One of the most popular methods by which South Africans purchase immovable property is through a loan from a bank. This process involves a mortgage bond being registered over the immovable property as security by the bank to ensure that if a person fails to pay back the loan, the bank can rely on this as security in order to claim any outstanding money owed to them.

Absa launched its new logo and image this week as part of its separation from Barclays. Visitors to Absa’s head office in Joburg were greeted by a gathering of aggrieved customers, led by the Lungelo Lethu  Human Rights Foundation (LLHRF), protesting the bank’s abusive home repossession practices. A memorandum was handed over to a senior representative of the bank’s legal department, with an undertaking to commence a dialogue with LLHRF to iron out grievances.

A Royal Commission of Inquiry into banking misconduct in Australia has heard heart-rending testimony of brutal banking practices, including cases where pensioners in their 80s were forced to sell their homes to repay loans. Now a massive class action suit is in the bake over reckless lending, focusing on those who took out mortgage loans since 2012. This is one of several class action suits now being launched against the banks.

A 72 year old man gets a 30 year loan which he cannot repay, so he is forced to sell his house. Bank staff are there to flog you stuff you don't want or need. They hate their jobs, but are given stiff sales target to meet so the bosses can get year-end bonuses that run into the millions. When you default, the bank comes after everything you have. Staff are prevented from talking bad about their employers because of "disparagement clauses" in their employment contracts. Even years after they have left the bank. When, customers are asking, will bank executives get time in jail, in this expose in the wake of the Australian Commission of Inquiry into Banking. You could just as easily cut and paste this story for SA. 

The EFF has shown itself a force for progressive change in SA, recently tabling a bill which would allow for the creation of a state-owned bank. In this article on Daily Maverick, deputy head of the EFF, Floyd Shivambu, explains how the existing Big 4 banks - Absa, Standard, Nedbank and FNB - continue their predatory practices against South Africans. This article shows a deep understanding of the extent to which banks are retarding the economic development of the country.

The place is Australia, but the pattern is the same we have seen in other parts of the world, with banks gouging their customers with merry abandon. It has all the elements of a crudely crafted, if effective, tale: banks and other financial services, founded, proud of their standing in society; financial service providers, with such pride, effectively charging the earth for providing elementary services; then, such entities, with self-assumed omnipotence, cheating, extorting and plundering their client. 

The Standard Bank v Nkwana case recently decided in the Pretoria High Court seemed to be a major step back for home owners facing repossession and eviction. The case was argued on behalf of Nkwana by Lawyers for Human Rights, and will almost certainly be appealed - especially the court's ruling that it was okay for banks to continue selling repossessed properties for a fraction of their market value. This absurd judgment prompted a response from former public protector Thuli Madonsela: "With due respect to the court, I consider this judgement to be grossly unjust and inequitable. It is as a setback regarding social justice. Should this matter be taken on appeal, it would be great if all those concerned about social justice join in as amicus curae."

The Lungelo Lethu Human Rights Foundation has sent a petition to President Ramaphosa detailing rampant abuses by the banks. It has asked the President to make it far more difficult to evict defaulting home owners by forcing the courts to sell repossessed properties at market price and allowing financially distressed customers at least six months to get back on their feet before recommencing bond repayments - as is common in many other countries. It also wants the President to order an investigation into the criminal liability of banking executives and directors for knowingly selling properties for less than their value after the Constitution was introduced in 1994.

An Alberton couple recently defeated an attempt by Standard Bank to repossess their home after they demonstrated that they had settled the arrears the bank was claiming. Thousands of other South Africans in a similar position should pay attention. It could save their houses.

VBS, a small mutual bank with R2bn in assets, shot to prominence in 2017 when it awarded then President Zuma a R7,8m home loan. It has now been placed under curatorship by the Reserve Bank following a run by municipal depositors, who have been warned that they are violating the law by placing money on deposit with VBS, as it does not have a full banking licence.

Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) employees were trained to forge signatures on documents and fabricate financial instruments on a routine basis to foreclose on homes they couldn't prove they owned. They also pushed struggling businesses into liquidation and then sold the assets for a profit - all to boost bonuses. One great grandmother nabbed the bank forging her signature to take out an insurance policy shje never asked for. This, by the way, has been going on in numerous cases in SA, with the courts turning a blind eye. It's time for bank whistleblowers to step forward.

Viceroy Research, which last year highlighted accounting irregularities at Steinhoff and brought it to its knees, has this time shone a light on Capitec Bank, calling it a “loan shark with massively understated defaults masquerading as a community finance provider”.

