Download PDF

South Africa Order

National Consumer Tribunal

Wason and Another v Avon Justine (Pty) Ltd and Others (NCT/32785/2015/165(1)(P)) [2017] ZANCT 63 (15 May 2017)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The Tribunal found that the omission of the debt counsellor's name from the original order was a clerical error that required correction for proper enforcement and record-keeping. The variation does not alter the substantive rights or obligations of the parties under the debt re-arrangement. The Tribunal confirmed the payment structure between the consumers and credit providers as an order in terms of section 150 of the National Credit Act. The Tribunal further drew the parties' attention to the statutory provisions regarding clearance certificates, expungement of records, and enforcement of Tribunal orders, and warned that non-compliance constitutes an offence.

Court disposition

Order varied to include the debt counsellor's name; payment structure confirmed; statutory warnings issued.

Orders

  • The payment structure between the consumers and the credit providers is confirmed as an order of the Tribunal in terms of section 150 of the National Credit Act.
  • The order is varied to reflect the name of the debt counsellor; no other changes are made.
  • The parties are directed to sections 71(1), 71(5)(a), and 152 of the National Credit Act regarding clearance certificates, expungement of records, and enforcement of Tribunal orders.
  • Failure to comply with the order constitutes an offence in terms of section 160(1) of the National Credit Act.

02

Material facts

Parties

Ian Romer Wason

Applicant

Moseki David Marema

Respondent

Promars Marema

Respondent

Avon Justine (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Direct Axis (SA) (Pty) Ltd, agent for Call Direct on behalf of Firstrand Bank Limited

Respondent

Foschini Totalsports

Respondent

JDG Trading (Pty) Limited on behalf of Joshua Doore

Respondent

Southern View Finance South Africa (Pty) Ltd t/a Capfin

Respondent

Woolworths Credit Card

Respondent

Amounts and remedies

  • RCS Cape Union Mart Current Outstanding: ZAR 1,310.83
  • RCS Verimark Current Outstanding: ZAR 2,036.11
  • Capitec Bank Limited (1355831723) Current Outstanding: ZAR 79,645.07
  • Capitec Bank Limited (1385523415) Current Outstanding: ZAR 14,499
  • Absa Bank Limited (5.47 E+015) Current Outstanding: ZAR 10,246.2
  • African Bank Limited (75007352457) Current Outstanding: ZAR 7,461.05
  • Absa Bank Limited (85679614) Current Outstanding: ZAR 69,289.32
  • Standard Bank of South Africa Limited (402196597) Current Outstanding: ZAR 13,631.07

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Debt Rearrangement Application / Order Varying Previous Consent Order to Include Debt Counsellor's Name

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
The debt counsellor applied for the original order to be varied as their name was omitted from the initial order. The applicant submits that the variation is necessary for proper record and enforcement of the debt re-arrangement.
Respondent
No opposition or substantive argument was advanced by the respondents regarding the variation. The respondents are parties to the debt re-arrangement and are bound by the terms confirmed by the Tribunal.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Section 71(1) National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

    A consumer whose debts have been re-arranged may apply for a clearance certificate at any time.

  2. 02

    Section 71(5) National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

    Upon receipt of a clearance certificate, a credit bureau or the national credit register must expunge the record of the debt re-arrangement order or agreement.

  3. 03

    Section 152 National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

    Any decision, judgment or order of the Tribunal may be served, executed and enforced as if it were an order of the High Court.

  4. 04

    Section 160(1) National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

    Failure to comply with an order of the Tribunal constitutes an offence.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The Tribunal found that the omission of the debt counsellor's name from the original order was a clerical error that required correction for proper enforcement and record-keeping. The variation does not alter the substantive rights or obligations of the parties under the debt re-arrangement. The Tribunal confirmed the payment structure between the consumers and credit providers as an order in terms of section 150 of the National Credit Act. The Tribunal further drew the parties' attention to the statutory provisions regarding clearance certificates, expungement of records, and enforcement of Tribunal orders, and warned that non-compliance constitutes an offence.

Obiter and limits

  • The Tribunal emphasised that its orders have the same force and effect as those of the High Court and must be complied with accordingly.
  • The parties should be aware of the process for obtaining a clearance certificate and the implications for their credit records.

Court disposition

Order varied to include the debt counsellor's name; payment structure confirmed; statutory warnings issued.

