A couple, who purchased a property without a boundary wall, wants to know if the previous owner can be forced to erect one if he has verbally agreed to do so.

Nothing has come of his promise and they are now building the wall themselves, but want to know whether they have any recourse.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says in order to comply with the provisions of section 2(1) of the Alienation of Land Act 68 of 1981, the whole contract of sale of land, or at any rate all the material terms thereof, must be in writing and signed by the parties.

“The material terms are not confined to those prescribing essential terms such as the parties, the property description and purchase price, but include all other material terms.”

Geldenhuys says it is not easy to define what constitutes a material term, but what has emerged from South African case law is that a material term is not necessarily one of the essentials of a contract of sale.

“If the boundary wall was a material term of the contract between the reader and the seller, the contract would not comply with the terms of the Alienation of Land Act, and as such would be of no force and effect.”

However, says Geldenhuys, it is most likely the case that the obligation to build the wall was not material to such an extent that it could affect the validity of the contract. “If one assumes that the contract is valid, the next step would be to examine its contents.”

If the contract includes a term stating that it is the whole agreement between the parties, the reader would not be able to hold the seller to his promise, according to Geldenhuys.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says it may be that the seller undertook to build the wall after the contract was signed, and the parties accordingly varied the contract by adding this additional obligation on the seller.

“The general rule is that parties to a contract are free to vary their contract as they deem fit, but this is subject to certain limitations.”

Similarly, says Van der Merwe, the parties may impose restrictions of subsequent variations by incorporating a non-variation clause. “This may be done with the object of achieving certainty and avoiding disputes about whether a variation has been agreed upon.”

Van der Merwe says a non-variation clause would typically state that no variation will be enforceable unless in writing and signed by both parties. “If the reader’s contract contains such a clause, the reader will not be able to depend on the subsequent verbal variation as agreed upon in the contract and as is required by the act.”

The possibility exists that the seller made a separate verbal contract with the reader after the conclusion of the contract, says Van der Merwe.

“Such a verbal contract may fall outside the ambit of the contract for the property, and may be enforceable, and the reader may consider obtaining legal advice if such a possibility exists.”

Van der Merwe says if one excludes the above possibility, the seller appears to have merely made a verbal promise and the reader will not be able to hold him to it as it is not part of their written contract.

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

One of our readers finds herself in the midst of a dispute with her landlord regarding alleged arrear rental.

She says she has signed a written agreement whereby she agreed to pay R3 200 per month. An equal amount was provided as a deposit.

The reader says she has made her payments regularly, and on time, for a year before the landlord’s letting agent informed her that the actual amount was R3 300 and that she was therefore in arrears.

The landlord is also threatening to use the deposit to cover any “outstanding monies”.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says the relationship between a landlord and tenant is mainly contractually driven. “Unfortunately, despite requesting it, our reader does not have a copy of the contract that she originally signed.”

He says the Rental Housing Act of 1999 provides that the lease agreement does not have to be in writing, but the landlord has to reduce it to writing if so requested by the tenant.

Van der Merwe says a lease would typically set out the monthly rental agreed upon, when it is payable and the landlord’s remedies should the tenant be in arrears.

“Failure to pay the agreed amount constitutes a breach of the agreement. In this instance, the amount is in dispute.

“Let us assume that the rental agreed upon was in fact R3 300 per month and that our reader mistakenly paid the incorrect amount for a year,” says Van der Merwe.

“She could make out a strong argument that by accepting the lesser amount for that length of time, the landlord had tacitly agreed to amend the agreement. Otherwise he probably would have raised an objection after the first month of receiving the incorrect payment.”

Lucille Geldenhuys

Then again, says Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch, the written agreement concluded between the parties will assist in determining what the position will be regarding this aspect of tacit acceptance.

“The landlord may benefit from the typical inclusion of a non-waiver clause in the agreement, which would permit him to claim the higher amount despite the lower payment.”

Geldenhuys says another typical clause provides that any changes to the agreement should be in writing and no tacit acceptance of any changes will be valid.

“On the other hand, if it transpires that the monthly rental was only R3 200 and the landlord continues insisting that our reader has to pay the alleged arrear rental, the landlord will be put to the proof of his allegation.”

In such an instance, says Geldenhuys, the written contract will favour the tenant and the landlord will of course not be entitled to use her deposit in lieu of the arrears.

“The Rental Housing Act provides for a Tribunal to assess complaints relating to unfair practices, which are defined as being any ‘practice unreasonably prejudicing the rights or interests of a tenant or a landlord’.”

Geldenhuys says if the landlord therefore wrongly uses the reader’s deposit in respect of so-called arrear rental, which is not in fact due, the tenant may make use of this forum or proceed through normal legal channels to claim back any amounts unjustly taken.

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Levies and trustees are at the centre of the latest question posed to our panel of experts.

A lady, who recently bougth a flat, wants to know whether it is normal, or legal, for the levy to increase by 35%.

She is also concerned that some trustees are abusing their powers and asks if owners, who are in arrears, are allowed to act as trustees and, lastly, whether trustees are allowed to serve for consecutive terms.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says Section 35 of the Sectional Titles Act 95 of 1986 provides that when any person other than the developer becomes an owner of a unit, a body corporate is established.

“The developer, for as long as he or she owns units, and the other owners are members of the scheme’s body corporate.”

The act further provides that every person who becomes an owner thereafter, will be a member of the body corporate, according to Geldenhuys.

