National Credit Regulator v Hand in Hand Financial Services CC trading as Thuso Finance (NCT/158511/2020/140(1)) [2021] ZANCT 30 (31 August 2021)
The Tribunal found that the Respondent's registration as a credit provider had lapsed, yet it continued to grant credit, contravening section 40(3) of the National Credit Act. The Respondent failed to conduct proper affordability assessments, overcharged interest and service fees, and entered into reckless credit agreements. The Respondent did not file an answering affidavit or condonation application, and the facts alleged by the Applicant were deemed admitted under Rule 13(5). The Tribunal was satisfied that the application documents were adequately served and proceeded to grant the orders sought by the Applicant on a default basis. The Respondent's repeated contraventions were declared...
- Citation
- [2021] ZANCT 30
- Parties
- Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Hand in Hand Financial Services CC trading as Thuso Finance
- Court
- National Consumer Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 31 August 2021
- Case Number
- NCT/158511/2020/140(1)
- Procedural Posture
- Default Application / Final Determination
- Outcome
- The application is granted on a default basis. The Respondent is found guilty of repeated contraventions of the National Credit Act and is declared to have engaged in prohibited conduct. An administrative fine of R200,000.00 is imposed, and the Respondent is ordered to refund consumers and appoint an independent...
- Judges
- A Potwana, T Woker, B Dumisa
- Legal Topics
- National Credit Act, Reckless Lending, Unregistered Credit Provider, Affordability Assessment, Overcharging Interest, Administrative Fine
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
National Credit Regulator
Applicant
Hand in Hand Financial Services CC trading as Thuso Finance
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Default Application / Final Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Respondent contravened multiple provisions of the National Credit Act by granting credit while unregistered and failing to conduct proper affordability assessments.
- 2 Whether the Tribunal can grant the orders sought by the Applicant on a default basis.
- 3 Whether the Respondent's conduct constitutes prohibited conduct under section 150(a) of the NCA.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the Respondent's registration as a credit provider had lapsed, yet it continued to grant credit, contravening section 40(3) of the National Credit Act. The Respondent failed to conduct proper affordability assessments, overcharged interest and service fees, and entered into reckless credit agreements. The Respondent did not file an answering affidavit or condonation application, and the facts alleged by the Applicant were deemed admitted under Rule 13(5). The Tribunal was satisfied that the application documents were adequately served and proceeded to grant the orders sought by the Applicant on a default basis. The Respondent's repeated contraventions were declared...
Court Disposition
The application is granted on a default basis. The Respondent is found guilty of repeated contraventions of the National Credit Act and is declared to have engaged in prohibited conduct. An administrative fine of R200,000.00 is imposed, and the Respondent is ordered to refund consumers and appoint an independent...
Orders
- The Respondent is found guilty of contravening sections 40(3), 81(2) read with regulation 23A, 81(2)(a)(ii) read with regulation 23A(12)(b) and 23A(13), 81(2)(a)(iii) read with regulation 23A(3) and regulations 23A(8) and (12)(a) and (c), regulation 23A(9) and (10), section 81(3) read with section 80(1), section...
- The Respondent's repeated contraventions are declared prohibited conduct in terms of section 150(a) of the NCA.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment