South Africa: National Consumer Tribunal

You are here:
SAFLII >>
Databases >>
South Africa: National Consumer Tribunal >>
2017 >>
[2017] ZANCT 52
| Noteup
| LawCite
Davids and Another v Absa Bank Limited and Others (NCT/67822/2016/165(1)(P)NCA) [2017] ZANCT 52 (4 January 2017)
Download original files |
SAFLII Note: Certain personal/private details of parties or witnesses have been redacted from this document in compliance with the law and SAFLII Policy |
IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER TRIBUNAL
HELD IN CENTURION
Case Number: NCT/67822/2016/165(1)(P)NCA
In the matter between:
CAREL BAREND JACOBUS DAVIDS FIRST APPLICANT
ID NUMBER: [6...]
HEATHER CECELIA DAVIDS SECOND APPLICANT
ID NUMBER:[6...]
and
ABSA BANK LTD FIRST RESPONDENT
AFRICAN BANK LIMITED SECOND RESPONDENT
DIRECT AXIS (SA) PTV LTD THIRD RESPONDENT
FINCHOICE (PTV) LTD FOURTH RESPONDENT
FOSCHINIRETAIL GROUP(PTV) LTD FIFTH RESPONDENT
MFC A DIVISION OF NEDBANK LIMITED SIXTHRESPONDENT
NEDBANK LIMITED SEVENTH RESPONDENT
RCS LOAN EIGHT RESPONDENT
SA HOME LOANS (PTV) LTD NINTH RESPONDENT
SANLAM PERSONAL LOANS (PTV) LTD TENTH RESPONDENT
STANDARD BANK OF SOUTH AFRICA LIMITED ELEVENTH RESPONDENT
TOYOTA FINANCIAL SERVICES (SA) LIMITED TWELVETH RESPONDENT
Coram:
Ms H Devraj - Presiding member
Adv F Manamela - Member
Ms P Beck - Member
Date of hearing 14 December 2016
JUDGEMENT AND REASONS
APPLICANTS
1. The Applicants are Carel Barend Jacobus Davids, a major male and Heather Cecelia Davids a major female residing in Cape Town (hereinafter referred to as "the Applicants").
RESPONDENTS
2. The Respondents are ASSA Bank Limited, African Bank Limited, Direct Axis (SA) (Pty) Ltd, Direct Axis (SA) Pty Ltd, Finchoice (Pty) Ltd, Foschini Retail Group (Pty) Ltd, The Motor Finance Corporation (MFC), Nedbank Limited, RCS Loan,SA Home Loans (Pty) Ltd, Sanlam Personal Loans (Ply) Ltd, Standard Bank of South Africa Limited, Toyota Financial Services (SA) Ltd (hereinafter referred to as "the Respondents").
BACKGROUND
3. During May 2016, the Applicant lodged an application (through registered debt counsellor Ian Eugene Romer Wason) with the Tribunal in terms of Section 86(8) of the Act to have a debt re-arrangement agreement confirmed as an order of the Tribunal.
4. The debt re-arrangement agreement was confirmed as an order of the Tribunal on 21 September 2016 as per case number NCT/44663/2016/138(1 ).
5. During October 2016, the Applicant lodged an application with the Tribunal in terms of Section 165(1) of the Act to have the order granted on 21 September 2016 to be varied.
6. The basis of the Application is that the Applicant omitted to include 7 of the credit providers, as part of the debt re-arrangement agreement. However, the acceptance letters were included as part of the initial application.
7. On the date of the hearing there was no appearance by the Applicant or the Respondents.
CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION
8. As stated above there was no appearance by the Applicant or any representative on the date of the hearing.
9. Rule 24 of the National Consumer Tribunal Regulations states the following:
"Nonappearance
24.(1) If a party to a matter fails to attend or be represented at any hearing or any proceedings, and that party-
(a) is the applicant, the presiding member may dismiss the matter by issuing a
written ruling; or
(b) is not the applicant, the presiding member may-
(i) continue with the proceedings in the absence of that party; or
(ii) adjourn the hearing to a later date
(2) The Presiding member must be satisfied that the party had been properly notified of the date, time and venue of the proceedings, before making any decision in terms of subrule (1)
(3) If a matter is dismissed, the Registrar must send a copy of the ruling to the parties. "
10. The notice of set down was sent to all the parties by the Registrar's office via e-mail on 29 November 2016.
11. At the time the matter was called by the Tribunal panel, there was no appearance by any of the parties.
12. The Presiding member of the Tribunal was satisfied that the parties were properly notified of the date, time and venue for the proceedings.
13. The application was then formally dismissed by the Tribunal on record.
ORDER
14. Accordingly, the Tribunal makes the following order:
14.1 The application lodged in terms of Section 165 of the Act is hereby dismissed.
14.2 The Applicant can refile the application.
DATED ONTHIS 22nd DAY OF DECEMBER 2016
[signed]
Ms H Devraj Member
Adv FManamela (Presiding member) and Ms P Beck concurring
Authorised for issue by National Consumer Tribunal
Case Number. NCT/67822/2016/165
Date. 2017/01/04
CCYY I MM I DD