“The standard management rules state that a minimum of two trustees will be elected at the first annual general meeting (AGM) of the body corporate. These trustees will hold office until the next meeting and will be eligible for re-election if nominated.”

Geldenhuys says these trustees stand in a fiduciary relationship to the body corporate and their duty is to perform and exercise the functions and powers thereof, as set out in the act and the rules of the scheme.

“A trustee must exercise his or her powers to manage or represent the body corporate in the interest and for the benefit of the body corporate.”

Geldenhuys says a trustee may not act without, or exceed, the powers granted by the act, the rules or the owners, and must avoid material conflict between his or her interests and those of the body corporate.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says the management rules do not prohibit a trustee who is in arrears to be re-elected, if so nominated.

“The rules do, however, prohibit an owner from voting at an AGM if in arrears, except where a special or unanimous resolution is required.”

The reader has the right to nominate owners or their spouses (or other parties, subject to certain conditions), other than the current trustees, to be elected as the new trustees at the next AGM, says Van der Merwe.

“I would advise her to familiarise herself with the provisions of the act and the management rules so that she can ascertain what her and the other owners’ powers are with regard to decisions taken in matters relating to the management of the scheme.”

Van der Merwe says the trustees do not decide by themselves what the increase in the normal monthly levy will be.

“The trustees prepare a budget that is approved, with or without amendments, by the body corporate at every AGM. The levy, meaning each owner’s contribution towards the budget, will then be calculated in accordance with the approved budget.”

If the scheme’s financial position is strong, it may happen that no increase is necessary, says Van der Merwe.

“If the financial requirements have increased, however, it may necessitate an increase that is higher than would normally be the case. What would be regarded as normal, would depend on the particular scheme and its financial requirements for the coming year.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Our panel has received an e-mail from a reader who is the victim of storm water accumulating on his property.

He lives on an incline, with neighbours above, below and next to him. Whenever there is a downpour, water from his neighbours and from his own property damn up against the boundary wall at the bottom of his property.

The reader is concerned that the wall may crack or fall over, or that his property may be flooded in the event of a serious downpour.

He wants to know whether he is allowed to remove a few bricks or drill holes in the wall to allow the water to drain and, if so, what if this causes damage to the neighbour’s property.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says storm water is the term that is used for excess rain water from buildings and roads. “It also includes ground and spring water.”

The basic common law principle is that an owner of a lower-lying property is obliged to receive naturally flowing water from a higher property, according to Geldenhuys.

“This principle is limited to the extent that the owner of the lower-lying property will not be obliged to accept an increased flow resulting from structures erected by the owner of the higher property.”

Geldenhuys says the Supreme Court of Appeal recently had the opportunity to consider the application of this common law principle in the context of urban properties.

“The court found that the owner of a lower-lying property may not necessarily be obliged to receive storm water from a higher property.”

The court confirmed, says Geldenhuys, that the common law principle referred to above only applies to the natural flow of water and that it may well be that there is an obligation on an owner of a higher-lying property to divert the water to the street, if reasonably possible.

Schalk van der Merwe

In essence, says Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg, this means that if the owner of a higher-lying property wants the owner of a lower property to accept his storm water, he would have to prove that the obstructed water would have flowed onto the lower property even if there were no buildings and the ground contours were not interfered with.

“Another factor that should be considered is the provisions of the town planning scheme applicable to the property in question.”

Van der Merwe says these provisions may place an obligation on the owner of the lower-lying erf to accept and permit the passage of storm water over his erf, only in the event of it being impractical for it to be drained directly to a public street.

“Such a provision would require that, where it is practical to drain storm water onto a street, the owner must do so.”

Van der Merwe says the reader would most likely therefore not be allowed to make holes in the wall or demand that his neighbour accept the storm water, unless it is impossible or impractical for him to divert the water to the street.

“The reader may also insist that the owners above him divert the flow from their erven so that the reader’s is not burdened as is currently the case.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Vandeesweek se leser wil van ons paneel weet of ‘n satellietskottel deel van ‘n huis se vaste toebehore uitmaak.

Hy is in die proses om ‘n huis te koop en het opgelet dat die verkoper die skottel verwyder het. Die verkoopsagent het hom meegedeel dat die verkoper ‘n DSTV-kontrak het en dus geregtig is om dit af te haal.

Die leser wil weet of dit wettig is.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg sê wanneer iemand ‘n eiendom koop, sal die kontrak normaalweg stipuleer dat dit verkoop word met alle vaste toebehore van ‘n permanente aard.

“Dit sluit items soos ligte en permanente ligskerms, blindings, gordyn- en handdoekreëlings, badkamerkassies ensovoorts in.”

Van der Merwe sê dit kan egter ook items insluit wat strenggesproke los van die eiendom is, soos byvoorbeeld swembadtoerusting, ‘n “wendy”-huis en kroegstoeltjies.

“Indien ‘n eiendom as ‘n lopende saak verkoop word, byvoorbeeld ‘n gastehuis, sal selfs items soos linne, gordyne en meubels heel moontlik deel uitmaak van die transaksie.”

Somtyds kan dit ook die geval wees dat items wat wel aan die eiendom vasgeheg is, nie as vaste toebehore beskou word nie, aldus Van der Merwe.

“Voorbeelde hiervan is ‘n satellietskottel, ‘n plasma-televisie wat teen ‘n muur gemonteer is, of ‘n geraamde spieël wat as ‘n ornament dien.”

Van der Merwe sê dis duidelik dat die lys van items wat as vaste toebehore beskou sal word, nie geslote is nie en dat die praktyksgebruike en hofuitsprake wat tot dusver gegee is, slegs riglyne daarstel.

