Bad day in home foreclosure court for Nedbank and its lawyers
The bank was attempting to foreclose on 12 homes. In one instance, a valuation was done based on assumptions. Picture: AdobeStock
It was a bad day in court last week for Nedbank, its property valuation experts, and its lawyers.
In a scathing judgment, Acting Judge Fiona Southwood of the Johannesburg High Court halted Nedbank's attempts to foreclose on 12 properties, each with different owners, citing numerous instances of non-compliance with court rules and ethical standards.
The judge raised serious concerns about the conduct of Nedbank's attorneys, counsel and property valuation experts.
Nor did she place much credibility on the arrears amounts claimed by the bank in several cases brought before the court by the bank.
The bank statements in five cases show the respondents were making payments on their mortgage loans.
'This raises a concern that the amount certified as being in arrears is not credible. [Nedbank's] counsel could not address my concern. It is advisable that the applicant lodge an affidavit to explain why the balance does not change,' reads the judgment.
ALSO READ: Court reverses home repo judgment after Nedbank bungled calculations
Falsehoods
Nedbank's attorney and counsel were found to have misled the court in one case by claiming the owner was properly served with legal notices and then – when challenged by the judge – denied any misrepresentation.
'There is no evidence in the record that the address at which personal service occurred is the home of the respondent,' reads the unreported judgment.
'At face value, the submissions in counsel's practice note constitute misrepresentations to the court. Furthermore, the attorney's incorrect allegation as to what appeared in the sheriff's return also constitutes, at face value, a misrepresentation to the court.'
The bank's attorneys were referred to the Legal Practice Council (LPC) for further investigation, while the counsel representing Nedbank will have to answer to the same council as well as the Pretoria Society of Advocates.
ALSO READ: Class action suit shows banks sell repossessed houses for cents in the rand
12 cases, 'recurring issues'
The 12 cases – heard during the court's 'Big Bang Week' when 15 courts heard 70 cases a day from 18 to 20 June 2025 – involved unopposed foreclosure applications under Rule 46A, which governs execution (public auction) against residential immovable property.
Rule 46A requires strict judicial oversight to ensure that foreclosure does not violate homeowners' rights, particularly when the property is their primary residence.
Judge Southwood identified several recurring issues that led to the dismissal or postponement of Nedbank's applications, including improper document handling, inadequate valuations, failure to serve notices correctly, and misrepresentations by legal practitioners.
One of the requirements in foreclosure applications is a valuation of the property.
This is to prevent properties being sold at well below market prices, a practice that historically led to homeowners losing equity accumulated in their homes.
'The valuer used in every instance did not give a satisfactory basis for claiming expertise in valuations nor indicate her qualifications and it was uncertain that she was in fact employed by an independent third party as she alleged,' says the judgment.
In one instance, a valuation was done without gaining access to the property. The valuator relied on assumptions about the number and sizes of the rooms, as well as the quality of finishes.
ALSO READ: Banks face R60bn claim for selling defaulters' homes too cheaply
The valuator was referred to the South African Council for the Property Valuers Profession (SACPVP) for investigation.
In multiple cases, documents were not uploaded correctly to CaseLines, the court's electronic case management system, hindering judicial preparation.
Affidavits meant to verify the authenticity of security documents were either missing, incomplete, or lacked proper references. In one case, the bank submitted copies of original documents, stating that originals were stored in a 'safe storage facility' without further evidence.
Nedbank also failed to comply with the National Credit Act's requirements for serving Section 129 notices, which inform debtors of their rights to resolve arrears before legal action.
One notice was sent to an incorrect email address, with the bank's legal counsel admitting the process was flawed.
ALSO READ: Another slapdown for banks in high court
'Strong message'
This ruling is stunning in its scope, sending a strong message to financial institutions and their legal representatives about the importance of meticulous compliance with court procedures and ethical standards in foreclosure cases.
The judgment emphasises the courts' role in safeguarding the right to housing, particularly for primary residences, as mandated by the Constitutional Court.
The ruling offers a reprieve for the homeowners, ensuring their homes cannot be seized without rigorous judicial scrutiny.
