Hello,
I have an issue with the following matter and will appreciate an input from forum members:
1. My wife is owner of a vacant stand in a security complex. Since all the stands have been developed hers is the only one that is still undeveloped. Since registration of the units levies was imposed by the body corporate at an amount of R200.00 per month (this was in 2006 but increases gradually to be 700.0 now)
2.There is a French drain system which has to be emptied regularly.
3.This is however the biggest expense in the complex. Unfortunately the system's capacity was designed that it has to be pumped out at least 1 to 2 times a week which amounts to considerable costs to the owners in the complex;
4. Due to the cost factor as in 3 above the Board of Trustees decided to increase the contributions as in 1 above
5. We decided that there was no dwelling build on the stand as yet, thus not making use of the system until same has been built.
6. The appointed managing agent was sending out monthly statements under her company name to COLLECT the said levies.
7. We approached the Board of Trustees and made a friendly request to pay a reduced levy due to the fact that we are not making use of the French drain system.
8. They refused to any reduced price and instructed the managing agent to still collect the increased fee from us.
9. The account ran into arrears and they issued summons for the outstanding amount;
10 Unfortunately the attorney who instituted summons was not briefed correctly and summoned me in stead of my wife.( We are married out of community of property)
11. A Notice To Defend was filed and they stopped the procedure.
12. They then issued summons in my wife's name.
13. A notice to defend was filed due to the fact that the conveyancer who did the transfers of the properties onto the names of the new owners issued the wrong home owners association constitution, which my wife did not sign because it was in the name of another entity and not in the entity's name as per her title deed.
14. Again they did not succeed in their claim due to the problem in 13 above.
15 Now after 4 years they are taking the matter to the Community Schemes Ombud Service due to a huge amount that is in arrears;
16.The other problem is that the managing agent, is not registered at the Estate Agency Affairs Board and doe not have a Fidelity Fund Certificate. Her excuse is that she collects monies on behalf of the Home Owners Assoc. but the money is directly paid by the members into the Home Owners Assoc. bank account.
17. The Act is very clear about the registration and qualification as an estate agent - I attach a few paragraphs to this email for perusal.
18. Furthermore the managing agent was acting as a sole proprietor since 2006 when sending out the monthly statements.
19. Since about 3 months ago she changed the sole proprietorship to a CC.
20. We received statements for the past 11 years from her Sole Prop. but as per attachments sent to the Ombud she copied all the info from the past Sole Prop. letterhead and pasted it onto her new company letterhead. Surely this is not correct?
21. Her statement only reflects Invoice numbers but she never sent us invoices. There are fees reflecting that we cannot control for what it is i.e. attorneys fees for the summons that was issued but there was never an order made from costs in this regard.
I would like to know whether:
1. She should have registered as an estate agent;
2. Whether she could again duplicated statements that she sent on a Sole Prop. for 11 years and pretend to the Ombud that these are indeed which she sent in the pass;
3. Whether it would be fair to make an offer (less amounts in that was not specified by invoice but just put on the statements) for mowing the grass in the complex as we never made use of the roads or pumping the sewerage since we have and had no dwelling.
4. My wife undertakes to sign the Body Corporate rules dated 2013 and further undertake that she will pay all future levies excluding the sewerage removal until a new dwelling is built.
5. Can the complete claim be dismissed du to the managing agent who is and was not registered according to the Act as attached
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Dave A
Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.