“Die antwoord op die vraag oor of ‘n item van ‘n vaste aard is of nie is nie so eenvoudig soos om te vra of dit los of vas van die eiendom is nie, maar sal eerder afhang van die feite en omstandighede van elke transaksie.”

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê daar mag somtyds, as gevolg van hul subjektiewe interpretasies, ‘n verskil in opinie wees tussen ‘n koper en verkoper met betrekking tot of ‘n sekere item van ‘n vaste aard is of nie.

“Dit is dus duidelik dat die partye die kwessie van watter aanhegtings permanent is, behoorlik moet deurdink en dokumenteer. Die eenvoudigste manier om onsekerheid te vermy, is om in die koopkontrak ‘n lys in te sluit van items wat ingesluit is in die transaksie, en spesifiek items waaroor daar onduidelikhede mag ontstaan.”

Geldenhuys sê indien ‘n spesifieke item nie gelys is nie, is die toets wat gevolg moet word om te bepaal of dit ‘n permanente aanhegting is, om te kyk na: die doel daarvan, die manier waarop dit aangeheg is, of dit relevant is tot die wyse waarop die eiendom gebruik word en wat die bedoeling van die verkoper was toe die aanhegting gemaak is.

“Hoewel daar teenstrydige opinies is oor of satellietskottels resorteer onder permanente aanhegtings of nie, is die meer aanvaarde opinie dat ‘n verkoper nie een sou installeer met die bedoeling dat dit permanent geïntegreer raak met die gebou nie aangesien dit ‘n integrale deel van ‘n DSTV-stelsel vorm.”

Geldenhuys sê die verkoper sou, by gebreke aan enige kontraktuele ooreenkoms met die leser tot die teendeel, wel geregtig wees om die skottel te verwyder.

Stuur jou eiendomsverwante vrae na coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Vandeesweek se leser woon in ’n woonstel in ’n sekuriteitskompleks en wil graag ’n tweede kat aanskaf, maar is bekommerd dat haar aansoek geweier gaan word.

Sy huur reeds 10 jaar ’n eenheid en is onlangs deur haar veearts aangeraai om ’n maatjie vir haar huidige kat – wat tekens van eensaamheid en depressie toon – te kry.

Die leser het skriftelike toestemming van beide die eienaar en die trustees om haar huidige kat aan te hou, maar is mondelings afgeraai om nie vir ’n tweede een aansoek te doen nie, aangesien dit afgekeur sal word.

Sy wil weet of die trustees die reg het om haar aansoek goedsmoeds te weier indien sy, soos altyd, voorneem om by die reëls van die kompleks te bly.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê, kragtens artikel 35(1) van die Deeltitelwet Nr 95 van 1986, word elke deeltitelskema by wyse van reëls bestuur en beheer.

“Ontwikkelaars en die eienaars van deeltiteleiendom word toegelaat deur die wet om die standaardreëls met nuwes te vervang. Dis dus nodig om te kyk wat die betrokke skema se reëls bepaal alvorens daar met sekerheid vasgestel kan word wat die vereistes aangaande ’n spesifieke kwessie is.”

Geldenhuys sê die standaard-gedragsreëls bepaal dat ’n eienaar of inwoner slegs troeteldiere, reptiele en voëls met die skriftelike toestemming van die trustees mag aanhou.

“Die trustees mag voorwaardes koppel aan hul toestemming, byvoorbeeld dat die dier nie op gemeenskaplike eiendom mag ronddwaal nie. Hulle mag die toestemming terugtrek indien die aansoeker die voorwaardes verbreek.”

Die hoë hof het al ’n beslissing rondom die interpretasie van hierdie standaard-gedragsreël gemaak, sê Geldenhuys.

“In die relevante saak is daar beslis daar is ’n plig op die trustees om elke aansoek op eie meriete te oorweeg, en dat hul besluit gebaseer moet word op die feite en omstandighede wat van toepassing is.”

Schalk van der Merwe

In die leser se geval, sê Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg, is dit nodig dat sy deur die proses vir die verkryging van toestemming vir ’n tweede kat moet gaan, soos in die gedragsreëls uiteengesit.

“Sy moet haar versoek op skrif sit, gemotiveer deur haar redes en die wyse waarop sy beoog om haar katte te beheer, ongeag dat daar aan haar genoem is dat sy nie eers die moeite hoef te doen nie.”

Van der Merwe sê as haar aansoek wel geweier sou word, kan die leser die trustees versoek om hul redes te verskaf.

“Dit mag blyk dat, nieteenstaande die leser se goeie rekord, daar wel grondige redes vir die weiering is. Daar mag byvoorbeeld ’n beperking wees op die hoeveelheid of grootte van die troeteldiere wat elke inwoner mag aanhou.

“Indien dit sou blyk dat die trustees die feite oorweeg het en hul besluit op regverdigbare redes gebaseer het, sal die leser hul besluit moet aanvaar.”

Van der Merwe sê indien die trustees nie hul besluit met redelike redes kan motiveer nie, hul redes arbitrêr is of as hulle bloot net weier ten einde nie ’n presedent te skep nie, kan die leser die hof nader vir ’n verklarende bevel dat toestemming onredelik geweier is en dat sy toegelaat moet word om ’n tweede kat aan te hou.

The position of a satellite dish on a unit in a sectional title complex is the topic of this week’s reader question.

