Credit Regulator has ‘done nothing to seek clarity’

● Court papers in the latest bid by Stellenbosch University’s Law Clinic and Summit Financial Partners to relieve the plight of judgment debtors paint a damning picture of the National Credit Regulator (NCR), which is charged with having “done nothing to seek clarity” on the interpretation of a contentious section of the National Credit Act that adversely impacts “thousands of consumers daily”.

The court papers state that in 2016, an application almost identical to the current application was made to the high court in Mahikeng to interpret section 103(5) of the act.

The NCR was one of the respondents.

“At the very least, the 750 consumers in the Mahikeng application should have jolted the NCR into action,” Stellenbosch Law Clinic attorney and lecturer Stephan van der Merwe says in his founding affidavit.

“In that application, the NCR stated that it would be approaching the court for a declarator ‘on the interpretation to be placed on section 103(5), read with section 101(1)(b) to (g) of the act’ and that the papers in the envisaged application were ‘at an advanced stage of preparation’. As far as we are aware, to date, there has been no application from the NCR.”

The NCR’s company secretary, Lesiba Mashapa, tells Money that the NCR had been advised “that the appropriate way to address this issue is by providing clarity in the regulations”.

Regulations were drafted and submitted to the department of trade & industry in February, Mashapa says.

The department did not respond to requests for comment.