One of the outrageous abuses taking place under the noses of our courts in SA is the ability of banks to repossess homes when a customer is three months in default, and then sell the property at sheriff’s auctions for a pittance. This leaves the customer without a home, and an outstanding debt to the bank. Needless to say, this abuse was a gift to criminal syndicates and property speculators, who feed on the misery of others by picking up these properties for as little as R100. Well, that just became a whole lot more difficult. New court rules gazetted last week make it far more difficult for banks to get away with this. For distressed home owners, putting up a strong defence against the banks got a whole lot easier. 

Nedbank has been accused of reckless lending after a Port Elizabeth woman was lent R30,182 - more than 5,5 times her monthly salary - and ended up paying back more than double this over four years at an annual interest rate of 35,4%.

The Foreclosure Machine is engaging in a deliberate strategy of emotional abuse towards desperate homeowners who are looking for an equitable solution (when most simply want an opportunity to meet the terms of their mortgage). The bank representatives may speak professionally, and even appear to be concerned, but their words are meant to deceive and may even kill. The stress created from corporate psychological abuse often culminates in health problems that may result in a silent death or even suicide. The banks do not play fair, and they will do whatever is necessary to take a home - including the destruction of a life if necessary.

Here's arguably the most effective tool in the homeowners' arsenal when the bank attempts to foreclose on your house in the High Court - simply insist that the matter is heard in the Magistrates Courts, wher the costs are much lower. Attorneys representing the banks will lose their appetite for the fight because the allowed legal fees they can charge in the Magistrates court in often less than 10% that of the High Court.

An unlikely alliance of white farmers, the SA Communist Party, trade unions and individuals whose homes have been repossessed by the four major banks came together outside the South Gauteng High Court on Friday to call for a freeze on evictions. This is the start of a "mass rolling action" campaign that is now being taken countrywide.

It has long been argued that South African banks and retailers have engaged in reckless lending, in complete defiance of the National Credit Act. For example, should a bank entice you into a "consolidated debt" account - rolling all your individual debts into one - it is required to do a fresh credit assessment. If you later run into financial difficulty and cannot meet these monthly repayments, you have grounds for claiming reckless lending on the part of the bank. Shoprite has now been found guilty of this practice by the National Credit Regulator. 

In a recent interview, Standard Bank joint-CEO Sim Tshabalala claimed the bank only sells debtors’ homes in execution “as a last resort”, and that it was eager to develop lifelong relationships with its clients. This ought to be good news for those involved in legal action with the bank, but it certainly is not the experience of the Kudoos family of Glen Marais in Johannesburg, who took out a mortgage loan with the bank in 2001.

Moneyweb recently reported Standard Bank's CEO Sim Tshabalala as saying the bank regarded eviction of clients from their homes as a last resort, and that the bank was eager to develop a "lifelong relationship with its clients. This was in response to the story that the four major lending banks face a R60bn Constitutional Court case for abusive home repossession and eviction tactics. One of the architects of the case, Advocate Douglas Shaw, responds to Tshabalala with the following open letter, questioning whether there is any merit in Tshabalala's claim that the bank uses repossession and eviction as a "last resort".

More than 225 applicants, mostly from Gauteng townships, have launched a suit in the Constitutional Court, claiming damages from the big banks for home repossession abuse. The applicants are claiming R60bn from the banks for unlawful repossession of homes since the Constitution came into effect in 1994. 

It’s an all too familiar situation for thousands of South Africans on a daily basis: your phone rings and you nervously look at the number on the screen, instantly your stomach turns with a knot as you recognise the number and once more you are faced with the dreaded choice of answering or blocking the call. You know if you answer you are undoubtedly going have to face a barrage of aggressive interrogation and questions from the person on the other end. If you don’t answer you know it will only be a matter of time before the cycle repeats itself.

It doesn't get more ridiculous than this. A Welkom man owes Absa Bank R1,4m after borrowing just R52,000 in 2008. Even Absa seems a bit embarrased by this travesty of justice, saying it is willing to accept a variation of the court order (which is certainly in violation of the National Credit Act and minimally one of the most negligent judgments to come to our attention).

The public protector is standing by her controversial report on the Absa-Bankorp lifeboat, in which she recommends that the South African Reserve Bank’s constitutional mandate be changed, saying that she would oppose applications by the Bank and the Treasury to have the report set aside.

Banks are raking in between R500 million and R800 million a month from bounced debit orders. That’s a sizeable portion of the banks’ non-interest fee income each year for little more than running a piece of computer code. How is it that they have failed to heed the findings of a Compeition Commission investigation into banking charges which recommended a R5 cap on a bounced debit order?