Why social housing landlords say South Africa's new eviction Bill needs fixing

The National Association of Social Housing Organisations (NASHO) and SOHCO Property Investments have warned that the proposed Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land (PIE) Amendment Bill, 2026, fails to tackle what they describe as two of the biggest threats facing South Africa’s social housing sector: unlawful occupations and organised rent boycotts.

While the Department of Human Settlements maintains that the Bill seeks to strike a fair balance between the rights of landowners and occupiers, the two housing organisations argue that the legislation overlooks the practical realities confronting social housing providers and risks leaving billions of rands in publicly funded housing vulnerable.

NASHO, which represents institutions responsible for more than 71% of South Africa’s regulated social housing stock, told the department that unlawful occupations and widespread non-payment of rent have already driven several housing providers into severe financial distress.

In its submission on the Bill, NASHO said at least three major social housing institutions had either collapsed or been pushed to the brink of insolvency because existing legislation has proved ineffective in protecting publicly funded housing assets.

Among the examples highlighted is the collapse of Capital City Housing NPC, which managed the Aloe Ridge social housing development in Pietermaritzburg.

According to NASHO, the R220 million development, completed in 2014 with public funding, consists of 952 rental units intended for low-income households. The organisation said the complex was occupied in 2018 by military veterans it alleged were linked to the Umkhonto weSizwe Military Veterans Association.

Although a court granted an eviction order, NASHO said it was never enforced because of security concerns and the presence of armed occupiers.

The organisation estimates that Capital City Housing lost about R1 million in rental income every month before eventually entering business rescue and later liquidation. It added that the property was auctioned in April this year without attracting buyers, while the Msunduzi Municipality is owed approximately R64 million for unpaid municipal services linked to the development.

“The liquidation of Capital City Housing should serve as a wake-up call to policymakers,” said NASHO General Manager Karabelo Pooe.

“Aloe Ridge demonstrates that building affordable housing is only one part of the solution. Public housing assets must also be protected and managed within a legal and enforcement framework that allows them to remain sustainable over the long term.”

NASHO said Aloe Ridge is not an isolated case and pointed to several other social housing institutions whose financial sustainability has been undermined by unlawful occupation and organised rent boycotts.

The organisation also highlighted the financial challenges facing Yeast City Housing, the non-profit social housing institution responsible for Thembelihle Village in Tshwane.

According to NASHO, the development comprises 733 units financed through approximately R150 million in government grants and loans. It said a rent boycott during the Covid-19 pandemic left the institution with debts exceeding R130 million, forcing it into business rescue.

NASHO said more than R2 million had been spent on legal proceedings without a single eviction order being obtained. During that period, the City of Tshwane disconnected electricity to the complex because of unpaid municipal accounts, with outstanding debt reaching about R60 million.

The submission also references the Ekurhuleni Housing Company (EHC), a municipal-owned housing entity that NASHO says is burdened by approximately R260 million in unpaid rental debt, in addition to R69 million owed to the City of Ekurhuleni for rates and municipal services.

According to NASHO, EHC budgets for a 90% rental collection rate but currently collects only between 20% and 30%. At one development in Delville Extension 9, it said just 15 of the 112 tenants are paying rent.

NASHO said EHC carried out evictions at Airport Park Phase 2 in January 2026 after residents allegedly stopped paying rent in 2020. Rental arrears at the development reportedly reached R85 million, while municipal service debt climbed to R46 million. A court subsequently confirmed that the occupation was unlawful under the PIE Act.

The organisation also noted that earlier evictions at Pharoe Park in Germiston were followed by violent protests in August 2025, including the petrol bombing of the Germiston Department of Home Affairs building.

NASHO argues that while the proposed Bill criminalises the incitement of unlawful land occupations, it makes no provision for organised rent boycotts, which it says have become increasingly common in publicly funded rental housing.

The organisation has proposed creating a new statutory offence that would make it unlawful to incite, organise or participate in coordinated rent boycotts at municipally owned or publicly funded housing developments where the intention is to coerce landlords or disrupt lawful management.

Its proposal would also allow landlords to seek court interdicts against boycott organisers and pursue expedited eviction proceedings against participating tenants, while retaining protections for tenants experiencing genuine financial hardship.

