Rajesh “Tony” Gupta blasted the G4S security guards deployed to protect his family's luxury Saxonwold compound as nothing more than “monkeys”‚ an account captured in leaked emails suggest.
The emails point to an altercation that Gupta had with at least two guards in October 2012‚ after they failed to heed his orders for them to prepare for the arrival of guests.
The emails show that on October 2‚ an employee of Sahara – the Gupta's computer retailer company - wrote to former G4S general manager Lenord Zaal of G4S complaining about one of the guards and how the complaint had been sent to one of the company's directors‚ Atul Gupta.
G4S provides security to the Gupta's businesses‚ homes as well as drivers.
In a following letter addressed to Atul Gupta‚ the letter's author – a senior G4S security official stationed at the Gupta compound‚ said there was a “quite serious” problem with one of the guards who wanted to drive rather than guard the main gates.
The author said the problematic guard did not pay attention to his work and is‚ “most of the time engrossed in some activity”.
“Monday evening I was not on duty‚ but I understand that G4S did not hear Mr Tony‚ when Mr Tony called them repeatedly‚ to inform them that a guest would be arriving‚ the incident aggravated Mr Tony so much that he called them monkeys [sic].”
The author adds that the errant guard could cause a lot of trouble for the family by attempting to drive one of the vehicles‚ possibly killing an “innocent” person or a member of the family.
In response Zaal undertakes to address the matter‚ telling Roux that G4S's customer services manager had visited the compound to address the complaint.
“It was clearly indicated to him that he is not appointed as a driver but an armed officer at the gate. His PR skills need to (improve).”
The Gupta family's attorney‚ Gert van der Merwe‚ referred questions to the Gupta family spokesman Gary Naidoo for comment. He had not replied at the time of publication.
G4S spokesperson‚ Wendy Hardy‚ said that many of those who would have had knowledge of the alleged incident had left the company and that the company would require some time before it could respond properly to the allegations.
The video could not be loaded.