A tenant has installed the dish, apparently without permission, on the fascia board of his flat and the owner – who says the dish is in the same position as a previous one – refuses to order the tenant to place it in a suitable position.

The trustees have ordered the owner in writing to request the trustees’ permission for the installation of the aerial (which has never been done) and, once permission has been granted, also to have it placed in the proper place.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says there are various provisions in the Sectional Titles Act No 95 of 1986 and the standard rules that limit owners’ and occupiers’ right to make installations and alterations to their sections and common property.

“For instance, management rule 68 states that owners may not do something to their sections or exclusive use areas that will prejudice the harmonious appearance of the building.”

Geldenhuys says conduct rule four states that an owner or occupier may not make alterations or additions to the common property without obtaining the consent of the trustees.

“Conduct rule five stipulates that nothing may be done to or placed on any part of the common property that, in the discretion of the trustees, is aesthetically displeasing.”

Geldenhuys says Section 35 of the act provides that the rules of the scheme will bind the body corporate, the owners as well as any person occupying a section.

“The act and management rules provide that the trustees shall do all things reasonably necessary for the control, management and administration of the common property.”

The trustees’ permission must therefore be obtained before any installation or alteration to common property is done, even if it is merely to replace an existing item with a new one, according to Geldenhuys.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says the trustees may not, upon receiving a request for the installation of the replacement item, unreasonably withhold their consent.

“They may, however, impose a condition that the new item be installed in another manner or place than the original, due to uniformity or other requirements.”

Van der Merwe says, in the case of the reader, the owner argues that the new dish was installed in the same position as the previous one and that the new installation should therefore be allowed.

“The fact that a previous dish was installed in an unsuitable place, with or without consent, does not set a precedent to continue in the same manner.”

According to Van der Merwe, the owner must still obtain the trustees’ consent for the installation of the new dish and adhere to their reasonable conditions.

“If the owner continues to ignore the trustees’ written demands, they must take such steps that are authorised by the scheme’s rules, for example the imposing of fines.”

Alternatively, says Van der Merwe, the owner may be disqualified from voting for ordinary resolutions at any general meeting.

“If a real dispute develops, the matter may be referred to arbitration.”

Ons paneel het interessante vrae van ’n dame ontvang wat, as trustee, vir meer as 30 jaar die tuin in haar woonstelkompleks se gemeenskaplike tuin in stand gehou het.

Die leser het sonder vergoeding na die tuin omgesien en selfs plante op eie onkonste aangeplant. Weens gesondheidsredes is sy nou nie meer in staat om na die hele tuin om te sien nie en het sy as trustee bedank.

Die voorsitter is glo nou besig om goedsmoeds plante uit die tuin te verwyder en sy wil weet of sy enige regte in dié verband het. Die leser wil ook weet of sy steeds vir haar eie plesier na ’n klein gedeelte van die tuin mag omsien.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê een van die take van die regspersoon, kragtens artikel 37 van die Deeltitelwet Nr 95 van 1986, is om die gemeenskaplike eiendom te onderhou. “Die instandhouding van die tuin en plante is ’n tipiese voorbeeld.”

Geldenhuys sê die gemeenskaplike eiendom – wat bestaan uit die gebou en erf, maar nie die binnekant van die dele nie – word deur alle eenheidseienaars gesamentlik besit in onverdeelde aandele proporsioneel tot die deelnemingskwotas van hul onderskeie eenhede.

“Daar mag slegs met die gemeenskaplike eiendom gehandel word op die wyse waarop die eienaars saam besluit. Afhangende van wat daar met die eiendom beoog word, sal ’n eenparige of spesiale besluit vereis word.”

Soos in die leser se geval, kan dit gebeur dat een van die eienaars aanbied om die onderhoud van die tuin met of sonder vergoeding te behartig, sê Geldenhuys. “Die eienaars kan dan saam besluit of hulle die taak aan dié persoon wil toevertrou, en of hulle verkies om eerder van ’n tuindiens gebruik te gebruik.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg sê indien hulle sou besluit om die taak aan die eenheidseienaar toe te vertrou en indien daar vergoeding is, sal dit as deel van die begroting by die algemene jaarvergadering deur die eienaars goedgekeur moet word.

“Die tyd en koste van die tuinmakery kan egter ook as ’n skenking deur die betrokke eienaar hanteer word, soos in die leser se geval.”

Van der Merwe sê dit sal nie toelaatbaar wees vir die voorsitter om op sy eie inisiatief, en sonder om minstens met die ander trustees te praat, die tuin van die skema te verander nie.

“As die veranderinge as normale instandhouding gesien word, mag die trustees ’n besluit daaroor neem. Uit die inligting wat die leser verskaf, blyk dit egter dat die veranderinge redelik groot is en dat dit die voorkoms van die skema mag verander.”

As veranderinge aan die tuin en die onderhoud daarvan ’n koste beloop, sal dit tien teen een as ’n luukse verbetering beskou word wat slegs met die toestemming van die eienaars gedoen mag word, volgens Van der Merwe.

“Selfs al het die voorsitter die nodige toestemming verkry, kan die leser nogtans oorweeg om die eienaars te vra om steeds ’n klein deel van die tuin te versorg.”

Stuur jou eiendomsverwante vrae na coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

This week’s reader may soon find herself without a roof over her head after selling her house and signing an offer to purchase another.

To her shock, her bond application was denied and in the process she realised there was no clause in the contract protecting her from this eventuality.

