Category Archives: Credit law


A4If you default on a credit agreement and action is taken against you by the credit provider, you still have time, according to the National Credit Act (NCA)[1], to reinstate the credit agreement until the goods have been sold in execution.  This is also the case of Firstrand Bank Limited v Nomsa Nkata[2]


Prior to the NCA coming into force, the position regarding the right of a consumer to re-instate a credit agreement was determined by the principle of redemption in common law. According to this principle, a consumer would be able to reinstate the credit agreement by paying the credit provider the full amount of the debt, together with ‘default charges’ and reasonable costs of enforcing the agreement.  According to the NCA, ownership and possession of an item or premises can be redeemed by paying only the amount overdue at that date, together with charges and costs.

The issue, however, is at which point it becomes too late to pay the amount overdue in the execution process. This issue was addressed in the case of FirstRand Bank Limited v Nomsa Nkata.[3] Section 129(3) and (4) of the NCA states:

“(3) Subject to subsection (4), a consumer may –

(a)  at any time before the credit provider has cancelled the agreement reinstate a credit agreement that is in default by paying to the credit provider all amounts that are overdue, together with the credit provider’s permitted default charges and reasonable costs of enforcing the agreement up to the time of reinstatement; and –

(b)  after complying with paragraph (a), may resume possession of any property that had been repossessed by the credit provider pursuant to an attachment order.

(4)  A consumer may not re-instate a credit agreement after–

      (a)   The sale of any property pursuant to –

            (i)     an attachment order; or

            (ii)    surrender of property in terms of section 127;

      (b) The execution of any other court order enforcing that agreement; or

      (c) The termination thereof in accordance with section 123.”

The Court’s judgement

The Supreme Court of Appeal found in the FirstRand Bank Limited case that in terms of both the common law as well as the NCA, “the Rubicon has been, and remains the sale in execution.” This means that at any point up until the time of the sale in execution, the consumer can put a halt to the execution proceedings and reinstate the agreement by paying the amount overdue, together with charges and costs.

The reasons…

The reason that the above provision was placed in the NCA was to make provision for the fact that many consumers borrow money over an extended period in order to finance the acquisition of large purchases such as a home or a motor vehicle. It was also noted in the above judgment that less affluent citizens may make use of extended credit to purchase household items and appliances. Therefore, the NCA assists consumers in providing them with the option of paying the overdue amount rather than having to pay the entire amount of the debt.


The Court established in the FirstRand Bank Limited case that Section 129(4) (b) can only be used before the sale has taken place and not thereafter. Once the sale has taken place the credit agreement cannot be re-instated between the consumer and the credit provider.

Should you find yourself in the temporary position of not being able to pay the monthly instalments of your credit agreement but are able to pay those instalments at a later stage, and not wanting to cancel the credit agreement, then it is imperative that you pay the money which is overdue to the Credit Provider prior to any sale in execution as you will not be able to reinstate the agreement thereafter.


National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

Firstrand Bank Limited v Nomsa Nkata, (213/14) [2015] ZASCA 44 (26 March 2015)

[1] 34 of 2005

[2] (213/14) [2015] ZASCA 44(26 March 2015)

[3] (213/14) [2015] ZASCA 44(26 March 2015)

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)


A3BReal security means that, on the basis of a creditor’s right against the debtor (principal debt), a creditor acquires a limited real right in the property of the debtor as security for the payment of the creditor’s right (principal debt) by the debtor. Real security differs from personal security in that a creditor does not acquire a limited real right in the property of the debtor in the case of personal security, but only acquires a creditor’s right against a third party as security for the payment of the principal debt by the debtor. Such a third party is normally surety of the debtor.

A requirement for real security is the existence of a valid and enforceable principal debt. The real security is accessory to the principal debt, in other words the real security is terminated automatically if the principal debt is paid in full.

If the object of security is moveable property, real security can be in the form of either pledge or notarial bond. In the case of pledge the object of pledge (corporeal or incorporeal moveable property) must be delivered by the pledgor (debtor) to the pledgee (creditor). Physical control of the pledge object is a requirement for the establishment and continuation of a limited real security right to the security object. The pledgee has the obligation to maintain the pledged property within reason and, on termination, to return the property to the pledgor. A notarial bond can be registered in respect of specified, corporeal moveable property of the debtor (mortgagor) in favour of the creditor (mortgagee) in the deeds registry. After registration of this bond, the mortgagee acquires a limited real right to the encumbered property without delivery thereof to the mortgagee.

