Standard Bank stopped from repossessing home after Consumer defaults on payments under Debt Review

In an Application for Summary Judgment in the Western Cape High Court under case no. 19520/2018, Standard Bank argued that, despite our client making a lump sum payment R100,000.00 in July 2013, the subsequent monthly non-payments under debt review constitutes a default in terms of Section 88(3) of the National Credit Act.
 
Even though our client was ahead of his debt review payments, Standard Bank persisted with the argument that “the Defendant had defaulted each and every time he did not make the monthly payment which means he did not comply with his obligation to pay each month”.
 
The learned acting Judge De Wet agreed with our Quintin Zimmermann: “How it can be argued that monthly non-payments in circumstances where a creditor (debtor) such as the Defendant had paid in excess of what was owing in terms of the restructuring order, amounts to a default of the restructuring order, is beyond comprehension”.
 
The Western Cape High Court further showed its disapproval of Standard Bank’s conduct by ordering Standard Bank to pay our client’s legal costs and holding that “the Plaintiff’s persistence with this application in circumstances where the Defendant was clearly not in arrears when summons was issued and had in fact paid in advance, raises serious concerns whether the Plaintiff acted bona fide herein”.
 
My first question is this... HOW OFTEN DO THESE BANKS get away with this? My second question is how much longer are we going to let them get away with it? Please choose your Property and Litigation Attorneys wisely. Let Liddle & Associates Inc help you fight against these legal injustices and protect your home during these most difficult of times.