NASHO cited the Social Housing Regulatory Authority’s 2023 Rental Boycott Strategy, which found that 40% of social housing delivery agents had experienced either organised rent boycotts or unlawful occupations.

Durban-based SOHCO Property Investments raised separate concerns, arguing that although the Bill recognises bad-faith occupation as a factor courts may consider, it fails to provide practical tools to prevent abuse of the legal process.

SOHCO Chief Executive Officer Heather Maxwell said former tenants who entered properties lawfully are increasingly prolonging eviction proceedings through tactical litigation and meritless legal defences.

The organisation has proposed amendments allowing courts to dismiss frivolous defences at an early stage, require occupiers to disclose all grounds of opposition upfront, compel interim occupational payments after lease cancellation, and impose punitive cost orders on litigants who deliberately delay proceedings.

SOHCO also argues that the law should distinguish more clearly between unlawful land invaders and tenants who initially occupied properties legally but later defaulted on their rental obligations.

It proposes that courts should specifically consider whether occupiers entered lawfully, the extent of rental arrears and whether they made reasonable efforts to engage with landlords before refusing to vacate.

Both NASHO and SOHCO also oppose automatic joinder of municipalities and other organs of state in eviction matters involving possible alternative accommodation.

They argue that municipalities should only be joined where occupiers can demonstrate genuine vulnerability and an inability to secure alternative accommodation independently, warning that automatic joinder unnecessarily complicates and prolongs lease-based eviction cases.

NASHO has also proposed that accredited social housing institutions be included in the Bill’s expanded definition of a “person in charge”, giving them the same legal standing as municipalities to obtain urgent interdicts against unlawful occupations.

The Department of Human Settlements said it had received submissions from social housing institutions, members of the public, non-governmental organisations and advocacy groups, including Abahlali baseMjondolo and Voices Against Evictions.

Ministerial spokesperson Tsekiso Machike said all submissions were receiving due consideration.

“The Bill was, accordingly, published for everyone to make his or her voice heard. It is the Bill for the people, by the people. It will never be imposed on the people, hence the information sessions and 60-day period to allow people to make their submissions,” Machike said.

He said the department believes the legislation strikes an appropriate balance by providing landowners with legal remedies while safeguarding the rights of occupiers.

Machike said the Bill expands the definition of a “person in charge” to include municipalities, property management companies and developers, enabling them to institute eviction proceedings against non-paying tenants. He also noted that courts would be empowered to issue eviction orders without necessarily ordering alternative accommodation.

The department intends introducing the Bill in Parliament during the second quarter of the 2026/27 financial year.

“As this process unfolds, we remain open to different views which will shape the final product,” Machike said.

Addressing concerns about rent boycotts, Machike acknowledged that they can cripple social housing institutions whose operations depend entirely on rental income.

“An effective collections procedure is the lifeline of any social housing landlord,” he said, adding that eviction often remains the only viable option in cases of organised rent boycotts, although landlords should first pursue education, engagement and negotiated solutions wherever possible.

On Aloe Ridge, Machike said there remains an opportunity to resolve the matter if stakeholders can reach agreement.

He said the liquidators remain open to proposals and noted that the principal creditors are Msunduzi Municipality and the National Housing Finance Corporation.

“If the Social Housing Regulatory Authority loses the housing stock to the private sector, it will largely be to settle these two creditors,” he said, adding that because both are stakeholders within the sector, a practical resolution should still be achievable.

Pooe said the Aloe Ridge experience demonstrates that obtaining an eviction order is only part of the solution.

“What is particularly concerning about Aloe Ridge is that an eviction order was obtained, yet the unlawful occupation persisted,” he said.

“The case illustrates that legal remedies alone are insufficient if there are no practical mechanisms to ensure that court orders can be implemented effectively and safely.”

He warned that the country cannot afford to continue losing publicly funded housing developments.

“South Africa cannot afford to lose publicly funded housing assets at a time when demand for affordable rental housing continues to grow,” Pooe said.

“Every project that becomes financially unsustainable represents a loss, not only to the institution involved, but to the thousands of households who depend on these developments for safe, affordable accommodation.”

[email protected]

IOL News