National Credit Regulator v Prestige Cash Loans (Pty) Ltd (NCT/257509/2023/57(1)) [2025] ZANCT 20 (15 April 2025)
The Tribunal found that the respondent admitted to contravening multiple provisions of the National Credit Act and related regulations, including operating an unregistered branch, charging excessive interest, and failing to conduct proper affordability assessments. The parties entered into a settlement agreement in which the respondent acknowledged prohibited conduct, agreed to close the unregistered branch, appoint an independent auditor, and pay an administrative fine. The Tribunal held that the application for a consent order was competent and that confirming the settlement agreement as a consent order would bring finality to the matter. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement...
- Citation
- [2025] ZANCT 20
- Parties
- Applicant: National Credit Regulator; Respondent: Prestige Cash Loans (Pty) Ltd
- Court
- National Consumer Tribunal
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 15 April 2025
- Case Number
- NCT/257509/2023/57(1)
- Procedural Posture
- Consent Order Application / Consent Order Application Following Settlement Agreement Under Section 138 of the National Credit Act.
- Outcome
- Settlement agreement confirmed as a consent order; no order as to costs.
- Judges
- A Potwana, M Peenze, N Maseti
- Legal Topics
- National Credit Act, Prohibited Conduct, Administrative Fine, Settlement Agreement, Credit Provider Registration, Affordability Assessment
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
Prestige Cash Loans (Pty) Ltd
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Consent Order Application / Consent Order Application Following Settlement Agreement Under Section 138 of the National Credit Act.
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the respondent contravened multiple provisions of the National Credit Act and related regulations.
- 2 Whether the settlement agreement between the parties should be confirmed as a consent order under section 138 of the National Credit Act.
- 3 Whether the respondent's conduct constitutes prohibited conduct under section 150(a) of the National Credit Act.
Ratio Decidendi
The Tribunal found that the respondent admitted to contravening multiple provisions of the National Credit Act and related regulations, including operating an unregistered branch, charging excessive interest, and failing to conduct proper affordability assessments. The parties entered into a settlement agreement in which the respondent acknowledged prohibited conduct, agreed to close the unregistered branch, appoint an independent auditor, and pay an administrative fine. The Tribunal held that the application for a consent order was competent and that confirming the settlement agreement as a consent order would bring finality to the matter. The Tribunal confirmed the settlement agreement...
Court Disposition
Settlement agreement confirmed as a consent order; no order as to costs.
Orders
- The settlement agreement between the applicant and the respondent is confirmed as an order of the Tribunal.
- No order is made as to costs.
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