A purchase order raised by LNDC for Clever Choice (Pty) Ltd totalled M402,690. By the time payment was processed, the amount had fallen to M242,850. A handwritten note cites the omission of two items. The items are not named. The supporting letters are not in the file.
This is the second part of a three-part investigation into maintenance expenditure at the LNDC Hlotse Residential Outestate in Leribe. Part One examined how M545,238 was paid to SPT Construction under a completion certificate, while nine major items were later found undelivered. Part Three examines the procurement process that brought in a third round of service providers in 2022.
Maseru — On 22 March 2021, the Lesotho National Development Corporation raised a purchase order for alteration and additional work at the Hlotse Residential Outestate. The contractor was Clever Choice (Pty) Ltd. The purchase order number was 2674. The total value of the works listed across ten line items, excluding tax, came to M402,690.01.
By the time the payment was processed three months later, the amount had shrunk to M242,850. Then it shrank again. The audit slip records a final disbursement of M230,707.50. No public explanation was ever given for the difference between what the purchase order authorised and what was ultimately paid.
22 March 2021
21–22 June 2021
25 June 2021
The gap between the purchase order total and the approved payment is M159,840 — more than a third of the entire contract value. No itemised record of which two items were omitted appears in the documents reviewed by the Lesotho Tribune.
The documents reviewed by the Lesotho Tribune do not contain any amended order, any variation certificate, or any formal record identifying which works were dropped and why. What the file does contain is a single handwritten comment on the payment processing approval form.
“Pls note the reduced order amount to M242,850.00 following omission of 2 items on the purchase order and supported by attached letters from the contractor confirming same.”
Handwritten note, LNDC payment processing approval, June 2021The two omitted items are not named. The letters from the contractor referred to in that comment do not appear in the document bundle reviewed by this newspaper. The gap between the purchase order total and the amount approved for payment is not a rounding difference or a VAT adjustment. It is the equivalent of more than a third of the entire contract value, removed from the payment with no itemised justification visible in the documents.
| Item | Amount |
|---|---|
| Paving bricks — 672m² herringbone pattern with DPM | M147,840 |
| Perimeter fence — 210m galvanised diamond mesh with barbed wire | M94,500 |
| Designed sliding steel gate — 6m with pedestrian gate | M21,350 |
| Diamond mesh gate same as existing, Fort Knox padlock | M4,000 |
| Window blinds — 43 vertical navy blue, all openings | M12,000 |
| Carpentry and joinery — seal all baths with chipboard | M2,500 |
| Wardrobes — shelving for files, varnish paint | M4,500 |
| Wetworks — guardhouse construction, electricity, plumbing, plastering | M88,000 |
| Replaster and repaint main house (Moon Dust S1000-N) | M6,000 |
| Metalwork — burglar-proof all external doors, gloss enamel paint | M22,000 |
| Purchase order total (excl. tax) | M402,690 |
| Amount actually approved for payment | M242,850 |
Unexplained reduction: M159,840 · Items omitted: unnamed · Supporting letters: not in file
The purchase order itself, printed on 22 March 2021, runs across two pages and lists ten distinct items. The approval signatures on the payment processing form belong to the PMO, PM, and GM-PDM, dated 21 and 22 June 2021.
A further anomaly emerges from the dates on the documents. The Certificate of Practical Completion for Order 2674, signed by LNDC’s maintenance clerk Ntlamelle and the Clever Choice contractor, bears the date 1 June 2021. The invoice submitted by Clever Choice, Invoice No. 013, also carries the date 1 June 2021. The completion certificate and the invoice are therefore dated the same day.
Under standard procurement practice, a certificate of practical completion is issued after a physical inspection confirming the contractor has met the specifications of the order. Issuing such a certificate on the same day as the contractor’s invoice raises the question of whether an independent inspection was conducted at all.
The leasing officer’s signature on the certificate carries a different date, 15 June 2021, suggesting a 14-day gap between when Ntlamelle signed and when the second signatory added their approval. No explanation for the discrepancy in signing dates appears in the documents.
Once payment was approved at M242,850, a further reduction appears at the disbursement stage. The audit slip records the total amount as M230,707.50. The difference of M12,142.50 corresponds to a withholding tax deduction at five percent, which is a standard statutory requirement. That deduction is therefore explicable. The gap between the purchase order total and the payment approval is not.
The works in the Clever Choice scope — paving, fencing, plastering, burglar-proofing, a guardhouse, and window blinds — are substantively different from those in the SPT Construction scope of 2020. They are not the same items being paid for twice. They represent a separate tranche of expenditure on the same property.
None of this expenditure prevented the February 2022 task team from finding the building structurally compromised and unfit for use as a regional office.
By the time the Clever Choice payment was processed in June 2021, cumulative expenditure on the Hlotse Residential Outestate had reached at minimum M821,288 across three payment cycles. Eight months later, the corporation’s own task team could not hold a meeting in the building.
The corporation has not responded to questions about the Clever Choice contract, including why the two omitted items were not identified by name in the payment processing documentation, what became of the contractor’s supporting letters referenced in the handwritten comment, and on what basis the Certificate of Practical Completion was issued on the same date as the invoice.
By early 2022, LNDC was preparing to solicit yet another round of service providers for the same property. The evaluation process that followed produced its own set of questions. Those are examined in Part Three.
“`
