SOUTH AFRICA: Tootabi Hunting Safaris What Is The Wounded Policy And Billing Issues

[Scott Slough]

All hunters/members identify very quickly with Royal or any other hunter in a similar situation.

AGREED! When I read Royal's first post, I thought there go I but by the grace of hunting large slow moving animals.

I do disagree with the characterization that Royal's original post (the duiker issue in particular) is about money. I trust Royal when he says it is not about the money and I assume that it would have already been solved from Loodt’s perspective if it were simply about the money. It is about the unspoken bond between a hunter and his PH/Outfitter and how we treat each other as gentlemen.

I know that I would have ABSOLUTELY agreed to pay the fee in the heat of the moment as I would have felt that I had failed in my duties as a hunter and that I “owed” it to the animal to count it has taken. But I would have ABSOLUTELY expected my PH/Outfitter to not charge me … after the final due diligence shared (no blood/no pay). I would have expected some good natured ribbing about the miss (how close do you want the next one to be?) … with an emphasis on the next one because a good safari business is built on the NEXT animal and the NEXT safari. I have been reading CONTANTLY ! about all of this pink camo this and pink shirt that ... some of THAT humor and humility could have gone a long way toward solving this problem.

I know that I have learned a great deal in this thread and am sorry that it is coming at the expense of BOTH Royal and Loodt.

 

[johnnyblues]

Well this thread has brought out a lot of opinions and emotions. I being a somewhat "hot headed "Italian can understand everyone's point's and frustration here. But I think we are somewhat missing the bottom line. Loodt should have NEVER charged him PERIOD. Just like Jacques did for BillC Loodt should have known better than to maybe get a bit greedy and take Royals money. It takes a big man to say NO what's right is right, it's clearly in the contract what constitutes a trophy fee payment. Bill why does Loodt just address this ASAP and give his side of this? I m sure he can find the time to sit by the computer and address this firestorm. Human nature being what it is we assume when someone does not respond quickly it implies guilt. Would Pieter have done this? Would Pieter not have address this in a timely manner? My gut feeling from you after speaking so many times about Pieter is he would have put this to rest. Bill you are like me...I will defend my family to the death and my friends I would give my last dollar if they had none. I hope we can get closure on this soon. One last word...If I had a hunt booked with Loodt I would be quite concerned about my upcoming safari. That's the truth.

 

[Hank2211]

I know that I would have ABSOLUTELY agreed to pay the fee in the heat of the moment as I would have felt that I had failed in my duties as a hunter and that I “owed” it to the animal to count it has taken. But I would have ABSOLUTELY expected my PH/Outfitter to not charge me … after the final due diligence shared (no blood/no pay).

Agree 100% - on both hunter and PH. If there is no blood, then the PH should not have charged him - that's what he himself wrote in the contract that Royal signed. So the buck stops there. I don't think Royal did anything wrong by saying in the heat of the moment that it looked like a hit.

Challenge may be - and this is only speculation based on my experience in the same area - it is likely that Royal was hunting a property owned by a farmer or another person, and that landowner may have imposed a different standard on the hunt than that which Loodt imposed in his contract. That could put Loodt in a spot if the situation comes to pass, as it did here. But again, that's his problem, not Royal's.

No matter how I look at it, there is only one right result.

 

[brushmore]

One last word...If I had a hunt booked with Loodt I would be quite concerned about my upcoming safari. That's the truth.

Well I have a another hunt booked with Loodt and I am not concerned at all. I have no idea what's going on with the Loodt and Royal. I actually agree with @billc and will see how things turn out. All I can speak to is my experience.

First off, if I was in the situation that Royal was in with the blue duiker I am sure I would have done the exact same thing he did. In a way I am glad he brought that up because I learned a lot.

As for the other stuff, it's nothing like what I encountered. I was not going to go into this but given the direction of things I will. I paid my bill in advance and there was a mistake on my invoice, it didn't include my deposit. Loodt's reaction when I pointed out the error was apologetic and went out of his way to straighten things out. There is no way he was trying to rip me off or be dishonest in anyway. He didn't make excuses or anything like that. If you ask me, what ever computer system he uses for billing is not so good (I wrote software like this in the past so that's why I have that opinion).

As for the merchandise, in our room were shirts and hats when we arrived. I seem to remember there was a note that this was complimentary and if wanted more stuff he would sell it to us. I asked for a fleece jacket since I was ill prepared for the unseasonably cold weather. I expected to pay for this at the end but I was never charged. Maybe Loodt just forgot (I know I did at the time). But either way, I felt that I got way more than I expected with my packaged deal.

