By Prof Graham Paddock

Disconnection of electricity for non-payment
Q1. If included in the Conduct Rules of the Body corporate, can electricity be disconnected if still unpaid, and the owner has been given notice of the disconnection.
A1. Hi,
For the bulk supplier of the electricity, i.e. Escom or a subsidiary supplier such as a local authority or City Power, cutting off the supply of electricity in response to non-payment of the account after due notice has been held to be a legitimate act. But a body corporate is not a supplier of electricity, in most cases it is a local distributor and it is not entitled to cut off the supply when one of its members is in arrears with levies.
The Act provides in sub-sections 37 (2) and (2A) a specific remedy for the non-payment of levies – the body corporate can and must take action in the Magistrates or the High Court to recover those levies from the owner.
So a body corporate is not entitled to cut off a supply of any service to a section in response to a non-payment of levies. This is an act of “spoliation”.
The illegal disconnection of electricity to a unit by a body corporate was dealt with by the High Court in the case of Queensgate Body Corporate v Claesen in 1998 and the court confimed that:
“It is a fundamental principle that no man is allowed to take the law into his own hands. No one is permitted to dispossess another forcibly or wrongfully and against his consent of the possession of property whether movable or immovable. If he does so the court will summarily restore the status quo ante and will do that as a preliminary to any enquiry or investigation into the merits of the dispute. It is not necessary to refer to any authority upon a principle so clear.”
In this case the body corporate’s counsel argued that the act was taken in accordance with the scheme’s rules, duly made under the Sectional Titles Act. This argument was held to be without merit. The court said:
“The clause giving the appellant the right to cut off electricity of any unit owner who is in arrears with his or her levies is clearly contrary to the common law. It constitutes nothing but a power to interfere with such person’s right to use the existing electricity supply. The instant case is an a fortiori example of spoliation. … no court would have had the power to deprive any holder of his or her electricity supply in the circumstances the appellant has done. It is a clear act of spoliation and there was no consent valid in law to such an act.”
Over the years I have heard fairly regular reports of people who have cut off electricity supplies to sections so as to force owners to pay up. It has been described as a “very effective” approach, but it is absolutely illegal.
Graham
From one of the other Paddocks Club users:
It could be seen as an “effective remedy” to collect arrears BUT are those doing it prepared to face the consequences?
In terms of the Rental Housing Act, § 16 (hA):
“Any person who-
(hA) unlawfully locks out a tenant or shuts off the utilities to the rental housing property will be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine or imprisonment not exceeding two years or to both such fine and such imprisonment.”
The Electricity Act 41 of 1987 section 27(3), also states:
“Any person who without legal right (the proof of which shall be upon him) cuts off or damages or interferes with any apparatus for generating, transmitting, or supplying electricity, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding the amount which the Minister may from time to time prescribe by regulation or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to both such fine or such imprisonment.”
Q2: In a sectional title scheme the developer is in arrears with levies. In the opinion of the other trustees a latent defected blocked drain pipe caused major water damage to lifts and 3 developer units. The insurance claim approved. The developer was asked on site prior to damage and undertook to look into this via an Architect, builder, etc. The developer did not do anything. The builder and plumber are not keen to assist on prior requests because of outstanding monies owed by the developer for construction work.
A2: The body corporate is obliged to insure all the buildings and, when damage occurs, to lodge claims and do its best to get the insurer to pay for the required repairs.
Normally an insurance company that approves a claim agrees to fund repairs to the damaged property rather than paying out cash. And if this is the situation in this case, the body corporate cannot frustrate this process in order to put pressure on the developer to pay his outstanding levies.
The possibility that the developer and his sub-contractors have done sub-standard work should be properly investigated. The opinion of a few trustees is not of much value, unless they happen to be qualified engineers. I suggest that if this seems likely the trustees should arrange to get the local municipality’s building inspector out and get his or her view. If the inspector confirm that this is a real possibility, the trustees should get legal and technical advice with a view to taking action against the developer while he still has an investment in the scheme.
As to the levy issue, I presume that the trustees have determined the highest reasonable rate of interest will be payable on outstanding levies and has handed the debt over for collection?
Graham
Professor Graham Paddock is now only available to answer questions on the discussion forum for Community Members of Paddocks Club. Get all your questions answered by joining Graham on this community platform. Join Paddocks Club at www.paddocksclub.co.za.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Posts
Archives
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- February 2008
- February 2007
Recent Comments