Last week there was a ground-breaking legal victory for a Port Elizabeth woman, when the Constitutional Court finally guaranteed that the home she has paid for in full will, in fact, be hers.
Last week there was a ground-breaking legal victory for a Port Elizabeth woman, when the Constitutional Court finally guaranteed that the home she has paid for in full will, in fact, be hers.
The ordeal for Virginia Sarrawitz began in 2001, when she paid R40 000 for a property with her life’s savings.
However, in an attempt to obtain transfer of the property, she was sent from pillar to post for many years after having taken occupation.
The person whom she had bought the property from was subsequently declared bankrupt in 2006.
Transfer had not been done at this stage, as the transferring attorneys were still waiting for a rates clearance certificate from the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality.
The rates clearance certificate was not issued as the insolvent owned a number of properties and the Municipality had allocated the Applicant’s payments for outstanding rates and taxes to the wrong municipal account.
Had the Municipality not credited the wrong municipal account, transfer in all likelihood would have been effected prior to sequestration of the insolvent.
The trustee of the insolvent estate refused to transfer the property into Sarrawitz’s name, in spite of all the evidence showing she had paid for the property and that the delays in transfer were not caused by her.
At this point she referred the matter to Legal Aid South Africa’s Port Elizabeth Justice Centre, where the matter was dealt with by Senior Litigator Lilla Crouse and Professional Assistant Roche van As.
This decision sets a precedent which will require a change in the law and will protect poor and vulnerable people – many of whom have little understanding of property transfers and ownership.
Strangely enough, had Sarrawitz paid a deposit and was paying the house off in terms of a purchase agreement, she would have been able to take transfer.
In other words the case proved that she was being penalised for paying cash!
Legal Aid SA Attorney Roche van As said that, whilst the case was fairly complex in terms of the law, the matter was really, “about a vulnerable woman whose home is her castle and whose life’s earnings and dignity is reflected in this home that she has established".
He said the decision will help others in similar situations and also, he hopes, lead to a reconsideration of property rights and protection of vulnerable consumers.
Adv Lilla Crouse added that this decision will change a law that has, in effect, been applied since the arrival of Jan Van Riebeeck and was based on European laws dating back to the 17th Century and earlier.