Immoveable property of the debtor serves as the object of security in that a mortgage is granted by the debtor (mortgagor) to the creditor (mortgagee) and registered in the deeds registry. A mortgage is a liquid document which grants the mortgagee a limited real right in respect of the immoveable property of the mortgagee without the physical control of the property being passed to the mortgagee. More than one mortgage can be registered over the same immoveable property at the same time. Priority is given, in this case, to mortgagees in the order that the mortgages were registered (prior in tempore, prior in iure).

The pledge of the mortgagee (creditor) can, if the principal debt is not paid in full by the mortgagor or pledgor (debtor), have the security object sold in execution and is entitled to the proceeds of the sale in execution for payment of the principal debt. In the case of insolvency of the pledgor or mortgagor, the pledge or mortgagee acquires a preferent claim to the proceeds of the sale of the security object.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice. Errors and omissions excepted (E&OE)


Alecia had big financial problems; she had too much debt and her expenses outweighed her income. She decided to open a new bank account into which her salary could be paid, which would ensure that she could manage her salary before her monthly debit orders went off.

Alecia thought it would be a good idea to pay her small debts off first and then begin with the larger debt. Unfortunately this resulted in her not making any payments at all on her home loan and credit card and the bank threatened to blacklist her and sent her a summons. The bank then made an application in court for an order that made it compulsory for her to pay the amount which the bank set out; this order is called an Emoluments Attachment Order (EAO) or garnishee order. An EAO is granted in terms of s. 65J of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 32 of 1944 and orders an employer (referred to as a garnishee) to make deductions from a debtor’s salary or wages and pay these over to the creditor or its attorneys. This amount was much greater than Alecia could afford and left her with no income for the rest of her monthly debt payments. She was thus put in a worse financial position than before.

If Alecia had known about debt counselling sooner she would not be stuck in the position she is now facing. It is important to educate people about debt counselling, especially in a country where debt is granted so easily and yet so hard to pay back. Debt counselling is a process of assisting consumers that are experiencing debt-related problems and are having difficulty making their current monthly payments, by providing budget advice, restructuring their payments, negotiating on their behalf with credit providers, monitoring their payments and providing aftercare services.

It is the duty of the Debt Counsellor [who is registered with the National Credit Regulator (NCR)] to assess whether the consumer is over-indebted by weighing the income and expenses and then taking into account statutory and non-statutory deductions as well as existing monthly debt payments. If the calculation results in a negative balance, the consumer is declared over-indebted. The debt counsellor provides a proposal that lowers the debt payments and increases the cascades (the number of months allowed for repayment of the debt, inclusive of interest), in order for the consumer to be able to manage his debt while paying it off at the same time. An order is then granted in court and sent to the credit providers, and the consumer can no longer incur any new debt. Once the debt is paid off, the consumer is given a clearance certificate and he/she has all that extra income to buy goods in cash.

Unfortunately, it was too late for Alecia as legal action was already taken against her. The same applies if a termination letter is sent in terms of s.129 of the National Credit Act. It is important for people to know that there is a way to manage their debt, but they need to acknowledge that they are in financial trouble before they are placed in a situation like Alecia. It may be too late for Alecia, but hopefully it won’t be too late for others.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.


Imagine receiving the nasty surprise that default judgement has been entered against your name because of a summons that you have never even received. It is necessary that you know the procedure of how to rescind a default judgement to get you out of this unwanted situation.Many people are confronted with the unfortunate situation of a judgement being entered against their name, without even being aware that legal action is being taken against them. The reason for this is that when a party fails to deliver a notice of intention to defend a summons, a Plaintiff is entitled to lodge an application for default judgment.[1]

The reason for many Defendants not filing a notice of intention to defend, is the fact that they simply never receive the summons initiating an action against them. Personal service of documents by the Sheriff is only required where the matter affects a person’s personal status, such as with divorces and sequestrations. As it is not a requirement for the Sheriff personally, to serve a summons on a person, it can lead to situations where the Defendant never sees the summons, although the Sheriff stated that the summons has been legitimately served.[2] An example hereof many people who indicate their domicilium citandi et executandi or nominated address where notices are sent, in an agreement.