As for Loodt now responding yet, cut him some slack. Not all of us are glued to our computers. I know if I was in his shoes I would certainly work things out with Royal before I said anything publicly.

 

[BRICKBURN]

..............
I do disagree with the characterization that Royal's original post (the duiker issue in particular) is about money. ...................

I am not trying to characterize someones motive for posting this thread.

Would Royal have a grievance if he had NOT been charged/invoiced for these various items? NO.

Royal was invoiced and money changed hands. If he had not been charged for the Duiker there would not have been an issue.

 

[BRICKBURN]

So true...View attachment 43379

Have a look at the scars on that old cat. He has done some serious learning!

 

[Scott Slough]

I am not trying to characterize someones motive for posting this thread.

Would Royal have a grievance if he had NOT been charged/invoiced for these various items? NO.

Royal was invoiced and money changed hands. If he had not been charged for the Duiker there would not have been an issue.

My money statement was in response to a large number of posts and not BRICKBURN's specifically ... I should have been clearer!

 

[BRICKBURN]

My money statement was in response to a large number of posts and not BRICKBURN's specifically ... I should have been clearer!

It's alright mate. Just making sure.

 

[Mekaniks]

Let's hit the pause button until loodt shares. Opportunity to learn for all - thread is starting to take on a life if it's own. Wishing y'all a blessed day and hoping Royal finds resolution and we all learn from our mistakes and be bold enough to share with others when we fall and/or fail.

dt

+1 what he said!!
But until then

 

[Wheels]

As for the other stuff, it's nothing like what I encountered. I was not going to go into this but given the direction of things I will. I paid my bill in advance and there was a mistake on my invoice, it didn't include my deposit. Loodt's reaction when I pointed out the error was apologetic and went out of his way to straighten things out. There is no way he was trying to rip me off or be dishonest in anyway. He didn't make excuses or anything like that. If you ask me, what ever computer system he uses for billing is not so good (I wrote software like this in the past so that's why I have that opinion).

.

brushmore,

Glad you had a great hunt with Loodt. Hope your next one is even better.

Your willingness to step into the line of fire for a "friend in need" is commendable.

In saying that, could the example you give above be seen or construed as padding an invoice in hopes of it being missed? Perhaps it is a computer program, perhaps sloppiness, perhaps .....


At a minimum it seems that Loodt should do a much better job of reviewing his invoices prior to presenting them to the client.

Hopefully we will hear from Loodt soon.


This has been a good post by Royal. Thanks! Hopefully, we as hunters will scrutinize our invoices better. It is after all, our money. Hopefully outfitters will scrutinize their invoices to make sure there are no mistakes prior to presenting them.

All the best.

 

[Biddleman]

A lot has been said by many on this thread, except for the one person who needs to be saying something!! It's disappointing that that there hasn't been a response. Yes, I know that Loodt was away from a computer, but as it has been pointed out earlier in the thread we can all see that he has accessed the site and been in private conversations with others. He was able to communicate with Bill. If it were my business, my future and my company name was a sponsor on a forum, you bet your sweet ass I would of responded before the thread hit 8 pages, as I know most of us would have.

Don't get me wrong. It's not my intent to bash Loodt or anyone else here. But the "let's all pause and wait for a response" is getting to be a joke, when a response could of and should of been done by now.

 

[Areaonereal]

Being in sales for 43 years, problems can be alleviated if everyone is on the same page from the beginning. When the client arrives, sit down, go over the contract, policies regarding blood or no blood, if it is a package how is it handled if a certain animal is not taken, the days you booked, your arrival and departure days(how they are handled $$ wise). Your bottom line should reflect any deposit advanced and any additional charges, i.e. Tours, sight seeing trips to town, drinks, etc. After which both client and outfitter can discuss and settle any question then. Additional animals could be added as agreed to the final bill. The time to settle a problem is before it becomes a problem. The Outfitter should take the bull by the horns and address any Issues or concerns before it is brought to their attention by the client, if they notice a concern(the ability to read people is an art that develops over time), Problems do not just go away. Final settlement should be seamless and settled with a handshake, smile and a I will be back attitude from the client.
My son and I just returned from hunting with Tootabi. Our PHs were outstanding.
Loodt and his family treated us so well, I can not describe how difficult it was to leave such warm and considerate hospitality. We were guests and treated as Royalty. Consideration for additional or replacement animals was very fair and forthcoming.Settlement was seamless, except Loodt could not remember the deposit amount, when I told him, his comment was then that is what we deduct. I think we need a time out on this subject. Let the other side speak.. Simply speaking a Manilla folder on each client with all e mails and deposit receipts and any contracts could save any disagreements. We all like surprises at Christmas, but not at settlement on a safari that has been a memorable occasion. I hope this closes on a fair and considerate note for both parties.

