Oasis Estate Homeowners' Association v Maletsatsi Caroline Tshontyi

The applicant, Oasis Estate Homeowners' Association (described in the order as represented by CSI Property Management), is a residential community scheme governed by its memorandum of incorporation and conduct rules. The respondent, Maletsatsi Caroline Tshontyi, is the registered owner of unit 2430 in the scheme and, by virtue of ownership, a compulsory member of the homeowners' association. The association alleged that the respondent had fallen into arrears with levy contributions payable to the scheme. According to the applicant's records, the outstanding amount was R3,391.39, inclusive of interest calculated at 12% per annum. The CSOS application for relief under s 39(1)(e) of the Community Schemes Ombud Service Act 9 of 2011 was lodged on 30 August 2023. The respondent did not respond to the s 43 notice issued by CSOS on 22 November 2023 or to subsequent opportunities to answer the claim. A certificate of non-resolution was issued on 30 November 2023, and the matter proceeded to adjudication on the papers.

• Whether the Community Schemes Ombud Service had jurisdiction under the CSOS Act to determine the levy dispute.
• Whether the respondent, as owner of a unit in the scheme and member of the homeowners' association, was obliged under the MOI and rules to pay levy contributions.
• Whether the applicant had proved on a balance of probabilities that the respondent owed arrear levies in the amount of R3,391.39.
• Whether an order should be granted under s 39(1)(e) of the CSOS Act for payment of the arrear levy contributions.
• Whether any costs order should be made under the CSOS Act.

The application was granted. The respondent was ordered to pay arrear levy contributions of R3,391.39 to the applicant on or before 30 April 2024. No order as to costs was made.

A homeowners' association that qualifies as a community scheme under the CSOS Act may obtain an adjudication order under s 39(1)(e) for payment of arrear levies where the owner, as a compulsory member of the association under the scheme's MOI and rules, is contractually obliged to pay such levies, and the association proves the arrears on a balance of probabilities. In the absence of a response or defence from the owner, documentary proof of ownership, membership, and the outstanding levy amount is sufficient to justify an order for payment.

The adjudicator observed that levies are the 'lifeblood' of shared living schemes and that non-payment can seriously destabilise a scheme by undermining its ability to fund maintenance, repairs, insurance, security, and other common expenses. The adjudicator also made general remarks that parties before CSOS are generally expected to bear their own costs, with costs orders more readily associated with dismissals under s 53 in frivolous, vexatious, misconceived, or non-compliant matters.

The decision reinforces a core principle of South African community schemes law: owners in homeowners' associations are bound by the scheme's constitutive documents and must pay levies as a compulsory incident of membership. It also illustrates the use of the CSOS dispute-resolution mechanism under s 39(1)(e) to recover arrear contributions efficiently on documentary evidence where an owner does not dispute liability. The order further reflects the accepted view that levy income is essential to the functioning and financial stability of shared living schemes.