Pick n Pay Under Pressure as Former Franchisees Demand Answers, Claim Lives Were Left in Ruins
Pick n Pay Under Pressure as Former Franchisees Demand Answers, Claim Lives Were Left in Ruins
A growing dispute between former Pick n Pay franchisees and one of South Africa’s largest retailers has entered a critical phase, with affected business owners demanding accountability and giving the company seven days to formally respond to their grievances.
Standing alongside members of the Progressive Forces of South Africa, former franchisees delivered a memorandum to Pick n Pay Stores Ltd this week, accusing the retail giant of failing to adequately address concerns that have lingered for years.
For many in the group, the issue is about more than business losses. They say it is about livelihoods destroyed, family savings wiped out and years of effort that ended in financial hardship.
The memorandum calls for meaningful engagement and a process that promotes fairness, accountability and justice for all affected parties.
Years of Frustration Reach Boiling Point
Representatives who handed over the memorandum said former franchisees have repeatedly attempted to engage with Pick n Pay over their concerns but believe their grievances have not been properly resolved.
They argued that the matter has dragged on for far too long and insisted that the retailer now provide a written response within seven days.
According to the memorandum, affected franchisees want a formal process that allows their concerns to be heard and addressed through constructive engagement.
The group warned that continued delays could intensify tensions and lead to broader mobilisation involving community structures and other organisations.
Claims of Financial Devastation
At the centre of the dispute are allegations from former franchisees who say they suffered significant financial losses after investing heavily in Pick n Pay-linked businesses.
Several claim they poured personal savings into their stores, took on debt and worked to turn around struggling operations, only to eventually lose their businesses under circumstances they believe were unfair.
Representatives argued that many of these business owners played a crucial role in local economies, particularly in township communities where stores often served as important economic anchors.
According to the group, franchise owners did more than operate supermarkets. They created jobs, supported local schools and contributed to the welfare of vulnerable families in their communities.
Questions Raised Over Black Franchise Ownership
The dispute has also reignited concerns around transformation and black economic participation within the retail sector.
Members of the group questioned why several black former franchisees allegedly lost their stores, arguing that it cannot simply be accepted that numerous black store owners were unable to manage successful businesses.
They contend that these cases deserve closer scrutiny and transparent engagement.
“I Arrived With Two Houses, Now I Have Nothing”
Among the most emotional testimonies came from former franchisee Albert Lehong.
Lehong claimed that he and his late business partner were recruited from Woolworths and later invested R6.5 million into a Pick n Pay store.
According to Lehong, they successfully increased the store’s turnover from approximately R2 million to around R5 million.
However, he alleges that the opening of a nearby corporate Pick n Pay outlet severely damaged the business and contributed to its eventual downfall.
Speaking during the memorandum handover, Lehong painted a stark picture of the personal consequences.
“I arrived at Pick n Pay with two houses,” he said.
“Now I have nothing. I live in a backroom.”
His story became one of the defining moments of the gathering, highlighting the human impact behind the corporate dispute.
Franchisee Claims He Walked Away Empty-Handed
Another former franchisee, Irish Mudisani from Siyabuswa in Mpumalanga, shared his own account of financial loss.
Mudisani said he purchased a former Score supermarket after it was presented as a Black Economic Empowerment opportunity.
He claimed he paid approximately R1.8 million for the store despite concerns about the condition of its equipment.
According to Mudisani, the store was later sold for R4 million, a figure he believes was significantly below its true value.
He argued that, based on a valuation formula of 2.2 times turnover, the business should have been worth approximately R16 million.
Mudisani further alleged that the R4 million sale price merely covered outstanding debts, leaving him with no financial return.
He called on government, community stakeholders and Pick n Pay itself to intervene and help resolve the matter.
Franchisees Demand a Seat at the Table
Former franchisees say they are not seeking confrontation but meaningful dialogue.
During the handover, representatives stressed that they want a formal meeting where affected individuals can sit down with Pick n Pay executives and discuss their grievances directly.
The group said it does not want to continue returning with memorandums and protests without seeing tangible progress.
At the same time, they made it clear that further action remains an option if they believe the company’s response falls short of addressing their concerns.
Pick n Pay Responds
Representatives from Pick n Pay received the memorandum and indicated that the company would provide a written response within the seven-day period requested by the group.
That response is now being closely watched by former franchisees, community organisations and observers interested in corporate accountability within South Africa’s retail sector.
As the deadline approaches, the dispute appears set to remain firmly in the public spotlight.
For the former franchisees waiting for answers, the next seven days could determine whether years of frustration finally lead to meaningful engagement, or whether the battle for accountability enters a new and more confrontational chapter.