 

[brushmore]

In saying that, could the example you give above be seen or construed as padding an invoice in hopes of it being missed? Perhaps it is a computer program, perhaps sloppiness, perhaps .....

There is no way that was the case whatsoever. I know this because we already had a discussion about this before hand. It was a clerical error and that's it. Inferring anything beyond that is just mud slinging.

 

[TEX84]

Royal, did you address this with Loodt privately before going public in this thread?

 

[Wheels]

There is no way that was the case whatsoever. I know this because we already had a discussion about this before hand. It was a clerical error and that's it. Inferring anything beyond that is just mud slinging.

Point made.

but

Mud slinging?




The OP deals with two examples of mistakes on the invoice.

You bring up an example of a mistake on an invoice. I simply ask the question.

Since my question, Areaonereal posts that Loodt couldn't remember the amount of his deposit. He doesn't imply anything wrong, just that Loodt didn't remember the amount of the deposit. Isn't the deposit an important part of the invoice and isn't it something that should be tracked and applied appropriately? Anyone who holds a deposit is a fiduciary and bears the responsibility of holding and keeping accurate records. An individual who takes the fiduciary duty seriously should know the amount of the deposit, not have to ask.

As I stated after my question to you. "Perhaps it is sloppiness", and perhaps it is. You and Areaonereal are both standing up for Loodt and yet you both had issues regarding deposits on your invoice. Sloppiness as a fiduciary is unacceptable.

We have heard from what, maybe 6 or 8 people that have hunted with Loodt on this thread and there are known mistakes/questions on at least three invoices. As I mentioned previously, at a minimum, Loodt needs to do a better job of reviewing his invoices prior to presenting them to the client.

Again, hopefully Loodt will join in the conversation soon.

 

[get015]

if there is no life to this thread and it's all air... (Why did it end up on here?)

My possible explanation.... Maybe it's a publicity stunt, once a year seems good... Who knows honestly at this point it's all open to interpretation........ Whatever each persons may be.....

 

[TokkieM]

Interesting that now there is more than one example of "mistakes" on invoices. Hard to believe a Professional Outfitter cannot keep track of who paid what. Can only ponder what else will come up.
Like Billc said earlier in the post it seems that not all hunting reports reflect the whole picture. Maybe if one of the gentleman who had a "mistake" made on their invoice before mentioned this in a report Royal would have been spared the problems.

The issue again is not so much about money,but I guess paying around 2000$ extra for nothing would not go down well with anyone. The issue is that there was a contract which stipulated that a wounded animal is considered wounded if blood is found,this was not the case. The "contract" Loodt's handshake and his word were broken when push came to shove. Which makes any of his words,handshakes and paper contracts worthless as he does not stick to them. Easy to stick with a contract when all goes well or its on your property the hunt is taking place. Loodt had a 3rd party here which is were the Blue Duiker was hunted. If this 3rd party insisted the Blue Duiker was wounded,Loodt should have asked him to prove it and or sorted the issue with said 3rd party,not with Royal.

Wait for Loodt don't wait for Loodt is not changing the fact that Royal had a breach of contract from Loodt's side. Now other invoice issues are popping up too. Nothing wrong with standing up for Loodt because he is a nice guy,something very wrong if he keeps making the same "mistakes" over and over again.

 

[Billcollector]

I have no dog in this fight at all. I have read this thing from beginning to end with some interest. It makes for good theatre, that's for sure.
One thing I do want to Say, however, is that this outfitter obviously never went to classes when it comes to Crisis 101. Doing nothing, not responding, is allowing this thread to spiral out of control. Every day that goes by is putting another nail in his reputations coffin. I have had wifi and cell service in the damnedest of places in Africa, so I can't buy the I can't communicate effectively thing. If I was the outfitter, I would call the OP, work everything out to the customers satisfaction, communicate this to AH and MOVE ON! Don't let conjecture, conspiracies and opinions fill the void due to your silence. Please! Get this done so we can go back to talking about ballistics and killing stuff!

 

[ChasingHemingway]

What is the cost of a blue duiker and Cape grysbuck? I know these are both special permit hunts, but was interested in actual cost of the hunt.

dt

 

[TokkieM]

Grysbuck around 950$ and Blue Duiker anything from 1000$ to 1900$ depending on who and were you hunt with.