  • The payment structure between the consumers and the credit providers is confirmed as an order of the Tribunal in terms of section 150 of the National Credit Act.
  • The order is varied to reflect the name of the debt counsellor; no other changes are made.
  • The parties are directed to sections 71(1), 71(5)(a), and 152 of the National Credit Act regarding clearance certificates, expungement of records, and enforcement of Tribunal orders.
  • Failure to comply with the order constitutes an offence in terms of section 160(1) of the National Credit Act.

Source and reliance status

National Consumer Tribunal

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

National Consumer Tribunal

Order

[2017] ZANCT 63

SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy

IN

THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL HELD AT CENTURION

Case Number: NCT/32785/2015/165(1)(P)

In the matter between:

IAN

ROMER WASON

APPLICANT

NCR REGISTRATION NUMBER: 1817

And

MOSEKI

DAVID MAREMA

IDENTITY NUMBER: [8...]

PROMARS

MAREMA

IDENTITY NUMBER: [8...] 1ST CONSUMER 2ND

CONSUMER

AVON JUSTINE (PTY) LTD 1ST

CREDIT PROVIDER

DIRECT AXIS (SA) (PTY) LTD, AGENT FOR CALL DIRECT ON BEHALF OF FIRSTRAND

BANK LIMITED 2ND

CREDIT PROVIDER

FOSCHINI

TOTALSPORTS 3RD

CREDIT PROVIDER JDG TRADING (PTY) LIMITED ON BEHALF

OF JOSHUA DOORE 4TH

CREDIT PROVIDER

SOUTHERN VIEW FINANCE SOUTH AFRICA (PTY) LTD T/A CAPFIN 5TH

CREDIT PROVIDER

WOOLWORTHS

CREDIT CARD 6TH

CREDIT PROVIDER

VARIED

CONSENT ORDER

The original order on this matter was issued on 23 March 2016. The debt counsellor subsequently informed the Tribunal that the name of the debt counsellor did not appear on the order and applied for it to be varied. The application was granted and the order is now varied to reflect the name of the debt counsellor. No other changes to the order have been made.

The Tribunal, having read the papers filed of record and being satisfied that the Applicant(s) and The Respondent(s) are parties to a debt re-arrangement facilitated by a Debt Counsellor under section 86(7)(b) read with section 138(1) of The National Credit Act, Act 34 of 2005 (the Act), hereby makes the following order:

1. The payment structure between the consumer (s)and the credit provider(s) is confirmed as an order of the Tribunal in terms of section 150 of the Act

Credit Provider Reference Current Outstanding Proposed Annual Interest Proposed Instalment 1

RCS CAPE UNION MART 6.01E+018 R1,310.83 16 0.76% R92.68 2

RCS VERIMARK 6.01E+018 R2,036.11 34 0.76% R65.26 3

CAPITEC

BANK LIMITED 1355831723 R79,645.07 62 2.63% R1,310.00 4

CAPITEC BANK LIMITED 1385523415 R14,499.00 55 2.78% R265.56 5

ABSA

BANK LIMITED 5.47E+015 R10,246.20 1 0.79% R0.00 1 R138.64 56 R195.18 6

AFRICAN BANK LIMITED 75007352457 R7,461.05 Until settled 2.33% R220.42 7

ABSA BANK LIMITED 85679614 R69,289.32 1 8.19% R0.00 1 R662.02 58 R1,162.52 21 R1,379.13 8

STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA

LIMITED 402196597 R13,631.07 59 2.33% R 240.21

2. The parties' attention is drawn to sections 71(1),71(5)(a) and 152 of the Act which states as follows:

Section 71(1).

A consumer, whose debts have been re-arranged in terms of part D of this chapter, may apply to a debt counsellor at any time for a clearance certificate

Section 71(5)

Upon receiving a copy of a clearance certificate, a credit bureau, or the national credit register must expunge from it's records the fact that the consumer was subject to the relevant debt re-arrangement order or agreement

Section 152

Any decision, judgement or order of the Tribunal may be served, executed and enforced as if it were an order of the High Court.

3. The parties are warned that failure to comply with the order of the Tribunal constitutes an offence in terms of section 160(1) of the Act

Dated at CENTURION on 15 May 2017

Adv J Simpson

Presiding member

National Consumer Tribunal

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

National Credit Act, 34 of 2005

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.