- Painted bays and long-standing arrangements do not create ownership. Exclusive use areas only exist through registration or an approved rule of law.
- Building on an exclusive use area without proper approval can trigger special resolutions and amended sectional plans. Informal enclosures can become unlawful extensions of a section.
- Misunderstanding exclusive use areas fuels neighbour conflict and financial risk. Clarity protects property values and community harmony.
Exclusive use areas are quietly becoming one of the most contested aspects of sectional title living in South Africa.
From parking bays to patios, owners are building, enclosing and claiming parts of common property based on painted numbers, long-standing arrangements or informal trustee approval, only to discover that none of it creates a legal right. The result is mounting neighbour disputes, financial strain and bodies corporate exposed to regulatory and legal risk.
Johlene Wasserman, Director of Community Schemes and Compliance at VDM Incorporated, says the problem is not that the law is unclear. It is that too many people assume that practice equals permission. “It doesn’t.”
According to Wasserman, disputes around exclusive use areas are rising across complexes and estates. Owners are relying on habit instead of statute, and assumptions instead of proper approvals.
“Most problems don’t arise because the law is complicated,” she says. “They arise because people rely on habit, hearsay, or hope instead of the actual law.”
What an exclusive use area really is
An exclusive use area is a defined portion of common property reserved for the use of one owner. It might be a garden, courtyard, parking bay, patio or storeroom. But the land itself remains common property. The owner does not own the space. They merely hold the right to use it.
“But here’s the part most people miss,” Wasserman explains. “The land remains common property. You don’t own it. You only have the right to use it. And that right exists in only two legal ways. Nothing more, nothing less.”
Those two mechanisms are strictly defined in law. There is no third category created by tradition, managing agent spreadsheets, sale agreements or trustee consent.
The first is a registered real right under Section 27 of the Sectional Titles Act. This right appears on the sectional plan, is registered in the deeds office and carries commercial value. It can be sold, ceded or bonded.
The second is a rule-based personal right under Section 10 of the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act. This right is created through a scheme rule approved by the Community Schemes Ombud Service. It is not registered in the deeds office and cannot be bonded. It exists only as long as the approved rule remains in force.
“Everything else, painted numbers, ‘we’ve always parked there’, trustee permission, managing agent spreadsheets or sale agreements, creates convenience,” Wasserman says. “But convenience is not a legal right.”
Why this matters beyond property law
The confusion around exclusive use areas goes beyond technical compliance. It affects boundaries, fairness and shared living. When one owner builds without proper authority or claims permanent control over space because it has always been theirs, it impacts neighbours, property values, insurance cover and the body corporate’s legal obligations.
“This isn’t just a property issue,” Wasserman says. “It’s a community issue. When someone treats common property as their own, it changes the dynamic of shared living, and it places everyone else at risk.”
Exclusive use does not entitle an owner to alter common property at will. Prescribed Management Rule 30(g) makes it clear that any improvement, whether a pergola, carport or braai area, requires body corporate approval by ordinary resolution unless authority has been formally delegated.
“And if the structure is watertight, enclosed and increases your floor area, it becomes an extension of your section,” she adds. “That requires a special resolution and an amended sectional plan lodged in the deeds office. Calling it ‘just a small enclosure’ doesn’t change the legal reality.”
Converting rights and the cost of assumptions
On maintenance, the law is equally firm. While the body corporate remains responsible for maintaining all common property, including exclusive use areas, the benefiting owner must reimburse the full cost. This prevents unlawful cross-subsidisation and protects the financial fairness of the scheme.
For owners who want to convert a rule-based personal right into a registered real right, it can be done. But it requires surveyors, formal resolutions, amended plans, registration and notarial cession. Until every procedural step is complete, the right remains personal regardless of how long the space has been used.
When buying or selling, assumptions can be expensive. Registered real right exclusive use areas must be disclosed and transferred by notarial deed. Rule-based rights must be verified against the CSOS-approved rules. A sale agreement cannot create exclusive use rights, even if everyone involved believes it can.
The bottom line, Wasserman says, is that exclusive use areas are not informal privileges but tightly regulated legal rights.
“Understanding the difference between use and ownership, and between personal and real rights, isn’t just for trustees or property professionals,” she says. “It’s for anyone who lives in a shared scheme and wants to avoid costly mistakes.”
Clarity protects communities. When owners understand the law governing exclusive use areas, decisions improve, disputes decrease and shared living becomes more harmonious.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
