A Paddocks Sectional
Title Lifestyle Blog
By Zerlinda van der
Merwe
We often categorise
the issues we experience in sectional title schemes as the “three ‘P’s’ of
sectional title living”, namely pets, parking and people, which are more often
than not, the cause of all the problems in sectional title schemes. Although
this list has been added to over time, the abovementioned three issues remain
the favourites. In this article, we will focus on parking.
Prescribed
Conduct Rule (“PCR”) 3(1) of Annexure 2 to the regulations under the Sectional
Titles Schemes Management Act 8 of 2011 (“STSMA”), provides that the owner or occupier of a section must
not, except in a case of emergency, without the written consent of the
trustees, park a vehicle, allow a vehicle to stand, or permit a visitor to park
or stand a vehicle, on any part of the common property other than a parking bay
allocated to that section or a parking bay allocated for visitors’ parking.
PCR
3(2) further provides that the
consent granted under subrule (1) must state the period for which the consent
is given.
When comparing this
conduct rule to its predecessor under the Sectional Titles Act 95 of 1986 (“the
STA”), one can see that the rule now provides that vehicles can be parked on
common property in the case of emergencies, without the prior written consent
of the trustees.
Demarcated visitors
parking bays are included in this PCR, and many schemes specifically regulate
the use of visitors parking bays in their additional, amended or substituted
registered conduct rules.
It is interesting to
note that the trustees no longer have the power, in terms of the PCR’s, to
cause to be removed or towed away any vehicle parked, standing or abandoned on
the common property without the trustees’ consent, unless the scheme amends their
conduct rules to grant the trustees this power, which could be extended further
to include clamping of these vehicles.
The amended rule
should not provide that the trustees may themselves remove or tow away the
vehicle, rather that they may arrange for the removal or towing away of the
vehicle. By arranging a specialised contractor, the trustees reduce the risk of
possible damage to the vehicle, and liability for such damage. However,
situations have occurred when the trustees, managing agents or scheme employees
have been unsuccessful in their attempts to arrange such a contractor to come
out to the scheme to remove or tow away a vehicle. In such a case, clamping of
the vehicle may be a better option.
Although the PCR has
never provided for clamping of vehicles, the scheme’s amended rules may provide
for this action to be taken by the trustees, managing agent, security or other
scheme employee.
Bearing in mind that
the owner of the vehicle will be liable for the expense of removing or towing
away the vehicle, when drafting a rule providing for clamping of vehicles,
provision may be made for a release fee or penalty to be paid by the owner of
the vehicle before the clamp will be removed from the vehicle. Issues may arise
when the owner of the vehicle wishes to remove the vehicle at a time when there
is no one available to release the clamp, such as late at night. When clamping
the vehicle, it is suggested that a notice be placed on the car, providing the
contact details of the party in charge of releasing the clamp.
As with any fining
or penalty provision in the scheme’s rules, the rule (and the amount of the
fine or penalty imposed) must be reasonable and be enforced through proper
procedure.
Should
you have any queries relating to this topic, or require our services to draft
or review your scheme’s rules, contact us via email at consulting@paddocks.co.za or telephonically on 021 686 3950.
Image
source: springsadvertiser.co.za
