Contact Us
Wednesday Mar 24, 2021

Tenant rights in terms of the set-off rent clause

The tenant of a residential lease is under duty to pay rent regularly, on time and in full, as required by section 4 (5) (a) of the Rental Housing Act 50 of 1999.

Failure to pay rent on time or withholding rent is a material breach and may lead to the cancellation of lease or the landlord's refusal to renew it.

In common law, a tenant has a weapon, a right to deduct from the rent (set-off) where the landlord is in default.

However, the tenant cannot rely on set-off if the lease has a clause for parties to contract out of this common-law right. It is a general practice to include a clause that restricts the tenant's common-law right to prevent any deduction or set-off.

The following are examples of such a clause: "The rental is payable monthly in advance, on or before the first day of each and every month, without deduction or set-off for any reason, at such place as the landlord may indicate in writing from time to time or into such account as the landlord may nominate from time to time.

"All rentals and other amounts payable by the tenant in terms of this agreement of lease shall be made without demand, free of exchange and without any deduction or set-off whatsoever."

Should the tenant deduct or set off, the landlord can resile from (abandon) the lease for breach.

The tenant can turn to the courts or the Rental Housing Tribunals to examine such a clause. The "without deduction or set-off" clause does not oust the jurisdiction of a court.

In Loch Logan Waterfront (Pty) Ltd v Carwash 4 U (Pty) Ltd and Another case, Judge Mojalefa Hans Rampai held that the relative remedy of rental remission applied to cases of minor deprivations, whereas the absolute remedy of rental withholding applied to cases of major deprivations.

The courts have jurisdiction to decide on the merits of each case in the context of the lease contract, the circumstances surrounding the need for repairs and the evidence of the parties.

In Poynton v Cran 1910 AD 205, the tenant signed a lease that stated that he would not be able to deduct from the rent at all, and that he would be responsible for the internal and external repairs and maintenance of the premises (a hotel).

In spite of these conditions in the lease, the landlady was under duty to ensure the property was repaired at the outset of the lease, and handed over in a tenantable condition.

The tenant did not accept the premises with the defects. If he had, then he would have had no claim, because this would have been a waiver.

In other words, having knowledge of the defects and accepting them without demand for repairs or protest results in the tenant not having the right to claim repairs or damages.

In the Poynton case, the tenant retained his right to demand that repairs be carried out and the right to claim costs for repairs he was eventually compelled to do when the landlady failed to respond.

The landlady's failure at the outset to attend to the repairs prevented her from relying on the condition that the tenant could not charge the cost against the rental.

According to Judge Innes, the without deduction clause "cannot relieve the landlady of her obligation to place the leased property in repair, or deprive the tenant of the remedy which the law gives him in respect of her initial default".

It is important to seek legal advice and not to deduct or resort to setting off against the rentals.

Dr Sayed Iqbal Mohamed, is the chairperson, Organisation of Civic Rights. Tenants in need of advice can contact the office on 031 3046451 or Whatsapp Pretty Gumede on 071 346 5595 or email, Loshni Moodley on or Whatsapp 0714445671.



Previous Articles *

Search News

Property Searches:

Browse Property For Sale

© 2020 Independent Online Property Joint Venture (Pty) Ltd. All rights reserved.
Reliance on any information this site contains is at your own risk. Please read our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.