As the LPC and SACPVP investigate the professionals involved, the case also highlights the need for accountability in South Africa's legal and financial sectors, says consumer legal advisor Leonard Benjamin.
'Nedbank now faces the challenge of rectifying its applications to meet the court's stringent requirements, while the ruling sets a precedent for future foreclosure proceedings.
ALSO READ: R60bn class action suit against the banks set down for 2026
'We've seen far too many instances of banks selling peoples' homes using judgments that should not have been granted in the first place,' he adds.
'Here's a ruling that I hope draws a line in the sand. Judge Southwood must be commended for rejecting outright sub-standard presentation of cases by Nedbank.
'While it must be appreciated that the volume of matters that must be dealt with places the judiciary under considerable pressure, it is no excuse and of little comfort to consumers because, in many cases, judges are all that stand between judgments that should not have been granted in the first place and possible homelessness.
'Clearly, despite increased judicial oversight, the banks still believe that, as [a] right, they are entitled to foreclose and that legal proceedings are a mere formality. Hopefully, this is coming to an end.'
This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
a day ago
- Mail & Guardian
Inflation ticks up to 3% in June on the back of higher food prices
The main contributors to the year-on-year increase were food and non-alcoholic beverages Annual consumer On a month-on-month basis, consumer prices were up 0.3% in June compared with a 0.2% increase the previous month. The main contributors to the year-on-year increase were food and non-alcoholic beverages, which reached a 15-month high of 5.1%, adding 0.9 percentage points to the overall rate. Alcoholic beverages and tobacco followed, rising to 4.4% and contributing 0.2 percentage points. Housing and utilities inflation also accelerated to 4.4%, adding 1.0 percentage points to the headline number. The rate for goods was also higher at 2.3% from 1.8% in May, while the services component edged up to 3.7% from 3.6%. The only dampener for June inflation was the transport category, which contributed -0.5 percentage points to the overall rate. Economists said this was because petrol prices fell more slowly — by just 0.2% in June compared with 1.1% in May and 1% in April — as higher Brent crude oil prices offset the modest appreciation of the rand. The inflation rate is still within the 'Such low inflation provides considerable support for consumers given that most wage increases are higher than this low prevailing rate of inflation,' said Elna Moolman, head of macroeconomic research at Standard Bank. 'It also arguably supports the case for the Reserve Bank to cut interest rates further at the upcoming monetary policy meeting next week.' Nedbank economists expect annual inflation for 2025 to rise gradually off a low base, but to remain relatively contained as a result of 'a surprisingly resilient rand, much lower global oil prices, the gradual easing in domestic supply-side constraints, and limited demand pressure on prices'. 'Given a relatively favourable inflation outlook, the South African Reserve Bank reduced interest rates by a further The central bank's monetary policy committee — which meets once every two months to decide on interest rates — will have its next discussion next week.
The Citizen
2 days ago
- The Citizen
Estimated assessments: Sars's new ‘cash-cow-grabbing' norm?