She contacted the agent, who is doing both deals, asking her why there was no such clause. The agent told her that she never thought that the reader’s bond application would be declined.

The agent said they would simply approach other banks and, if unsuccessful, try to cancel the sale. She advised against trying to include a protective clause at this late stage as she did not want to “wake sleeping dogs”.

The reader says she is aware that she has signed a legally binding contract.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says in terms of the Alienation of Land Act No 68 of 1981, an agreement for the sale of land must be in writing and signed by the parties or their agents acting on their written authority.

“It is important that the whole agreement be contained in the sales contract, including the conditions relating to the manner in which the buyer will finance the purchase.”

As with the reader, someone wishing to buy a new property may not be able to purchase it before his or her existing property is sold, says Van der Merwe.

“This may be due to capital being required to finance the purchase. Alternatively, the bank may only grant the finance if the buyer’s existing bond is cancelled.”

Van der Merwe says it is important to include a carefully worded suspensive condition in the offer whereby the transaction is made subject to the sale and transfer of the buyer’s current property, and/or that the buyer succeeds in obtaining a bond.

“If the wording is vague, it may lead to different interpretations between the contracting parties.”

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says if there is a material difference in the parties’ interpretation of the agreement, a legal dispute may occur and it may even be grounds for having the agreement cancelled or declared void based on misunderstanding, misrepresentation or non-disclosure.

“Even worse than including vague suspensive conditions, is including none at all. This appears to be the case with the reader.”

Geldenhuys says, from the facts given by her, the agreement does not include a condition stipulating that she must succeed in obtaining a bond.

“If this is the case, the agent will have no authority to cancel the sale. This can only be done by agreement between the reader and the seller.

“If the seller does not agree to cancel, the reader will be bound, even if she is unable to raise the necessary finance.”

Geldenhuys says if she does not perform in terms of the agreement, the seller may take legal action against her to either enforce it or to claim damages.

“It is well known that ignorance of the law is not regarded as an excuse and that there is an obligation on a contracting party to inform him or herself of the legal implications flowing from it.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Our reader, who has inherited the right of use of an immovable property until her death and free of charge, wants to know exactly what this includes.

She wants to know from our panel of experts whether maintenance work will also be for the estate’s account and if the use of services such as the telephone and DSTV are included. The trustees of the estate have disconnected the DSTV.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says when an owner of immovable property passes away, he or she can bequeath the ownership to his or her heir subject to a right of use and/or habitation by another person for a specific period.

“Our common law recognises three legal concepts in this regard.

“The first is referred to as usufruct, which is a legal right to use and derive profit from a property belonging to someone else. Profits may include rental income as well as, for instance, that derived from farming activities.”

Geldenhuys says the user may not sell, change or destroy the property and must eventually return it to the owner who, in the case of a deceased estate, will be the person who inherited it.

“The second concept is known as usus (right of use), which entitles the user to occupy a house with his or her spouse, family and guests and he or she may let out a part of it. The user may not alienate the property or cede the right to use it to another person.”

The third, habitatio (living rights), gives a person the right to live in a property, says Geldenhuys. “The holder of a habitatio may cede his or her right to use the property to another and he or she may also rent the property out.

“It is clear that the concepts are very similar and therefore it is important that the testator get proper legal advice when drawing up the will.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says it is also important that the testator indicate who will be responsible for the maintenance of the property and payment of, among other things, the rates and taxes, levies and insurance premiums.

In terms of our common law, the person who is liable for these expenses is not necessarily the person whom the testator intended, according to Van der Merwe.

“In the case of a usufruct, the user will be liable for the maintenance costs, excluding costs relating to the normal deterioration of the property, as well as expenses such as rates and taxes.”

Van der Merwe says the owner will be liable for the insurance of the property and any extraordinary expenses, for example large scale repairs. “There rests a lesser obligation on the holder of a habitatio or usus for the running expenses relating to the property.”

The exact obligations by the inhabitant or user with regard to the running costs of the property will depend on the circumstances of the case and on the provisions of the will, says Van der Merwe. “Additional services like a telephone and DSTV will not normally be included unless the will provides for it.

“In the reader’s case, it will be necessary to examine the will to determine what personal right was bequeathed to her before the extent of her rights and obligations can be determined.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Ons paneel deskundiges het ’n e-pos van ’n leser ontvang wat sê sy voel soos ’n gevangene in haar eie huis.

Ongeag die feit dat sy en haar man 10 jaar gelede geskei is, het hulle as “egpaar” bly saamwoon. In dié tyd het sy die verband betaal asook verbeterings op haar onkoste laat aanbring.

Sy sê haar eksman raak al hoe meer beledigend en aggressief en dring daarop aan om vir sy deel van die eiendom uitbetaal te word alvorens hy die pad vat.

Die leser sê die huis is amper afbetaal en is veronderstel om ’n belegging vir hul kinders te wees en sy wil dit nie verkoop of verloor nie. Sy wil weet wat haar te doen staan.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê wanneer ’n egpaar skei en hulle besit onroerende eiendom, sal die egskeidingsbevel en/of skikkingsakte normaalweg reguleer wat daarmee gebeur. “Gewoonlik sal die partye ooreenkom dat een van hulle volle eienaarskap verkry.”

Geldenhuys sê die bevel en/of akte sal stipuleer of daardie party ’n bedrag aan die ander party vir sy of haar aandeel moet betaal. “As daar ’n verband is, sal die bank genader moet word vir toestemming dat die een party die ander se aandeel in die verband oorneem.”

