Posted: 2008-03-17 23:58 No more property rights?  Presenter: Jane van Renen Guest(s): David Green - Click here to listen to the interview Summit TV speaks to David Green about the new property Bill before Parliament that will see the rights of legal property owners further eroded that may make it almost impossible to evict illegal squatters in South Africa JANE VAN REENEN: A potentially controversial new Bill has been tabled in Parliament regarding tenants and landlords - here to discuss it is David Green from the Pace Property Group. Dave, this Bill says that a tenant who stops paying rent or a landowner who stays in occupation after he ceases to own property can’t be regarded as an illegal occupier. How should we view this statement - is it as scary as it seems? DAVID GREEN: I think one has to consider all aspects of the legislation. Fundamentally what the legislation is attempting to do is to protect the rights of tenants. We need to differentiate between an illegal tenant and a legal tenant - a legal tenant one who has a lease and is in occupation lawfully of a particular premises. Clearly one wants to uphold the rights of those individuals. Then you do have the situation where there’s illegal tenants and illegal occupants - what this is doing is taking away the rights of the landlord to free up the property from such individuals which could be people who have just taken over a building they’ve found, or it could be somebody that’s moved into a property without the landlord’s consent. JANE VAN REENEN: Is the difference here a piece of paper which is the contract stating that there is a relationship between the tenant and the landlord or a lack of it? DAVID GREEN: A contractual arrangement between a landlord and tenant can in writing or it can be oral - this is really where an illegal tenant without the consent or possibly the knowledge initially of a landlord takes over a piece of real estate, and the difficulty the landlord then has in ejecting those types of tenants. We are not talking about major financial houses as landlords, we are talking right down to the smallest possible landlord - which could be a private individual with a small home who finds it’s been taken over by an illegal tenant. The state is also at risk with regard to their larger housing schemes - we’ve seen recently where groups of people have taken over blocks of sub-economic homes destined for others who have been waiting a long time for that accommodation only to find it’s been taken over by illegal occupants. JANE VAN REENEN: This doesn’t make much sense. On the one hand the Bill is saying they’re going to make it illegal to arrange unlawful occupation - but at the same time they’ve introduced a definition that says constructive eviction is made less possible. So on the one hand they don’t want to have this scenario - but on the other you’re not able to get rid of the squatters... DAVID GREEN: Absolutely. I think unfortunately it tries to cover all the bases. Practically an illegal occupant of a particular piece of real estate is an illegal occupant - and the judicial system should be allowed to take its course in order to free up that piece of real estate for its rightful holder. It’s not going to help to play into the hands of hijackers of buildings. As you know the way these people operate is they would take over a piece of real estate - normally owned by an absentee landlord, or the even state that’s not able to observe all its real estate all the time - and they then install tenants in that building who assume themselves to be there legally paying a rental to a landlord that’s not the rightful landlord. So now you sit with a situation where you have people occupying buildings which they think they’re legally occupying as tenants - only to find that the landlord is not in fact the correct landlord, and they’re there under false pretences. Nevertheless the Act once it comes into being would protect these unrightful landlords for want of a better word - and that’s clearly not a situation one would want to find oneself in. JANE VAN REENEN: It almost seems as though the state is shooting itself in the foot - it’s trying to provide housing for people who have been on a waiting list, but we might find people who are not on the waiting list jump to the front of the queue and occupy the housing illegally… DAVID GREEN: When it comes to social housing clearly in South Africa we have a large need for the provision of adequate housing - we know there are backlogs in the system, and we know they’re trying to address the backlogs. It’s not going to help to provide legislation that muddies the water even further. I think on the one hand the state is providing houses - on the other side the legislature is providing legislation that’s not working in unison, and is making it more difficult. It’s not deliberate - it’s coincidental to an extent, or it’s just not properly thought through - but I think debates like this may raise the issues. Putting the social issues aside the legal framework needs to be upheld - one needs to write legislation that works for all parties rather than one party, and especially not for the illegal party. JANE VAN REENEN: Do you think this is going to happen? DAVID GREEN: I would like to think that it must happen - I like to think the Bill will be thoroughly thought through and re-looked at and reconsidered. At the end of the day one condones the rights of the legal parties - not the illegal parties - and justice must prevail. www.summit.co.za Transcripts: onsub1@avusa.co.za tr/met Comments Related to this transcript: Comment on this transcript... Name : Email : Comments :