A recent High Court case, Ekosto 1042 vs Van Wyk, has important implications for the real estate sector - and for landlords and rental agents in particular
The tenant in a rented property, it appears, claimed that he had, at his own expense, carried out certain significant improvements to the property. However, the tenant had kept no records of the cost involved here, nor could it clearly be proved that the improvements were as extensive as outlined. The tenant then refused payment of the rental as compensation for what he considered a valuable contribution to the apartment. The court, in the absence of payment documents, upheld the landlord's decision that the tenant had to leave on account of not paying his rent. Many tenants do carry out improvements to their units - but, the law is quite clear on this matter: unless a deal has already been negotiated with the landlord, the improvements become part of the property and no compensation for them is required. The legal firm Smith Tabata Buchanan Boyes' comments on this case are also relevant, because they remind us yet again that in all property matters no oral agreement is binding and that any property agreement has to be put in writing and signed by all the affected parties. Looking back on a property marketing career of over some 30 years, it is surprising and often tragic how often this basic principle of South African law has been forgotten, sometimes with disastrous consequences for those involved. *Lanice Steward is the Managing Director of the Cape Peninsula estate agency Anne Porter Knight Frank.