Die partye kan ook die verband kanselleer en die gade wie volle eienaarskap verkry, kan dan ’n nuwe een in sy of haar naam registreer, sê Geldenhuys.

“Dit is ook moontlik dat die partye mede-eienaars kan bly. In daai geval, sal die titelakte en verband geëndosseer word tot dien effek dat die partye geskei is en die eiendom in mede-eiendomsreg besit.”

Geldenhuys sê hulle sal dan steeds gesamentlik en afsonderlik vir alle verpligtinge teenoor die bank aanspreeklik wees, net soos voor die egskeiding.

“As die partye nie kan ooreenkom oor die wyse waarop die eiendom hanteer moet word nie, sal hul huweliksgoederebedeling bepaal watter gevolg die egskeiding op die eiendomsreg het.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg sê vanuit die inligting wat die leser verskaf, blyk dit dat haar vorige man se naam ook op die titelakte verskyn. “Sy spesifiseer egter nie of hulle met die egskeiding bepaal het wat met die eiendom sal gebeur nie.”

Van der Merwe sê as die effek van hul egskeiding was dat haar vorige man mede-eienaar gebly het, sal dit nodig wees dat hy uitgekoop moet word.

“Hulle moet verkieslik ’n prokureur raadpleeg sodat hulle ’n regverdige ooreenkoms kan bereik met betrekking tot die finansiële implikasies, inaggenome dat die leser die afgelope 10 jaar die verbandpaaiemente en kostes van die verbeteringe gedek het asook die feit dat haar eks die eiendom kosteloos bewoon het.”

Die bank sal die leser se aansoek vir oorname of registrasie van ’n nuwe verband volgens hul normale kriteria oorweeg, sê Van der Merwe. “Selfs al het die leser ’n goeie betaalrekord, sal die normale risiko-oorwegings toegepas word om seker te maak dis bekostigbaar.”

Van der Merwe sê die bank is verder verplig om haar aansoek te oorweeg met inagneming van die Nasionale Kredietwet, wat beoog om oorverskuldiging deur verbruikers te voorkom en om verantwoordelike lening deur kredietverskaffers aan te moedig. “Indien die leser nie kwalifiseer nie en indien sy nie iemand het wie borg sal staan nie, sal sy heel moontlik die eiendom moet verkoop.”

Stuur jou eiendomsverwante vrae na coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Our panel has received a query from a tenant who is struggling with a blocked drain in her kitchen.

The reader signed a one-year lease on a flat, but, within two weeks of moving in, the sink was blocked. The matter was reported to the caretaker, who said the owner had to attend to a similar problem the previous week.

She was given a plunger, but had no success and a plumber was eventually called out.

Days later the drain was blocked again and she reported it once more. She was reluctantly told that she should get someone to fix it.

The reader wants to know if she would be within her rights to have the problem sorted out on her expense and then deduct the amount from her rent.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says when a landlord and tenant enter into a lease agreement, the property is let for the full use and enjoyment of the tenant.

“Being a capital investment, it is important for the landlord that the property be maintained in a habitable condition. The same goes for the tenant, to ensure his or her continued, full use and enjoyment of the property.”

Van der Merwe says the lease agreement will normally determine what rights and obligations rest on the tenant insofar as maintenance work and a contribution towards the running costs of the property is concerned.

“Most often, the lease will specify that the tenant is liable for the cost of unblocking drains, replacing light bulbs, broken windows, missing keys and so on.” The obligation to effect major repairs like leaking roofs and structural problems is usually the landlord’s, according to Van der Merwe.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says if the lease does not address the matter of repairs, the provisions of the Rental Housing Act Nr 50 of 1999 will determine the rights and obligations of the parties.

She says the act provides for an inspection by the landlord and tenant at the start of the lease to record defects to the property. “The landlord is entitled to receive it back in a good condition, taking into account the faults that were present and excluding normal wear and tear.”

Geldenhuys says it therefore follows that the tenant will be liable for repairs during the subsistence of the lease.

From the information given by the reader, says Geldenhuys, it would appear that the reader is renting a flat in a multi-storied building in which all the flats belong to one landlord.

“If the blocked drain is due to a blockage in her flat, she will be liable for the cost of the plumber, unless the lease stipulates otherwise. If others are experiencing similar problems, as it would appear, the problem may be structural.”

If so, the tenants may demand that the landlord attend to the problem to ensure that they can once again use their properties in the manner agreed to in the lease agreements, says Geldenhuys.

Van der Merwe says if the landlord does not deal with the matter promptly, the reader may proceed to have the drain unblocked so that she can use the sink again.

“The reader must however not deduct the cost from the rent. The receipt must be handed to the landlord for a refund.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Ons paneel het ’n opvolgvraag na aanleiding van ’n onlangse artikel oor verhurings ontvang – dié keer van ’n verhuringsagent.

Die agent sê nadat die oorspronklike termyn van een van sy huurkontrakte verval het, het die huurder en huiseienaar ’n privaatkontrak vir ’n verlenging gesluit.

Hy vergelyk dit met wanneer ’n kliënt agter ’n agent se rug ’n koopkontrak met ’n verkoper sluit nadat dié twee partye deur die agent aan mekaar voorgestel is.

Die agent wil weet of hy in dié geval steeds op kommissie geregtig is.

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg sê wanneer ’n eiendom deur ’n verhuringsagent verhuur word, is dit normale praktyk dat daar ’n kontrak tussen die eienaar en agent opgestel word. “Dié tipe kontrak, wat as die verhuringsmandaat bekend staan, beskryf die omvang van die verhouding tussen die eienaar en die agent.”

