Are you cruisin’ for a bruisin’?

CAN a landlord hold his tenant liable for excessive service charges, especially if the charges are excluded because of the clear meaning of the language in a lease contract?

A tenant from Johannesburg was distressed when she realised that she was paying for municipal service charges that were not part of the written lease agreement.

When she examined the municipal bills, she noticed the amount she paid included charges relating to sewage, electricity for the common area, water used for the garden and electricity for the gardener’s quarters. In addition, she also paid for the power consumption of an electric fence and lighting around the complex. Attempts to resolve the matter with her landlord were unsuccessful. The rental housing tribunal was of no help because the “complaint’s clerk” refused to accept her complaint after perusing the lease. She explained that in terms of her lease, she was required to pay for charges consumed in the unit. Clause 4 of the lease stated that her rental excluded water and electricity charges and that she would be given monthly copies of the municipal bill. Clause 8 stipulated: “The tenant shall be liable for all electricity and water consumed in the premises during the currency of this lease. Any amounts notified as due by the landlord are to be included with the next month’s rental.”

She brought these relevant clauses to the personnel’s attention but was unable to lodge a complaint. A reading of the lease with clauses 4 and 8 clearly lays down what the tenant is responsible for – “all electricity and water consumed in the premises”.

If there were headings in the lease and these were in conflict with the body of the contract, then the body of the contract must prevail. In Sentinel Mining Industry Retirement Fund v Waz Props (Pty) Ltd [2012] ZASCA) judge Tom Cloete said it was common sense that where a heading conflicts with the body of the contract, it must be the body of the contract which prevails because the parties’ intentions are more likely to appear from the provisions they have spelt out than from an abbreviation they have chosen to identify the effect of those provisions.

There is no need to interpret these clauses since they are simple. There are also no special rules of interpretation that apply to the service charges clauses. The parties’ intentions were clear since the headings were not in conflict with the body of the contract.

In terms of common sense and logic, the relevant contractual provisions would be binding on the landlord. The tenant, in this instance, cannot be held liable for charges except for water and electricity consumed in her unit.

However, it is not the dispute with the landlord, but the failure of the Gauteng Rental Housing Tribunal to accept an unfair practices complaint that is disconcerting.

The tribunal personnel does not have the authority nor the qualification, skill and knowledge to make such a judgment call. In fact, even a member of the tribunal cannot pronounce an opinion on a dispute unless this is done as part of a ruling or judgment of the tribunal.

Dr Sayed Iqbal Mohamed is chairperson of the Organisation of Civic Rights and deputy chairperson of the KZN Rental Housing Tribunal. For advice, contact Pretty Gumede or Loshni Naidoo at 0313046451 or civicrights@ocr.org.zaw CERTAIN genres of music have a significant impact on our driving ability, research shows. Songs with a tempo of between 60 and 80 beats a minute are optimal for driving which means AC/DC and Guns N’ Roses are out, and Taylor Swift or Ed Sheeran are recommended.

“Aside from the distraction caused by scrolling through playlists, the music you listen to can have a profound effect on your mood, which can affect your driving,” says Maanda Tshifularo, the head of Dialdirect. “The harder and louder, the more likely you might be to speed, be aggressive or become distracted.”

According to the study conducted at the Ear Institute of University College London, one’s eyes and ears need to be focused on the same thing for optimal processing and reaction time. Splitting your attention between listening to the radio and paying attention to the traffic around you, increases your risk of being in an accident.

Research titled “Effects of noise and music on human and task performance: A systematic review” from the Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada, found that music could reduce stress and mild aggression in frustrating situations like bumper-tobumper traffic, but could reduce your ability to manoeuvre to avoid other vehicles. It concluded that a moderate volume level of music was optimal for driving, while loud music or noise impaired performance.

A research team led by Dr Simon Moore, a psychologist from London Metropolitan University, found that music that is upbeat and noisy increases your heart rate – causing excitement and leading motorists to focus more on the music than on the road. Moore suggests that songs with a tempo of between 60 and 80 beats per minute are optimal for driving, as this tempo closely mimics people’s average resting heart rate.

“As a guideline, AC/DC’s Thunderstruck

hits 133 bpm, Taylor Swift’s hits the 96 bpm mark, Beyoncé’s comes in at 80 bpm, while Ed Sheeran’s Perfect clocks up 64 bpm,” says Tshifularo.

The study also found listening to music that you don’t like could cause stress and distraction.

Tips for driving right while enjoying good music: