R70,000 eviction pain for South Africans

Experts warned that landlords should not follow advice on social media about evictions, as it can lead to fines, jail time, and costs of R40,000 to R70,000, if not more.

VDM Law Director and Head of Litigation Ann-Suhet Marx said she has seen an influx of eviction-related enquiries pouring into her firm and cautioned consumers against accepting bad advice from social media.

“It’s terrifying to see how many people are asking for eviction advice on social media, and getting really bad advice from questionable companies,” she said.

“They’re being advised to cut off their non-paying tenants’ water and electricity, install thugs in the residence, prevent access and take down doors – all of which are illegal.”

Eviction enquiries aren’t the only thing spiking. Marx explained that VDM has also been dealing with a large increase in requests for remedial intervention after people have gone through a bad service supplier and been left high and dry.

While Marx sympathised with the need to keep costs down and the concerns of some that the law isn’t on their side, she explained that the phrase “long arm of the law” exists for a reason.

“Despite what people may think, the law will reward you at the end of the day, but it takes time, especially with evictions, because it’s a two-fold process comprising first the application and then the main agreement,” she said.

“This also means double sheriff’s fees and double disbursements, which makes it expensive.”

Marx dealt with a case around five years ago where her client’s tenant was not paying. Due process was followed, and the tenant was legally evicted.

But now, Marx said she’s handling waves of remedial action cases after people, in an effort to save money and speed up the process, pay dodgy companies to handle defaulting tenants.

When things go wrong, as they inevitably do, it ends up costing the owner far more in the long run, and with the possibility of a fine or jail sentence for doing it illegally.

“Meanwhile, the dodgy company moves on to the next person. That’s R10,000 to R20,000 or more wasted, along with the time taken to appear in front of the Rental Tribunal, and then the new costs that arise from moving to a proper law firm,” she warned.

“My advice is to first evict and collect the outstanding money, and then go for damages. Also, the minute it starts turning ugly, I go to court.”

Marx said she opts for the High Court, which is best for record-keeping, speed, and a smoother process. It’s not necessarily more expensive than the Magistrate’s Court.

R150,000 Sandton eviction gone wrong

In 2022, Marx took over a botched eviction by a distressed Sandton homeowner. After dealing with two other law firms regarding her non-paying tenant, the homeowner approached Marx for help.

“At this stage, her financial losses were already heavy and mounting, as were her stress levels. I took the matter straight to the High Court, which ruled in her favour to evict,” Marx said.

“Falsely accusing the owner of racism, the tenant refused to vacate the property while threatening to shoot the owner and then later me.”

Marx said that eviction had everything, including failure to pay, protection orders, lies, perjury, threats, accusations of racism, and criminal charges.

“The tenant tried to take it on appeal and failed. Then he lied twice, saying he’d been working away on a wind farm in the Eastern Cape when the sheriff tried to serve the eviction,” she said.

“The sheriff had proof that he’d served him in person, and the company refuted his claim of ever working for them.”

When the sheriff and members of the police arrived to evict him forcibly, Marx, who was there, said the tenant threatened to shoot them, too.

“The officers broke the door down, went in and started hauling his things onto the pavement. He, in turn, made his children get onto the roof and smash the solar panels,” she said.

“Yes, he had paid for and installed the panels, but they were seen in the eyes of the court as fixtures that no longer belonged to him personally, so he became liable for those costs, too.”

Inside, the house was in shambles with smashed cupboard doors, illegal water connections, and cables pulled out of the ceiling, causing significant damage.

“This situation should never have been allowed to happen,” Marx said. “It could have and should have been dealt with in the court from the outset.”

“But bad advice like cutting off water prolonged it and made it much, much worse, and it ended up costing the owner about R150,000.”

Attaching furniture causes trouble

Landlords have the option of attaching a defaulting tenant’s assets. However, Marx explained that this still won’t resolve non-payment.

“And tenants can and do come back saying that the desk belongs to their aunt, the bed to their grandpa, and so on,” she said.

The Sandton tenant did precisely this. “He appeared in court with a spreadsheet of who owned what in the home, and how do you prove otherwise?”

According to Marx, if there’s even the slightest likelihood that the furniture belongs to someone other than the tenant, the court won’t allow the assets to be attached.

“That’s why it’s my policy to always go straight for eviction: charge first, ask questions later,” she explained.

“Remember that an incumbent tenant who has possession has the most power, so we need to evict them first and collect the outstanding money. Once they’re legally out of the residence, we can institute other claims.”

Marx estimated the cost of an unopposed eviction at between R30,000 and R40,000. She said she averages around R26,000. However, opposed evictions can be anything from R40,000 to R70,000 on average.