Van der Merwe sê die mandaat bepaal watter funksies die verhuringsagent namens die eienaar sal uitvoer, byvoorbeeld om ’n gepaste huurder te vind, die huurkontrak op te stel en te laat teken, die huur in te vorder en te reël vir herstelwerk aan die eiendom.

“Die mandaat moet stipuleer wat die verhuringsagent se vergoeding sal wees, watter dienste daarvoor gelewer sal word en of dit vir die eienaar moontlik is om die agent se mandaat tydens die huurtermyn te beëindig.”

Hy sê die mandaat kan verder ook bepaal of die eienaar ’n vergoeding aan die agent sal moet betaal indien die eiendom, na verstryking van die aanvanklike termyn, weer aan dieselfde persoon verhuur word en, indien wel, wat die vergoeding sal wees.

“Die mandaat sal aantoon wanneer die verhuringsagent se mandaat verstryk,” sê Van der Merwe. “Dit kom gewoonlik tot ’n einde wanneer die aanvanklike huurkontrak verstryk.”

Ten einde te verseker dat beide die eienaar en die agent se regte en belange beskerm word, en in die belang van ’n deursigtige verhouding, kan die noodsaaklikheid van ’n eenvoudige en duidelike skriftelike mandaat nie oorbeklemtoon word nie, aldus Van der Merwe.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch waarsku dat tensy die eienaar met die agent ooreengekom het dat laasgenoemde weer op ’n vergoeding geregtig sal wees indien die termyn verleng word, of indien ’n nuwe kontrak tussen hulle tot stand kom, sal die agent nie noodwendig op ’n vergoeding vir die nuwe termyn kan aanspraak maak nie.

“Party verhuringsagente verkies om in die huurkontrak ’n klousule in te voeg wat stipuleer dat indien die eiendom weer aan dieselfde huurder verhuur word, of indien die huurder die eiendom koop, die agent op kommissie geregtig sal wees.”

Geldenhuys sê die rede vir die invoeging van dié bepaling in die huurkontrak eerder as in die verhuringsmandaat, is om dié voorwaarde ook onder die aandag van die huurder te bring en laasgenoemde kontraktueel daartoe te verbind. “Indien die partye op so ’n bepaling ooreengekom het, sal die agent dit kan afdwing.”

Geldenhuys sê indien die mandaat of die huurkontrak egter nie die situasie aanspreek nie, volg dit nie outomaties dat die agent op ’n vergoeding geregtig is nie, en sal dit nodig wees om die feite van die betrokke geval te ondersoek ten einde te bepaal of die agent die effektiewe oorsaak van die transaksie was.

“Indien ’n mens sou aanvaar dat daar nie ’n mandaat tussen die leser en die huiseienaar was wat herverhuring aan dieselfde huurder aanspreek nie, sal die leser tien teen een nie op ’n vergoeding geregtig wees nie.”

Stuur jou eiendomsverwante vrae na coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

Our panel has received a lengthy e-mail from a lady who has been renting a property, which has now changed hands, for the past four years.

The agreement stipulates an initial lease period of one year. It further states that the lease will be extended indefinitely after expiration of the first year, unless either party gives the other two months’ prior notice that the lease shall terminate after the initial one-year period.

Another stipulation is that the tenant should get two months’ written notice of any change to the rental amount.

Our reader says the new owner has now increased the rental by R1 000 with immediate effect.

She wants to know whether this is within his rights and if the two-month notice period relating to a rental increase is still in effect. She also asks whether she is entitled to interest on her deposit should she cancel the lease and at what rate.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says it is possible for a property owner to sell the property during the lease period. “In that case, the common law concept of huur gaat voor koop will be applicable.”

She says this concept refers to when a property is sold to a purchaser subject to a lease and the tenant occupies the property. “The tenant is legally entitled to remain in the property despite the property having been sold.”

In other words, says Geldenhuys, the new owner may not evict the tenant or cancel the lease, provided the tenant adheres to its terms and conditions.

“The lease remains valid and binding until the legal termination thereof, either in terms of the lease itself, by mutual consent or by way of legal process.”

Geldenhuys says if the agreement stipulates that the tenant must pay a deposit to the lessor prior to the commencement of the lease, the lessor, as seller of the property, must transfer the deposit plus accrued interest to the purchaser once ownership of the property has been transferred.

“In terms of the Rental Housing Act, the purchaser must continue to hold the deposit in an interest bearing account until the lease is terminated.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says the seller must also provide the purchaser with the inventory of the property that was drawn up between him/her and the tenant during their joint inspection at the commencement of the lease.

“This will enable the purchaser to know which faults and defects existed in the property at the start of the lease and whether the tenant is liable for any repairs.”

Van der Merwe notes, in the reader’s situation, that the initial fixed rental period of one year has already expired.

“Either party therefore has the right to terminate it at any time with two months’ written notice. It is therefore possible for the new owner to terminate our reader’s lease.”

Furthermore, says Van der Merwe, the initial lease stipulates that once the fixed period has expired and the lease continues indefinitely, the lessor shall have the right to increase the rental with two months’ written notice to the tenant.

“If the reader is not happy with the increased rental, she may terminate the lease with two months’ written notice to the new owner.”

Van der Merwe says upon termination, and after she and the new owner have finalised the joint inspection and it is confirmed that she is not liable for any repairs, the initial deposit plus accrued interest must be refunded to the reader.