In the event of the Defendant moving, the Sheriff will still deliver the summons to this address, but the Defendant will never receive it.In the event of a Defendant not receiving a summons, certain steps have to be taken to have the judgment rescinded. The Defendant has to serve and file his application for rescission of judgment within 20 days after becoming aware of the judgment that was entered against him.[3] The Defendant (now the Applicant) is required to set out in an affidavit why the matter was not defended and what the bona fide defence is to the claim.  The onus is upon the Applicant to set out legitimate reasons for why the matter was not defended.[4]

When bringing an application for the rescission of judgement before court, the following principles are applicable:[5]

The Applicant must give a reasonable explanation for his default. The court will be unwilling to help the Applicant if it is found that he was aware of the proceedings against him or if the default was simply due to his own negligence. If the Applicant’s default is of a wilful or negligent nature, these will serve as considerations that the court will take into account when deciding whether an application should be granted.

In many cases an Applicant simply rescinds a default judgement to delay the inevitable. It is therefore necessary for the Applicant to show that he is not simply delaying the Plaintiff’s claim. A bona fide defence, in other word a genuine defence, must therefore be shown, although it is not required to deal fully with the merits thereof or produce any evidence in this regard.

Ultimately, the court has discretion whether to rescind the default judgment or not, based on whether good cause was shown by the Applicant.[6]

Although it involves an unwanted and often lengthy and expensive process, it is important to have any judgments against your name rescinded as soon as possible, as they have a negative impact on your credit rating. These judgements, if executed, will also leave you highly annoyed when the Sheriff shows up on your doorstep with a warrant of execution to seize your personal belongings.

[1] Magistrates Court, Rules of Court, Rule 12(1)(c)

[2] Magistrates Court, Rules of Court, Rule 9(3)

[3] Magistrates Court, Rules of Court, Rule 49(1)

[4] Du Plessis v Tager 1953 (2) SA 5 (O)

[5] Grant v Plumbers (Pty) Ltd 1949 (2) SA 470 (O)

[6] De Witts Auto Body Repairs v Fedgen Insurance Co Ltd 1994 (4) SA 705

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.


A2_BElectronic Funds Transfers, better known as EFTs, have become a popular payment method in South Africa, accepted by many in lieu of cash or cheque payments.

Many accept the printed electronic funds transfer document as “proof” of a cash payment into the bank account, especially in the selling and purchasing of motor vehicles. They insist on the transfer to be made immediately there and then upon which the vehicle is transferred and registered to the buyer on the same day.

The abuse of Electronic Funds Transfers made to the seller’s bank account, especially between different financial entities, is yet another devious manner in which the original Natis documentation or registration of ownership of a motor vehicle can be obtained with no intention to honour the actual payment.

EFTs are governed inter alia by agreements between the various financial entities. Depending on the agreement, such an EFT transaction can take up to two days to actually reflect as a deposit on the statement of the seller. The risk of accepting proof of an EFT as “proof” of actual payment as if it was a cash deposit, puts the seller at a real risk of being defrauded.

Most ordinary citizens do not know that an electronic transfer can be reversed within a few hours after it has been made, depending on the individual financial institute at which the account is held.

Devious fraudsters who are au fait with the mechanics of the law and the financial systems in South Africa, use this knowledge to the detriment of others.

In the sale of any motor vehicle, or any other object of which ownership is registered on the eNatis system, the Natis registration document is a very useful instrument to secure and verify payment prior to the transfer of registered ownership.

The easiest safeguard against any such risk of loss because of non-payment, is the current, valid and original Natis document, reflecting the registered owner and titleholder of such a vehicle.

For as long as the seller of the vehicle retains the possession of the original Natis document reflecting the seller as the registered owner, no fraudster or any other person can obtain registered ownership of the vehicle, unless the seller physically enables them to do so. Once payment actually reflects on the bank statement the necessary documentation should be handed over to effect transfer of registration to the purchaser or his nominee.

Should a seller hand the original Natis registration documents over prior to actual confirmation of payment, the vehicle can be traded and registered to any innocent third party, whilst the seller himself still awaits payment.

As no party to an agreement can transfer more rights than he is legally entitled to at that time, the seller will be able to claim the motor vehicle from any person who has such motor vehicle in his or her possession, even if the possessor at that stage has “purchased and paid” the vehicle.  As long as the motor vehicle has not been transferred and registered to a purchaser who has not paid for same, the seller can safeguard himself in such a fraudulent transaction.

