>>> Mona Pillay 02-Dec-10 01:24 PM >>>

Dear Carl,

Thank you for your response.

However what you fail to understand is that not everyone was aware of the fact that Chanel Ferreira worked for the Aleit group, even though you may say "it was clear to most of the contestants that Chanel was employed by the Aleit group". I personally do not know who those contestants are that knew this information and was openly discussing it in the competition as you say. I’m not sure as to how you would know this information as you were not around with the contestants for most of the event. I’m sure if you personally contact each of the contestants and ask them for their views about the issue of an employee from Aleit Group entering the competition and actually winning, then I’m sure you would certainly receive mixed unhappy reactions. Furthermore other contestants and I only found out that Chanel works for the Aleit group minutes before they announced the winners so how were we suppose to raise an objection at that point. Most of the contestants were shocked, upset and had left. It is still bias and unethical because even though Aleit was not one of the judges, he was a Sponsor and does have an association with Chanel Ferreira, despite the fact that there was an independent panel of judges. The facts speak for itself. If I had known this information prior to the 26th of November, I would have never wasted my time and money to be a contestant.

Regards,
Mona Pillay

>>> Carl Wallace info@weddingdiary.co.za> 01-Dec-10 05:26 PM >>

Dear Mona

We would like to thank you for taking part in the 2010 Bride of the Year competition. It was wonderful to have had the opportunity to meet you and I certainly hope that our paths cross again in future.

I am saddened about the way you feel the results of the event were handled. I would like to stress – most importantly - that The Aleit Group was not in charge of the competition or the related rules and regulations. They had no say in the method chosen to select the finalists nor did they have any input into the evaluation of the contestants on the night. In fact, they were not even consulted on how we ultimately came up with the 1st, 2nd and 3rd positions.

Furthermore, The Aleit Group has no form of ownership or profit share in Wedding Diary or in the Bride of the Year Competition. Regarded as South Africa’s top Wedding and Events Coordination company, I merely approached them to assist in executing the mechanics of this event. It was vital to gain sponsorship from the top suppliers in the industry because without this, the event would not have been possible. Aleit was clearly the key and his good relations with vendors in the industry helped us achieve our goal.As you may or may not be aware, Aleit Swanepoel was originally part of the judging panel. The minute one of his staff members entered the competition, I asked him to step down which is what he did - immediately and with grace. The ultimate results of the competition were decided upon by an independent judging panel and to this end I can confirm that everything was above board. This statement is supported by the extended time it took them to award a winner on the night. The decision was a clearly a tough choice!From a legal perspective I would like to bring the following points to your attention:

· The competition was open to all brides who were married between June 2009 and June 2010. There were no restrictions of any kind as to the status of the entrants.

· There was no condition as to the exclusion of any entrants, whether they were employed by the organizers, sponsors or anybody else involved in the competition or otherwise. This was clear to all the entrants before they entered this competition. It was therefore to be expected that ANY bride could enter, whether the bride was involved with any of the related entities or not. Such terms would have been written into the competition rules should we have had reason to exclude a special class of people. A complaint could thus also be made against any of the other contestants entering for any reason whatsoever·

The judges were all independent of the Aleit Group and Aleit resigned as a judge to ensure fairness. There is further no averment that the winner was favoured due to her connection with the Aleit Group.

· Apart from a form of working relationship between some of the entities, there is no suggestion of any bias by any of the judges or any proof thereof.

· It was clear to most of the contestants that Chanel Ferreira was employed by the Aleit Group as this was openly discussed during the competition. Should this have been a problem for the contestants, or if they felt during the course of the competition that the judging would not be fair due to the said fact, this surely would have been raised by the contestants before the final decision was made. The fact that the same was not raised as an objection indicates to the merit of Chanel being chosen as a clear winner.

· With regards to the point raised regarding the Lotteries Act, the Lotteries Act, Act 57 of 1997, does not apply to this competition as there was no competition entry fee or subscription fee payable by the entrants. Furthermore, the competition cannot be seen as a “lottery” as the prizes were not distributed by luck or chance.

· There is, in summary, no legal basis for the complaints lodged to date.With regards to the complaints regarding the judging, the costs and the association between the relevant entities - the rules are clear namely:

9.1 The orginasiers reserved the right to amend the terms and conditions at any time;

9.2 Rule 6 – The judges decision is final and no correspondence will be entered into;

9.3 Rule 7 – Flights and accommodation will not be paid for by Wedding Diary;If you have any further questions or wish to submit feedback regarding the above please do not hesitate to contact me, Carl Wallace at info@weddingdiary.co.za.

Kind Regards

Carl Wallace 084 501 5910

Managing Director

Wedding Diarywww.weddingdiary.co.za