Executive Committee of Oasis Estate HOA v Maletsatsi Caroline Tshontyi

The applicant, Oasis Estate Homeowners Association, a non-profit company and community scheme under the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 (CSOS Act), brought an application against the respondent, Maletsatsi Caroline Tshontyi, the registered owner of unit 2430 in the scheme. The HOA alleged that the respondent had failed to pay monthly levies and ancillary charges, including CSOS levies, and claimed arrears of R4 004.93 as at 15 February 2024. The respondent did not deny liability in principle, but complained that the managing agent had sent multiple invoices for the same month, thereby causing unnecessary additional charges on her account. After calling for further information under section 51 of the CSOS Act and examining the updated levy statement, the adjudicator found that certain invoice-related amounts had indeed been duplicated, namely repeated charges totalling R192.00. After deducting those duplicated amounts, the adjudicator found that the true amount owing was R3 812.93.

• Whether the respondent was indebted to the HOA for unpaid levies and ancillary charges in respect of unit 2430.
• Whether the applicant had proved the amount of the respondent's indebtedness on a balance of probabilities.
• Whether duplicated invoice charges had been improperly included in the levy account and, if so, whether they should be deducted.
• Whether relief should be granted under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of a contribution or other amount due to a community scheme.

The application succeeded in part. The respondent was declared indebted to the applicant in the amount of R3 812.93 in respect of levies and ancillary charges as at 15 February 2024. She was ordered to pay that amount in three equal monthly instalments of R1 270.98, commencing on or before 1 March 2024, with the remaining instalments payable on the first day of each succeeding month. No interest would accrue during the three-month payment period, but on default the full amount would become immediately due and payable. The order did not affect the respondent's obligation to continue paying regular monthly levies and ancillary charges. There was no order as to costs.

A homeowners association may obtain relief under section 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for recovery of unpaid levies and ancillary charges from a member owner where it proves the indebtedness on a balance of probabilities. Owners in a homeowners association are contractually bound by the scheme's governance documents and are obliged to pay levies. However, the adjudicator must determine the actual amount lawfully owing and exclude duplicated or unsupported charges before granting relief.

The adjudicator observed that levies are the 'lifeblood' of an HOA and that defaulting owners are effectively subsidised by compliant owners. The adjudicator also remarked that the directors of an HOA cannot perform their functions in the absence of funds collected from owners. These comments explain the practical importance of levy collection but were not themselves necessary to the operative finding on the exact amount due.

The matter illustrates the CSOS adjudication process for levy recovery disputes within homeowners associations and confirms that levy obligations in private estates are enforceable through the CSOS framework. It is significant in showing that while community schemes are entitled to recover arrear levies, the adjudicator will independently scrutinise levy statements and disallow duplicated or unjustified charges. The order also demonstrates the remedial flexibility available under the CSOS Act, including structured payment arrangements and temporary suspension of interest.