White farmers will still be expected to repay loans on land even if it is seized by the South African government, according to statements made by Nedbank.

A screenshot of an email ostensibly sent by a Nedbank client services resolution manager asserts that borrowers with mortgages on expropriated property will be obligated to continue bond payments – whether they are compensated by the government or not.

The email reads as follows –

Dear Customer,

Thank you for the query you have raised with regard to the impact of land expropriation to your bonded property.

Nedbank is not privy to what provisions may be made for land purchasers whose land is encumbered, and what the proposed Review Committee would come up with to address this. However, we believe a balance needs to be achieved between the parliamentary agenda, and in particular the law of contract.

It is important to note the Home Loan agreement is subject to a contractual agreement, and bond payments remain due and payable until such a time that the bond is paid in full, irrespective of any form of land appropriation – with or without compensation. We would encourage you to continue with the bond payments until such time a determination is made, the time of which is also unknown to us.

We trust that our response meets with your expectation.

The content of the email matches identical announcements released by Nedbank on social media.

Infowars has reached out to Nedbank regarding the email above and received a prepared statement the bank is issuing in response to queries about land expropriation –

The land debate itself has already had a negative impact on overall investor sentiment and, therefore, economic activity and job creation. But, so far, it has not yet directly affected Nedbank or the way we assess credit for our clients.

We fully support the democratic process and land reform debate and the need for historical redress, but it is vital that this sensitive and important issue is handled properly to ensure no lasting impact on economic growth and food security.

The recent announcement by President Cyril Ramaphosa seemed to pre-empt the Parliamentary process underway. Any proposed changes of Section 25 of the Constitution will still need to be fully debated and will have to pass constitutional and legal muster on multiple fronts.

The actual wording of any proposed changes will be absolutely vital and would need to be assessed before any economic and credit assessment impacts can be determined. We feel it would be wise to wait for this process, rather than pre-empt this without the detail.

Nedbank is participating in the current Parliamentary process and debate and has made a submission. We emphasised in our submission that we did not support a change to Section 25 of the Constitution, as this already provides for expropriation without compensation in cases where a court holds this to be just and equitable or it is in the national interest.

The Banking Association of South Africa (BASA) has also made a submission.

Infowars has been regularly reporting on the developing situation in South Africa, and will continue to do so.

Dan Lyman: Follow @CitizenAnalyst