Justice for Joan

Tercia Joubert, Brooklyn

This letter refers to the article "Sewage flood sparks demolition threat," Tabletalk, November 19.

I am writing to express my outrage at how unfairly 83-year-old Brooklyn resident Joan Wessels has been treated by the City of Cape Town.

No elderly resident should ever endure what she has gone through.

After a blockage in the main sewer pump, raw sewage forced its way into Ms Wessels’s garden and swimming pool, leaving her yard flooded in human waste. Despite this distressing event being caused by a municipal failure, she did everything by the book and lodged a public liability claim as instructed.

Instead of receiving support, she was met with months of silence - and then, shockingly, a building inspector, who arrived not to assess damage, but to issue her with a notice for “unauthorised building work”.

Something doesn't add up, and she is even being threatened with possible demolition action if she does not comply.

This is not how a vulnerable resident should be treated. Ms Wessels asked for help and instead found herself overwhelmed by bureaucracy, fear, and shifting responsibility.

Justice for Joan!

• The City of Cape Town spokesperson, Luthando Tyhalibongo responds to the letter:

The City’s Development Management Department at times, needs to ascertain if structures that are subject to claims have building plan approvals. 

As a result, investigations are conducted, and if it is found that there are no approvals for certain aspects of the building, notices are served on the owners to rectify the situation. 

The duration of unauthorised construction or who was responsible for such construction has no relevance in this case. 

It remains incumbent on owners to ensure that the properties they own have lawfully constructed structures.

Upon investigation, the building inspector established that there is no record of approval for the swimming pool. 

Unless proven otherwise, the structures are deemed to be non-compliant. If a record of approval is not available, owners are required to submit “as-built” plans to the city for approval.

In cases where records are not available, owners are required to submit “as-built” plans to obtain approval in order to comply with enforcement processes.

 Historical aerial photography records available to the City show that the subject swimming pool was constructed between 1987 and 1997. 

It should be noted that buildings constructed before September 1985, which is when the National Building Regulations and Standards Act became effective,  are deemed to be compliant.

 It is important to note that owners must submit “as-built” plans to the city for approval, and in order to comply with the notice, owners must obtain approval as directed in the notice.

 All claims are subject to a thorough merits investigation, which is conducted in conjunction with several departments, and it is imperative that the investigation is conducted with the utmost due diligence. 

In this regard, both the City’s Water and Sanitation department, as well as the City’s Building Development Management Department, were requested to provide their investigation reports respectively on the incident in question, and whether the pool was approved by the City as required in terms of the law, as the claimant was not able to provide the approved plans upon request.

 As the Building Development Management Department confirmed that the claimant’s pool did not have the relevant approved building plans in place, the claimant's claim was accordingly repudiated on this basis.

 Should the claimant not be in agreement with this decision, she has been informed of her right to appeal this decision in terms of section 62 of the Systems Act.