Sustainability in community schemes: How delays become tomorrow’s crisis

Across South Africa, community schemes are quietly shouldering an escalating burden. Behind neatly painted facades and manicured entrances lies a growing tension between financial reality and human affordability. 

This challenge was a central theme at the recent Community Schemes Ombud Service (CSOS) Annual Indaba, where the session on “Sustainable Governance: Shared Responsibility as the Cornerstone of Community Schemes” brought together trustees, managing agents, and other industry role players. At the heart of the discussions were the familiar, but difficult, questions around levies, setting budgets, managing arrears, and enforcing collections. Though each story differs, there is a pervasive pattern. 

The temptation to delay levy increases, postpone collections, or defer maintenance projects is understandable, but deeply costly as property values begin to erode, potential buyers hesitate, and paying owners end up subsidising non-paying neighbours. 

Initially, the scheme may bridge shortfalls through temporary fixes, delaying a repaint, postponing maintenance, or dipping into reserves, but these tactics merely postpone the inevitable. Eventually, deterioration accelerates, emergency repairs become unavoidable, and the scheme faces a financial cliff edge. Once distress sets in, recovery is both lengthy and costly. 

Amid mounting financial pressure, community scheme unit owners continue to feel the squeeze of rising municipal tariffs, escalating levies, and increased maintenance costs. While South Africa’s broader economy offers cautious optimism with inflation contained at 3.4% (well within the Reserve Bank’s 3 – 6% target range), household budgets remain tight under the weight of high interest rates and stagnant wage growth. 

Many economists anticipate that the Reserve Bank’s next move could be an interest rate cut, potentially easing bond repayments and improving household cash flow. For community schemes, this period of relative economic stability offers a valuable window and an opportunity to reinforce financial governance, rebuild depleted reserves, address maintenance backlogs and strengthen long-term sustainability. 

At the heart of levy challenges lies a delicate balance of rights and responsibilities. On one hand, the constitutional right to housing and dignity must be respected. On the other, the responsibility of paying owners to safeguard their investment cannot be overlooked. When arrears remain unchecked, everyone pays the price, the deferred maintenance becomes a major repair, values fall, and lenders lose confidence in funding unstable schemes. 

Trustees, who are often volunteers, stand on the frontline. They carry fiduciary responsibility for assets worth millions, assets that often represent the life savings of the owners who elected them. Their role calls for many attributes, such as the courage to raise levies when needed, the commitment to pursue arrears early, and the skills to communicate transparently about financial realities. 

The old adage “a stitch in time saves nine” could have been written for community schemes. Trustees who postpone action risk turning small issues into major structural failures, and manageable arrears into legal battles. 

A proactive culture is not about punishment, but prevention. It’s the difference between quickly replacing a leaking pipe today or rebuilding an entire water-damaged wall tomorrow. Financially struggling owners who act early, whether by selling, restructuring, or seeking help, retain equity and choice. Those who delay too long often lose both. 

The 10-Year Maintenance, Repair and Replacement Plan required by the Sectional Title Schemes Management Act is often dismissed as a compliance burden, but in reality, it is one of the most powerful tools trustees have. When developed properly, it forecasts real maintenance needs, from minor tasks to major capital repairs, and allows for steady, manageable levy increases that prevent financial shock. 

Schemes that embrace this discipline do more than preserve value, they grow it. A well-maintained, financially stable scheme attracts buyers, commands better prices, and inspires confidence. It becomes, in every sense, a stronger investment. 

The 10-Year Maintenance, Repair and Replacement Plan required by the Sectional Title Schemes Management Act is often dismissed as a compliance burden, but in reality, it is one of the most powerful tools trustees have. When developed properly, it forecasts real maintenance needs, from minor tasks to major capital repairs, and allows for steady, manageable levy increases that prevent financial shock. 

Schemes that embrace this discipline do more than preserve value, they grow it. A well-maintained, financially stable scheme attracts buyers, commands better prices, and inspires confidence. It becomes, in every sense, a stronger investment. 

Every trustee board faces the same paradox, raise levies and risk default, or keep them low and guarantee deterioration. The R200 “saved” today often becomes a R20,000 special levy tomorrow. Inflation, arrears, and deferred maintenance quietly compound until the scheme’s resilience is eroded. 

On the positive side, the mere fact that these issues are being highlighted and discussed in forums such as the CSOS Indaba is an undeniable indication of progress. Many schemes are adapting by introducing early-payment discounts, recognising consistent payers, and improving communication around levy decisions. These initiatives not only improve compliance but also build morale and trust. 

In community schemes, delay equals decay, but awareness results in progress. Trustees are not mere administrators of monthly expenses, they are custodians of shared wealth. Their choices today determine tomorrow’s stability. For owners, sustainability begins with honesty, meeting obligations, engaging early, and protecting one’s investment.  

The question is not whether community schemes can afford to plan ahead, it is whether they can afford not to. Because in community living, delay is never neutral. It is, without exception, the most expensive decision of all.