Pheko v Lamara and Another (NCT/312494/2024/141/(1)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 42 (3 October 2024)

Pheko v Lamara and Another (NCT/312494/2024/141/(1)(b)) [2024] ZANCT 42 (3 October 2024)

The Tribunal found that the applicant never applied for debt review and did not sign any documents authorising such a process. The first respondent, Asia Lamara, acted without mandate by placing the applicant under debt review, contravening section 86(1) of the National Credit Act. The evidence showed that the applicant's complaint was included in a prior investigation resulting in Lamara's deregistration and an order to remove unlawful debt review flags. The National Credit Regulator failed to provide evidence of compliance with prior orders but is nonetheless obliged to ensure the applicant's credit profile is corrected. The Tribunal held that the applicant's debt review status is...

Citation
[2024] ZANCT 42
Parties
Applicant: Thabang Samuel Pheko; Respondent: Asia Lamara; Respondent: National Credit Regulator
Court
National Consumer Tribunal
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
3 October 2024
Case Number
NCT/312494/2024/141(1)(b)
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Default Hearing; Application for Removal of Debt Review Status
Outcome
Application granted; the applicant's debt review status must be removed and his credit profile reinstated.
Judges
Z Ntuli, MC Peenze, S Mbhele
Legal Topics
National Credit Act, Debt Review Removal, Consumer Protection, Default Proceedings
Banking and Finance Civil Procedure National Credit Act Debt Review Removal Consumer Protection Default Proceedings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thabang Samuel Pheko

Applicant

Asia Lamara

Respondent

National Credit Regulator

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Default Hearing; Application for Removal of Debt Review Status

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant was lawfully placed under debt review by the first respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the applicant's debt review status should be removed from his credit profile.
  3. 3 Whether the National Credit Regulator is obliged to ensure correction of the applicant's credit record.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the applicant never applied for debt review and did not sign any documents authorising such a process. The first respondent, Asia Lamara, acted without mandate by placing the applicant under debt review, contravening section 86(1) of the National Credit Act. The evidence showed that the applicant's complaint was included in a prior investigation resulting in Lamara's deregistration and an order to remove unlawful debt review flags. The National Credit Regulator failed to provide evidence of compliance with prior orders but is nonetheless obliged to ensure the applicant's credit profile is corrected. The Tribunal held that the applicant's debt review status is...

Court Disposition

Application granted; the applicant's debt review status must be removed and his credit profile reinstated.

Orders

  • The National Credit Regulator is directed to ensure execution of all Tribunal orders made in NCR v Asia Lamara under case number NCT/102200/2018/57(1).
  • The National Credit Regulator must ensure the applicant's credit record is corrected within ten days of this order and communicate the corrected profile to all the applicant's credit providers.