Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Former Gender Equality commissioner Mbuyiselo Botha denied leave payment claim

August 5, 2026

Food order dispute at workplace canteen ultimately costs employee his long-held job

August 5, 2026

High Court clarifies when housebreaking with intent to steal becomes theft

August 5, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Former Gender Equality commissioner Mbuyiselo Botha denied leave payment claim
  • Food order dispute at workplace canteen ultimately costs employee his long-held job
  • High Court clarifies when housebreaking with intent to steal becomes theft
  • Woman’s fabricated lobolo letter costs her claim to man’s estate and pension
  • PIC CEO Patrick Dlamini’s suspension ruled unlawful by Pretoria High Court
  • Accommodation failures at SAPS and correctional centres undermine public service delivery
  • High Court tells NERSA to review Musina Municipality’s late electricity tariff application
  • Johannesburg Labour Court tightens rules for urgent applications and motion proceedings
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Legacy Builders fails to prove claims consumers can earn up to R92 000 working two hours a day
Consumer Protection Law

Legacy Builders fails to prove claims consumers can earn up to R92 000 working two hours a day

Advertising Regulatory Board rules that the programme's headline earnings promises were not backed by evidence and orders members to stop carrying the claims until they are substantiated.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliAugust 4, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
The Advertising Regulatory Board ruled that Legacy Builders failed to substantiate claims consumers could earn up to R92 000 a month through its programme.The Advertising Regulatory Board ruled that Legacy Builders failed to substantiate claims consumers could earn up to R92 000 a month through its programme.
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • The Advertising Regulatory Board partially upheld a complaint against Legacy Builders and Rooi Kwagga Digital.
  • The Directorate found no evidence supporting claims that consumers could earn between R1 600 and R92 000 a month.
  • ARB members have been told not to accept advertising with these earnings claims until they are independently substantiated.

An 18-page promotional brochure for the Legacy Builders programme told prospective customers they could earn between R1 600 and R92 000 a month, work for as little as two hours a day, and build what was described as an automated online business.

The complaint stemmed from an 18-page promotional brochure that marketed the Legacy Builders programme as a ready-made online business capable of generating substantial monthly income.

On its cover, the brochure asked: "What if you could earn R30 000 p.m. extra online?" alongside an image of a man using a laptop while lying on a beach. It also claimed that more than 7 500 people in South Africa and 58 000 worldwide were using the programme to earn dollars online with a cellphone, Wi-Fi and a computer in just two hours a day because an "automatic system" worked for them around the clock.

Inside, the brochure presented six earning "options", suggesting participants could earn between R1 600 and R92 000 a month depending on the programme they purchased. It also indicated that customers could upgrade to more lucrative packages by paying the difference, while another page suggested earning $900 four times would generate "R60 000 p.m."

Those promises have now come under scrutiny, with the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) finding that the company did not provide any evidence to show the advertised earnings were achievable.

In a ruling issued on 30 July 2026, the ARB Directorate partially upheld a consumer complaint against Legacy Builders and Rooi Kwagga Digital, concluding that the programme's income claims broke the Code of Advertising Practice as they were not substantiated.

Complaint questioned extraordinary earnings

The complaint focused on the brochure's repeated claims that consumers could generate substantial monthly income by joining the programme. Among the challenged statements were promises that participants could earn an extra R30 000 a month online. Another section offered a range of monthly earning "options" from R1 600 to R92 000, depending on the programme chosen.

The complainant argued that the advertising made the income seem realistic and attainable, even though there was no evidence that customers actually reached those results. She also noted that the brochure gave the impression people could start earning almost immediately, though participants first had to complete several weeks of training.

Legacy Builders did not respond to the complaint or provide any material to back up its advertising claims. Even so, the Directorate went ahead with the matter, saying it was obliged to consider the complaint for the guidance of its members.

Directorate separates training from earnings

The Directorate separated the complainant's two main arguments. On the question of training, the Directorate found that the brochure repeatedly mentioned e-learning modules, coaching, community support and a 30-day classroom programme. Taken as a whole, the Directorate decided that consumers were sufficiently informed that they would have to complete training before making any income.

"The booklet calls this a 'programme' and makes it clear that learning modules need to be completed," the ruling states. It added that "a reasonable person would understand this to mean you have to learn how to do the work before you start earning from it."

For that reason, the Directorate rejected the claim that the advertising misled consumers into thinking they could start earning immediately without training.

No evidence for the promises

The Directorate reached a very different conclusion when it looked at the income claims at the heart of the marketing campaign. It found that Legacy Builders could not prove the extraordinary income promises at the centre of its advertising. The claims that consumers could earn between R1 600 and R92 000 a month were not backed by any evidence.

While the Directorate accepted that the brochure made it clear participants would need to complete training first, it found that the advertiser had not produced any credible proof that the advertised income was achievable or realistic for most consumers.

The ruling notes that the brochure presented the earning figures as "options", making it seem like consumers could choose how much they wanted to earn just by picking a particular programme. It also repeatedly referred to "100% profit", but the advertiser did not show any evidence that customers actually achieved those returns.

"There is nothing before the Directorate to show that the claimed income potential of between R1 600 and R92 000 per month is valid, accurate, or even representative of a typical customer's income," the ruling says. It ultimately found that the earnings claims were "currently unsubstantiated" and broke Clause 4.1 of Section II of the Code of Advertising Practice.

Advertising members instructed to reject claims

The finding has immediate consequences for how the programme can be advertised by ARB members. The Directorate told members not to accept any advertising promoting the Legacy Builders programme if it includes earning potential, until the advertiser submits new proof according to the Code and that evidence is accepted through a new ruling.

The Directorate also made it clear it was not deciding whether the Legacy Builders business itself was legitimate. Its job was only to decide whether the advertising followed the Code of Advertising Practice.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

Advertising Regulatory Board consumer protection Legacy Builders Rooi Kwagga Digital
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Judge recalls car repossession order after Nedbank client arrives late for hearing

July 30, 2026

ARB says Castle Lager influencer Jana Swart should have disclosed sponsored post

July 28, 2026

Consumers warned against paying for misleading quick exit debt review promises

July 25, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 7   +   4   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

June 2, 2025
Don't Miss
Constitutional Law
4 Mins Read

Former Gender Equality commissioner Mbuyiselo Botha denied leave payment claim

By Kennedy MudzuliAugust 5, 20264 Mins Read

The High Court in Johannesburg ruled that former Gender Equality commissioner Mbuyiselo Botha cannot claim payment for accumulated leave because commissioners are public office bearers, not employees.

Food order dispute at workplace canteen ultimately costs employee his long-held job

August 5, 2026

High Court clarifies when housebreaking with intent to steal becomes theft

August 5, 2026

Woman’s fabricated lobolo letter costs her claim to man’s estate and pension

August 5, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
OUR PICKS

Legal Practice Council ordered to disclose records behind English-only admission exams

July 28, 2026

Attorney who briefs advocate remains liable for fees unless agreement states otherwise

July 30, 2026

R112,000 hospital bill reduced to R750, allowing refugee child’s body to be released for burial

August 3, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
►
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
►
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
►
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
►
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
►
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by