Nash Paints, MIPF rentals stalemate falls off

NASH Paints Group executive chairman, Tinashe Mutarisi’s US$27 000 rentals stalemate with the Mining Industry Pension Fund (MIPF), has been cleared, after the pensions fund body withdrew its claim with costs.

The impasse, which hogged the limelight in March, this year, after the businessman refused to pay rentals that the pensions fund body had raised in retrospect, has proved to be a no-brainer, albeit with some unwarranted bad publicity to the paint giant.

Reads part of the notice of withdrawal: “Take notice that the plaintiff (MIPF) herein withdraws its claim and tenders wasted costs.”

Of the new developments, Mr Mutarisi said he was happy to have the issue behind.

However, he feels some clarity would have helped avoid the “unnecessary” hype it carried.

“I am one person who upholds ethical business practices and I honestly felt the decision by MIPF was unfair to me and my business.

“We have had a fruitful business relationship and I was disappointed by their decision to unilaterally raise rentals in retrospect hence the fallout and subsequent court case, which could have been avoided through simple engagement and mutual respect,” he said.

According to the plaintiff’s founding affidavit, the Nash Paints boss agreed to be bound as surety and co-principal debtor with Nash Furnishers in a deed of suretyship signed on January 24, 2019.

The terms of agreement were that he would pay monthly rentals which include basic rent and operational costs.

They also agreed that if his company fails to pay, the plaintiff would be entitled to recover rent already due and damages for breach of contract being holdover damages.

Mr Mutarisi who also owns Nash Furnishers, Nashtv and Avion Mobile Technology, was trolled on social media over the reported rentals fall out, but remained steadfast in his call for justice.

Questions were raised how the business reportedly worth millions of US dollars would fail to pay such an outstanding rentals debt.

“Business is about respecting each other and my decision to question the rental increase was coming from a place of respect for standards.

“Everyone deserves respect and business is all about applying the rule of thumb hence my decision to question the move by MIPF. I am, however, happy that the case has been thrown out with costs and it’s back to business,” said Mr Mutarisi.

Mr Mutarisi has been dragged to court over the rentals stalemate with MIPF at premises housing his other business, Penmen Investments, trading as Nash Furnishers.

Penmen Investments were cited as the first respondent while Mr Mutarisi was second.-herald.clz.w