Provision in the Tax Administration Act may be subject to abuse. Sars often prepares these estimates 'by comparing deposits into a bank account to turnover declared on the tax return'. Picture: AdobeStock The South African Revenue Service (Sars) has the power to raise estimated assessments when the information supplied by a taxpayer is considered incorrect or inadequate. The apparent subjectivity of the parameters used when issuing estimated assessments make the provision subject to abuse, argues Nico Theron, founder of Unicus Tax Specialists. The Tax Administration Act authorises Sars to issue an estimated assessment if a taxpayer fails to submit a return; submits a return or relevant material that is incorrect or inadequate; or fails to respond to requests for relevant material, even after multiple reminders. If any of these requirements is unmet, Sars may issue an estimated assessment, which is then based on its own calculations of the taxpayer's liability, says MaxProf auditor Debora Motana in a published article. ALSO READ: Are you making money with crypto assets? Sars is looking for you Troubling … Theron finds the subjective nature of the parameters for inaccurate returns or information or inadequate returns or information troublesome. 'If, for example, the taxpayer submits detailed information, but the Sars auditor does not understand it, is the information inaccurate? Perhaps not. Is it inadequate? Well, perhaps, for that auditor but perhaps not for the next one.' He says hypothetically the provision can be relied on when an accurate assessment is objectively speaking possible – but subjectively, the auditor may be snowed under or lack the expertise to get to an accurate assessment and revert to an easy way out, thereby shifting the workload to the taxpayer. ALSO READ: Economists say they are confident in Sars Methodology Theron notes that Sars often prepares these estimates by comparing deposits into a corporate taxpayer's bank account to turnover declared on the tax return. 'If the deposits are higher, they will typically propose to tax the difference. They will propose this even though it is trite that the sum of deposits in a bank account will seldomly yield the same number as turnover. 'This much, frankly, is ridiculously obvious to anybody with a basic understanding of commerce and accounting.' When Sars estimates a taxpayer's tax bill by comparing bank statements to turnover, the onus is on the taxpayer to prove – on a deposit-by-deposit basis – why the difference is not taxable. Theron argues that accurate assessments are to be preferred and that estimated assessments should only be raised as a last resort and not simply if the taxpayer failed to file a return, failed to respond to multiple requests, or submits information or a return that is inadequate or incorrect. Motana warns taxpayers to be vigilant in adhering to the requirements outlined in the provision (Section 95 of the act) that grants the power to Sars to make an estimated assessment. She also notes that the onus is on the taxpayer to demonstrate whether the assessment is valid or needs adjustment. ALSO READ: Tax season now open: Sars pays out R10bn in refunds after auto-assessments, you could be owed Court case Motana refers to an appeal case before the tax court in Johannesburg where Taxpayer RPC took an estimated assessment on appeal. It was not satisfied with the methodology used by Sars in determining the assessments. In its judgment in favour of Sars's methodology, the court quoted from the Africa Cash & Carry v Sars case where the tax court stated that an estimated assessment 'by its very nature' is subject to change based on an evaluation of the evidence and any information that becomes available. The tax court must place itself in the shoes of the functionary to determine whether the methodology followed and the assumptions on which the estimated assessments are based, are reasonable and produce a reasonable result. In the Taxpayer RPC case the court found that the methodology used by Sars is not expected to be precise, as long it satisfies the objective test. ALSO READ: Looming tax deadline and glitches cause frustration 'Cash-cow-grabbing norm' Theron says an organ of state such as Sars must act within the four corners of its empowering provisions. He questions whether the raising of estimated assessments is used as a last resort to protect the fiscus or whether it is used because it is effective and convenient. 'I can understand, from a business perspective, that estimated assessments might be used as cash-cow-grabbing norm. Indeed, we are seeing an increase in estimated assessments.' * Sars announced last week that it has issued auto-assessments to 5.8 million taxpayers, up from five million last year. Taxpayers have from 21 July until 20 October to file their tax returns or make changes to their auto-assessments. Provisional taxpayers have until 19 January to file their tax returns. This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
The Herald
2 days ago
- The Herald
Six years in jail for bogus attorney
Johannes Teboho Motse, who posed as a legal practitioner and unlawfully represented unsuspecting clients in various courts between February and November 2022, has been sentenced to six years in jail. The Rustenburg specialised commercial crimes court convicted Motse, 43, of multiple charges of fraud, theft, forgery and uttering. 'He forged critical legal documents, including a right of appearance certificate, a Fidelity Fund certificate and an admission certificate, to deceive his victims,' National Prosecuting Authority spokesperson Sivenathi Gunya said on Monday. One of the complainants paid Motse R15,000 to prosecute an appeal. After receiving no legal service, the client reported the matter to the police. Investigations revealed that Motse was not registered with the Legal Practice Council. Motse pleaded guilty to all charges. 'In aggravation of sentence, state advocate Matshidiso Ramakgaphola highlighted the prevalence of such crimes in the court's jurisdiction and emphasised that the offences were premeditated and meticulously executed.' The court sentenced Motse to six years for fraud, forgery and uttering. On the charge of theft, he was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, wholly suspended for five years on condition that he repays the complainant R15,000 by August 31. TimesLIVE
