- The law places a clear duty on bodies corporate to maintain common property under the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act.
- A Pretoria body corporate was found to have failed this duty, causing internal water damage to a residential unit
- The owners were awarded over R26 000 for repairs, but their rental loss and legal fee claims were dismissed due to CSOS limitations
South Africans living in sectional title schemes often expect a basic standard of upkeep from the community structures that manage their properties. What many owners may not realise is that this expectation is not just about good governance, but a legal obligation.
The Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, Act 8 of 2011, creates a statutory duty for every body corporate to control, manage and administer the common property for the benefit of all owners. This includes maintaining the external and structural components of buildings, such as walls, roofs, gutters and waterproofing systems, in a condition that prevents foreseeable harm. When these duties are neglected, the financial and legal consequences can be significant.
Water ingress ignored, owners forced to act
A recent ruling from the Community Schemes Ombud Service has provided a clear example. In the matter, adjudicator Karen Bleijs ordered The Oval Body Corporate in Pretoria to pay R26 162.50 to two unit owners after failing to maintain common property, resulting in internal water damage. The ruling highlights how unresolved maintenance issues can escalate into costly disputes, especially when bodies corporate delay repairs despite repeated requests.
Carlos and Claudia de Oliviera, owners of Unit 7 at The Hills Estate, brought the dispute to CSOS after numerous emails, photographs and quotations sent to the trustees failed to prompt remedial action. Their unit suffered water ingress from outside, damaging the ceilings, walls and fixtures, and ultimately leading to the loss of a tenant. Although the body corporate eventually addressed the external waterproofing in late 2022, they refused to compensate the owners for the resulting internal repairs.
Adjudicator confirms breach of maintenance duty
The applicants submitted a claim totalling more than R81 000, which included the cost of interior repairs, lost rental income and legal fees. In her ruling, Bleijs found that the internal damage flowed directly from the body corporate’s admitted failure to maintain common property, specifically the building’s exterior, parapets and flashing. Because of this breach of duty, she ordered reimbursement for the full cost of the necessary internal repairs.
However, she dismissed the other elements of the claim. While sympathetic to the owners’ losses, Bleijs emphasised that the CSOS Act does not give adjudicators the power to award damages for consequential financial loss or legal expenses. This limitation has also been upheld in court, most notably in the case of Trustees for the Time Being of the Avenues Body Corporate v Shmaryahu.
Quoting from previous legal precedent and applying section 3(1)(l) of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act, Bleijs made it clear that the responsibility to maintain common property is non-negotiable. Had this responsibility been fulfilled, the dispute and the damage would likely have been avoided altogether.
A legal warning to trustees and managing agents
The case serves as both a warning and a reminder to trustees and managing agents. Maintenance of common property is not optional or a matter of discretion. It is a core duty under law, and failure to comply can result in financial exposure, enforcement orders and the breakdown of trust within the scheme.
For sectional title owners, the ruling also underscores the importance of keeping records. The applicants’ ability to demonstrate a timeline of correspondence and damage helped establish their claim on a balance of probabilities, the standard of proof in civil and CSOS matters.
Conviction.co.za
Get your news on the go. Clickhereto follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
