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.

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.

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 leser woon in ’n meenthuiskompleks waar twee inwoners volgens haar die afgelope dekade die gedragsreëls totaal en al verontagsaam.

Een van hulle woon langs haar en sy optrede, sê sy, het ’n ernstige impak op haar lewensgehalte. Volgens haar, het sommige keelvol-inwoners al hul eenhede verkoop.

Die “skuldige” partye skuld glo ook groot bedrae aan agterstallige heffings.

Sy sê oor die jare het die verskeie bestuursagente nie die trustees geadviseer hoe om dié inwoners te hanteer nie en/of die trustees het nie die reëls geïmplementeer nie.

Verder is dit haar opinie dat die trustees amper “geheimsinnig” optree en dat geskrewe klagtes aan die bestuursagent nooit beantwoord of erken word nie.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys van Lucille Geldenhuys Prokureurs op Stellenbosch sê, kragtens artikel 35(1) van die Deeltitelwet Nr 95 van 1986, word deeltitelskemas deur bestuurs- en gedragsreëls beheer en bestuur.

“Indien die standaard-reëls, of dié wat deur die ontwikkelaar ingestel is, nie effektief is nie, mag die eienaars die reëls vervang of uitbrei om by die behoeftes van die betrokke skema te pas.”

Geldenhuys sê ’n effektiewe manier om gedragsreëls af te dwing, is deur die oplegging van waarskuwings en, indien oortreders nie gehoor gee nie, boetes.

Volgens haar moet bogenoemde deur die trustees, wie jaarliks deur die eienaars gekies word, hanteer word. “Dit kan ook aan die bestuursagent gedelegeer word.”

Geldenhuys sê hoewel die doel van die gedragsreëls is om die wyse waarop die inwoners hulself gedra, te reguleer, sal dit slegs effektief wees indien dit op eienaars en inwoners afgedwing word. “Eienaars en inwoners moet besef hulle het die mag om hul regte te beskerm en om nie deur ’n paar inwoners geterroriseer te word nie.”

Sy sê dit vereis egter dat die eienaars en inwoners pro-aktief aan die bestuur van die skema moet deelneem. “Hulle kan dit doen deur oortredings en ongewenste gedrag by die trustees of bestuursagent aan te meld.”

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe van Rawson Properties Helderberg sê eienaars moet ook die moeite doen om die vergaderings van die regspersoon by te woon en om die trustees dáár opdrag te gee om ongewenste situasies aan te spreek.

“Daar is ’n plig op die trustees om hul funksies (soos beskryf in die Deeltitelwet) behoorlik uit te voer. Dit sluit in om oortredings en klagtes te ondersoek en aan te spreek, om stappe te neem om heffings in te vorder, ensovoorts.”

Van der Merwe sê indien die trustees hul take nie uitvoer nie, verbreek hulle die vertrouensplig wat die wet op hulle plaas en kan hulle, in sekere omstandighede, persoonlik aanspreeklik gehou word vir skade wat deur die regspersoon gely word.

“Indien eienaars voel dat die trustees nie hul verpligtinge uitvoer nie, kan hulle nuwe trustees by die algemene jaarvergadering kies. Andersins kan hulle stappe, soos voorgeskryf deur die wet, neem om die trustees af te dank en nuwes te kies.”

Indien die bestuur van die skema deur ’n bestuursagent hanteer word wat nie hul mandaat doelgerig uitvoer nie, kan hul dienste beëindig word en ’n nuwe agent aangestel word, aldus Van der Merwe.

“Hoewel dit verstaanbaar is dat eienaars wie hulself in die leser se posisie bevind, magteloos voel, is dit noodsaaklik dat hulle hulself bemagtig deur kennis in te win aangaande hul regte.”

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

Our panel has received an e-mail from a reader who wants to know what the procedure and costs are when selling a share of co-owned, inherited property.

She specifically enquires about transfer costs, deed registration fees and Capital Gains Tax (CGT).

Schalk van der Merwe

Schalk van der Merwe from Rawson Properties Helderberg says if two or more persons co-own a property and the one wants to buy out the other’s share, the transaction is treated like a normal contract of purchase and sale. “This is the case irrespective of whether the parties bought the property together, or whether they inherited it or received it as a donation.”

In the reader’s situation, says Van der Merwe, it will be necessary for the co-owners to determine the fair market value of the property on which they will base the purchase price of the selling party’s share. “The fair market value can be determined by obtaining valuations from estate agents, or by using an average price based on recent sales of similar properties in the area.”

Van der Merwe says it is advisable to use the fair market value as the basis for the purchase price as the South African Revenue Service (Sars) will require a valuation when the transaction is submitted for the payment of transfer duty. “The transfer duty is calculated on the value of the whole property and thereafter multiplied by the percentage of the share being purchased.”

If the purchase price is less than the fair market value, Sars may nevertheless calculate the transfer duty on the higher amount (fair market value), according to Van der Merwe.

Lucille Geldenhuys

Lucille Geldenhuys from Lucille Geldenhuys Attorneys in Stellenbosch says it is also possible that the difference between the fair market value and the purchase price may be regarded by Sars as a donation, and as such it may attract donations tax. “It is therefore advisable that the parties obtain professional advice regarding the tax implications of the transaction so that it can be structured correctly.”

Geldenhuys says once the purchase price has been determined, the parties may instruct an attorney to draw up a sale agreement. “The attorney will also be able to advise the party of the tax consequences flowing from the transaction, including the CGT that the selling party will have to pay in respect of his or her share that is being sold.”

If the parties jointly registered a bond over the property, it will either have to be settled in full and cancelled simultaneously with the transfer of the property, or the buying party will have to apply to the bank to take over the bond, according to Geldenhuys. “This means that the buying party will be substituted as the sole debtor in respect of the loan and the mortgage bond.

“If the bond is cancelled, each party will be liable for his or her share of the outstanding balance and the buying party will most often then register a new bond to finance the buyout.”

Geldenhuys says as far as the conveyancing process and costs are concerned, the normal process of transfer of ownership will be followed and the standard transfer and bond registration fees will be applicable.

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.