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

The issue of property attached by a creditor is at the centre of this week’s reader question, posed to our panel of experts by an estate agent.

He wants to know whether a property owner, whose property has been attached by a creditor due to unpaid debt, is still able to sign a sale mandate with an estate agent.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says when a person registers a mortgage bond as security to the financial institution granting the home loan, the latter becomes a creditor with a preferential claim against the person’s estate.

“This means the property will act as security for the repayment of the loan as well as any other costs incurred by it, excluding other creditors, up to the maximum amount covered by the bond.”

Geldenhuys says if a person fails to repay a home loan, the financial institution will eventually initiate steps to foreclose on the property. “They will obtain a judgement against the owner, attach the property and sell it on a public auction.”

Once a bondholder or other creditor obtains a judgement against a property owner, and a writ of execution has been issued by the court authorising the attachment of the property, an attachment interdict is noted by the deeds office, according to Geldenhuys.

“This effectively prevents any further dealings with the property at the deeds office until it is sold by the creditor, or until the creditor uplifts the attachment.

“However, once the property has been attached, it does not mean that the owner may no longer sell it,” says Geldenhuys. “The owner may still give a mandate to an estate agent or may attempt to sell the property privately before it goes on auction.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says it is most certainly necessary for the owner to advise the agent that there is an attachment against the property. “The creditor responsible for the attachment will only agree to uplift it if satisfactory arrangements have been made to settle the outstanding debt from the proceeds of the sale.”

Van der Merwe says if these are not sufficient to settle the creditor’s claim, there may be a substantial delay in transferring the property to the buyer while the owner negotiates with the bank or creditor in respect of the shortfall. “There are also no guarantees that the bank or creditor will agree to a payment arrangement.”

This will cause the owner to be in breach of the sale agreement as he/she will not be able to pass transfer to the buyer, according to Van der Merwe.

“By informing the agent beforehand of a possible delay that may be caused by the attachment and the resulting negotiations, the agent can in turn inform the potential buyer. This will allow the buyer to make an informed decision with regard to purchasing the property.”

Van der Merwe says the owner must also protect himself in the sale agreement by inserting a suspensive condition that the contract will only be binding if the creditor, who attached the property, consents to the transaction.”

Send your property related questions to coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.

‘n Boom wat die grensmuur tussen twee erwe oorskry, is die wortel van die kwaad tussen bure.

Ons leser skryf dat haar buurman ongelukkig is met die oorhangende takke van ’n immergroen-boom wat op die leser se erf naby die grensmuur staan. Hy beweer onder meer dat blare van dié boom sy geute verstop.

Hy eis dat die leser die oorhangende takke teen haar eie koste moet snoei, of selfs die boom heeltemal moet verwyder. Omdat die boom koelte aan die leser bied, wil sy dit nie laat uithaal nie.

Haar vraag aan ons paneel deskundiges is wie vir die oorhangende takke verantwoordelik is.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê in terme van die gemenereg mag ’n grondeienaar bome en plante op sy of haar erf plant waar hy of sy goeddink.

Sy sê egter dat dié reg deur wetgewing beperk word, byvoorbeeld die Bosbouwet Nr 122 van 1984, munisipale regulasies en ordonnansies, asook die gemeenregtelike beginsels van oorskryding.

“’n Grondeienaar word ook beperk in sy of haar eienaarskap in dié sin dat hy of sy nie die grense van sy of haar erf bo- of ondergronds mag oorskry nie. ’n Algemene vorm van oorskryding wat onmin tussen bure veroorsaak, is dié van plante wat oorhang op ’n ander eiendom.”

Geldenhuys sê die reg wat die leser het om bome op haar eiendom te hê wat aan haar privaatheid en koelte bied, moet gebalanseer word met die buurman se reg om nie geteister te word daardeur nie.

“Die leser se buurman is dus inderdaad geregtig daarop om aan te dring dat sy die oorhangende takke moet verwyder,” sê Geldenhuys. “Indien sy nie gehoor gee nie, het die buurman die reg om oorhangende takke self te verwyder en dit aan die leser te oorhandig.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Of hy ook gronde sal hê waarvolgens hy kan aandring dat die boom verwyder moet word, sal afhang van die mate waartoe die boom tans, of potensieel, skade aan die buurman se eiendom aanrig, sê Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg.

“Die leser sal egter ook daarop geregtig wees om minder dramatiese oplossings as die verwydering van die boom te oorweeg, indien dit ook die nodige verligting sal bring.”

Van der Merwe sê, vanuit die inligting wat die leser verskaf het, blyk dit egter nie dat die boom, benewens die blare wat in die buurman se tuin val en die geute verstop, ander skade aan sy eiendom aanrig nie.

“Gevolglik sal die buurman nie gronde hê waarop hy op die verwydering van die boom kan aandring nie.”

Van der Merwe sê indien die leser nie samewerking aan haar buurman gee deur die boom te snoei nie, het die buurman die opsie om vir ’n interdik aansoek te doen om haar te dwing om die plantegroei binne die perke van redelikheid te hou en enige oorskrydende plante te verwyder.

“Die buurman mag ook die leser aanspreeklik hou vir enige skade wat uit die oorhangende takke spruit.”

Hy sê dit sal in die beste belang van die leser en haar buurman wees om met mekaar saam te werk en ’n oplossing te vind wat albei se eienaarskap en regte om hul eiendom te geniet, respekteer.

Stuur jou eiendomsverwante vrae na coetzee[at]fullstopcom.com.