative issues. Recently, Ilonka indicated that proof was required to confirm rainy weather conditions, despite Pretor managing the complex remotely. Weather conditions are easily verifiable through the national Weather Bureau. In comparison, Lemon Tree permitted contractors to continue work during rainfall, and although their project was reportedly supervised, the pa****ts began leaking within months. This inconsistency raises legitimate concerns about the quality and reliability of oversight across complexes under Pretor’s management. We appeal to Pretor and its executive team to conduct proper due diligence. There appears to be mismanagement across multiple complexes—for example, Mews at Reds is a well-known case of poor oversight. We ask that Goldenfields not be treated as a test case for remote management systems. Residents live on-site, consistently invite management to inspect issues in person, and seek engagement that goes beyond feedback from the on-site caretaker. We are also concerned about the current caretaker arrangement. Chrisnet, who is elderly and uses a disability (green) parking permit displayed on her windscreen, is being tasked with responsibilities that are beyond reasonable expectation in Peach Orchard and Apricot Lane. The complex continues to deteriorate under this arrangement. In addition to this, we are being charged for caretaker services while residents are simultaneously required to perform administrative tasks on her behalf—including receiving phone calls during working hours to write emails for her and to provide evidence she should be able to obtain herself. This results in duplicated charges, as residents effectively carry out tasks for which we are already paying Pretor and the caretaker. There are further recurring issues with contractors: inconsistent standards, allegations of commission-based arrangements, and frequent instances where contractors are blamed for failures despite having acted under management’s instructions. We experienced a similar pattern during the plumbing project, where excessive water was consumed because the caretaker in Unit 22 for years used only the underground valve located in her garden—a valve that bypasses the meter entirely. Photographic evidence from her gardeners confirms this setup. When an “underground leak” was later mentioned, it closely resembled previous attempts to shift responsibility, raising concerns about whether the explanation was being used as a pretext. For these reasons, we urgently request the following: A full review of Pretor’s management practices at Goldenfields. Immediate on-site inspections by Pretor executives, rather than continued reliance on remote supervision. A reassessment of contractor oversight and appointment processes, including transparency around responsibilities and communication. A review of caretaker charges, to ensure residents are not paying for services that are not being performed or that residents are being forced to carry out themselves. Thank you for your attention. We look forward to constructive engagement and meaningful corrective action.
Helpful (0)
|Replies (0)A
Anonymous
1 reviews | Active since Jan 2020
30 Nov 2025, 09:20
Concerns Regarding Remote Management, Caretaker Duties, and Duplicated Charges at Goldenfields
Dear Pretor Executive Management, We would like to raise several concerns regarding the current management approach at Goldenfields, particularly the reliance on remote supervision and the resulting operational, financial, and administrative issues. Recently, Ilonka indicated that proof was required to confirm rainy weather conditions, despite Pretor managing the complex remotely. Weather conditions are easily verifiable through the national Weather Bureau. In comparison, Lemon Tree permitted contractors to continue work during rainfall, and although their project was reportedly supervised, the pa****ts began leaking within months. This inconsistency raises legitimate concerns about the quality and reliability of oversight across complexes under Pretor’s management. We appeal to Pretor and its executive team to conduct proper due diligence. There appears to be mismanagement across multiple complexes—for example, Mews at Reds is a well-known case of poor oversight. We ask that Goldenfields not be treated as a test case for remote management systems. Residents live on-site, consistently invite management to inspect issues in person, and seek engagement that goes beyond feedback from the on-site caretaker. We are also concerned about the current caretaker arrangement. Chrisnet, who is elderly and uses a disability (green) parking permit displayed on her windscreen, is being tasked with responsibilities that are beyond reasonable expectation in Peach Orchard and Apricot Lane. The complex continues to deteriorate under this arrangement. In addition to this, we are being charged for caretaker services while residents are simultaneously required to perform administrative tasks on her behalf—including receiving phone calls during working hours to write emails for her and to provide evidence she should be able to obtain herself. This results in duplicated charges, as residents effectively carry out tasks for which we are already paying Pretor and the caretaker. There are further recurring issues with contractors: inconsistent standards, allegations of commission-based arrangements, and frequent instances where contractors are blamed for failures despite having acted under management’s instructions. We experienced a similar pattern during the plumbing project, where excessive water was consumed because the caretaker in Unit 22 for years used only the underground valve located in her garden—a valve that bypasses the meter entirely. Photographic evidence from her gardeners confirms this setup. When an “underground leak” was later mentioned, it closely resembled previous attempts to shift responsibility, raising concerns about whether the explanation was being used as a pretext. For these reasons, we urgently request the following: A full review of Pretor’s management practices at Goldenfields. Immediate on-site inspections by Pretor executives, rather than continued reliance on remote supervision. A reassessment of contractor oversight and appointment processes, including transparency around responsibilities and communication. A review of caretaker charges, to ensure residents are not paying for services that are not being performed or that residents are being forced to carry out themselves. Thank you for your attention. We look forward to constructive engagement and meaningful corrective action.
0
Replies (0)