Levy Arrears, AGM Reporting and POPIA: How Much Detail Should Trustees Disclose?
By Jennifer Paddock
One of the more difficult questions trustees face at annual general meeting (AGM) time is how to report on levy arrears while respecting owners’ privacy.
On the one hand, Prescribed Management Rule (PMR) 26 made under the Regulations to the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 (STSMA) requires the annual financial statements (AFS) to present a clear and accurate picture of the body corporate’s financial position, including outstanding levies and other amounts owed by members. On the other hand, the Protection of Personal Information Act 4 of 2013 (POPIA) requires the body corporate to limit the disclosure of personal information to what is necessary for a lawful purpose.
So, how should trustees strike the right balance?
What Does PMR 26 Require?
PMR 26(1)(c)(i) provides that the AFS must include analyses of:
“amounts due to the body corporate in respect of contributions, special contributions and other charges, classified by member and the periods for which such amounts were owed”.
This means that the trustees must disclose which sections are in arrears, how much is owed and how long the amounts have been outstanding. The purpose is to give owners and auditors a realistic picture of the scheme’s financial health and the extent to which levy arrears may be affecting cash flow.
What Does POPIA Require?
POPIA does not prohibit the disclosure of personal information where disclosure is authorised by law. However, it does require the body corporate, as the “responsible party,” to apply the principle of minimality.
In simple terms, this means that only the minimum amount of personal information reasonably necessary to achieve the legal purpose should be disclosed.
A Practical and POPIA-Compliant Approach
In my view, the best practice is to identify arrears by section or unit number rather than by the owner’s name.
For example:
Unit 14 – R45,000 overdue (90+ days)
This approach satisfies the requirements of PMR 26(1)(c)(i) because it clearly identifies the relevant section and the age of the debt, while avoiding the unnecessary publication of the owner’s full name in documents that are circulated to all members.
Because each owner is already linked to a specific section in the scheme, the section/unit number provides the same operational and financial information without unnecessarily exposing personal information.
What Should Be Highlighted at the AGM?
At the AGM itself, trustees should focus on the broader financial implications of arrears rather than “naming and shaming” individual debtors.
For example, the trustees might report:
- the total amount of outstanding levies;
- the provision for doubtful debts;
- the impact on the body corporate’s cash flow; and
- whether legal action or Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS) proceedings are underway.
This gives owners a meaningful understanding of the issue without turning the AGM into a public discussion about one or more individual owners’ finances.
How Should Trustees Report on Legal Proceedings?
Where collection proceedings are in progress, the most effective approach is to include a brief legal status report in the trustees’ report required by PMR 26(1)(f).
For example:
“The trustees are pursuing recovery of material arrears through legal and CSOS processes. Certain matters have proceeded to judgment, while others remain pending. The trustees continue to take appropriate recovery steps on professional advice.”
This keeps owners informed that action is being taken while avoiding the disclosure of unnecessary personal or litigation details.
What About Requests for More Detailed Information?
Owners are entitled to inspect body corporate records under PMR 26(2) and 27(4), and there may be circumstances where more detailed information must be disclosed to a member on application or written request.
However, trustees must still apply POPIA’s principle of minimality and disclose only what is reasonably necessary for the lawful purpose of the request.
As a general rule, broad circulation of owners’ names and detailed financial histories should be avoided unless there is a clear legal basis requiring such disclosure.
The Bottom Line
Trustees do not have to choose between transparency and privacy – they can achieve both. By:
- identifying arrears by section/unit number rather than owner name;
- reporting the total debt and its impact on the scheme’s finances; and
- providing only general updates on legal proceedings,
trustees can comply with both PMR 26 and POPIA.
In my view, this is the most practical and legally sound approach. It provides members with the information they need to assess the scheme’s financial position while respecting the privacy and dignity of owners who may be in arrears.
_________________________________
Article reference: Paddocks Press: June 2026, Volume 21, Issue 6
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Comments