In the event of the payment then not forthcoming, your rights as seller can be enforced by means of a very simple but highly effective application to any court, which can be done ex parte with an interim relief order to return the vehicle by sheriff to the registered owner of the motor vehicle at a date on which service is to be effected on the purchaser, whereafter the normal motion procedure is followed.

It is also recommended to issue summons for the cancellation of the agreement, return of the vehicle, cost and interest simultaneously.

For as long as the seller retains and holds on to the original Natis documents on which he/she is reflected as the registered owner of the motor vehicle, the seller will have a prima facie right to and be the entitled possessor of such motor vehicle.

A seller who has already caused registration of the vehicle to be transferred to the purchaser prior to have payment secured, is left in a precarious position. The seller has very little hope of success against such a purchaser with the intention to defraud. The litigation can be prolonged and costly with no guarantee of recovery of the loss.

For further reading, see Unitrans Automotive (Pty) Ltd vs Trustees of the Rally Motors Trust 2011 (4) SA 35, just one of the transactions during a shopping spree of fraudulent transactions using EFTs by a fraudulent purchaser, and other matters referred to in the judgement.

 This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.


SaleimmovableBut what the parties don’t keep in mind is that this agreement between the parties constitutes a credit transaction as defined in the National Credit Act (hereinafter called the Act) and that in certain circumstances the seller will have to register as a credit provider in terms of the Act.

To establish if the Act will be applicable and if the seller should register as a credit provider one should carefully consider the following:

  1. The Act will apply to all written credit agreements between parties dealing at arm’s length. This is to probably curb underhand dealings between family members at the peril of other third parties.
  2. Arm’s length transactions are not defined in the Act but they exclude, for example, transactions between family members who are dependent or co-dependent on each other and any arrangement where each party is not independent of the other and does not strive to obtain the utmost possible advantage out of the transaction.
  3. The Act does not apply where:
  • The consumer is a juristic person whose annual turnover or asset value is more than a R1m;
  • The purchaser is the State or an organ of the State;
  • A large agreement (i.e. more than R250 000, such as a mortgage) is entered into with a juristic person whose asset value or turnover is less than R1m.

A credit agreement includes a credit facility, credit transaction and credit guarantee or a combination of these. The relevance is the following:

  1. A credit facility requires fees or interest to be paid ;
  2. A credit transaction does not necessarily require interest or fees to be paid. An instalment agreement would suffice to qualify as a credit transaction .

An instalment agreement is defined and relates only to the sale of movable property.

A credit transaction also includes any other agreement where payment of an amount owed is deferred and interest or fees are charged.

A mortgage agreement qualifies as a credit transaction [Section 8(4)(d)] and the importance is that mortgage is defined in the Act as a pledge of immovable property that serves as security for a mortgage agreement.

Mortgage agreement is also defined as a credit agreement secured by a pledge of immovable property.

Section 40 of the Act requires one to register as a credit provider should you have at least 100 credit agreements as credit provider OR if the total principal debt under all credit agreements exceeds R500 000. Principal debt means the amount deferred and does not include interest or other fees.

It follows that if you sell your home to an individual in a private sale (i.e. where he does not get a bond from the bank) and you register a bond as security, you have to register as a credit provider UNLESS the principal debt is less than R500 000 or the buyer is a juristic person and the price is more than R250 000.

The implications for the seller could be far-reaching if he is not registered, as the agreement will be unlawful and void, and a court must order that:

  1. The credit agreement is void as from the date the agreement was entered into;
  2. The credit provider must refund to the purchaser any money paid by the purchaser under the credit agreement, together with interest;
  3. All the purported rights of the credit provider under the credit agreement to recover any money paid or goods delivered to, or on behalf of the purchaser in terms of the agreement, are either cancelled or forfeited to the State.

The application form to register as a credit provider and also the calculation of the registration fee that is payable to the National Credit Regulator (NCR) can be found on the NCR’s website. If the seller has not registered by the time he enters into the loan agreement he may still register within 30 days after entering into the loan agreement.

Sellers, be careful when you enter into these types of agreements as non-compliance with the Act could be a costly exercise.

This article is a general information sheet and should not be used or relied on as legal or other professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact your legal adviser for specific and detailed advice.