Reading Time: 5 minutes

100 Debt Counsellors Attend Free Workshop

100 Debt Counsellors attended a free online workshop held by well known legal practice VHT Attorneys.

The topic was an important one: “Terminations”

One of the main points of the day was that Debt Counsellors (and their clients) should not be scared to go to court and ask the court to rule on accounts where the credit provider may say they have terminated. 

While it is easy to just claim a matter is terminated and refuse to cooperate, things are actually more complicated than that (for credit providers).

Terminations & Section 86(10) & 88(3)

When a credit provider wants to get out of the debt review process, they are allowed (under very specific circumstances and in a very specific way) to issue a notice they intend to do so (a Section 86(10) Notice or later to proceed to enforcement in terms of Section 88(3).

This allows them to jump out of the debt review matter and proceed with legal action against the consumer.

Generally, this happens when a consumer stops paying for their debt review or the matter has never been to court and nothing is happening with the debt review.

In the past, these sections were occasionally abused by credit providers, but much less so today. There does, however, remain some confusion among credit providers about these sections, and they still often make mistakes when trying to get out of participating in the debt review process.

Credit Providers Must Do Very Specific Things

While no one wants credit providers to be prejudiced by the debt review process or see people hide away from paying debts responsibly through debt review, it is also true that consumers should be protected from greedy credit providers who try to get around the debt review process.

This is why the National Credit Act sets out very specific steps and requirements for any credit provider who wants to go around the debt review and take legal action against the consumer.

60 Business Days

Credit providers need to wait the set amount of time before they can start any legal action against anyone who has begun debt review.

Once the 17.1 is sent to them (not the date of applying) they have to wait 60 business days.

If during that time the matter is settled between both parties through negotiation over a new repayment plan, then great. 

If the matter is already set down at court and a court date obtained … then no 86(10) can occur.

If the matter is already set down at court and a court date obtained (lodged is the correct term here, as the credit provider needs to be given notice of this) then no 86(10) can occur.

They (the credit provider who wants to duck out) have to come to court then and sort things out when the rest of the debt restructuring matter is heard.

Have They Served Notice Properly?

If a credit provider wants to proceed with new legal action, they have to send notices of their intention to the Debt Counsellor, Consumer and NCR (all 3 and they really have to prove they have done so).

Credit providers have to prove they have done so and cannot hide behind PoPi. Otherwise courts will throw out their opposition.

Have They Proved Default?

To be able to proceed in terms of 86(10) and enforce their rights, the credit provider must prove that the consumer is actually in default.

This is when a consumer has missed an agreed payment on an account, and it has changed legal status. Normally, this happens when people enter debt review and pay fees in Month 1, but it is worth checking this. Was an agreed payment obligation missed or not?

Credit providers can’t just casually mention it in their court papers. They must show and argue this happened.

Understanding 88(3)

When a consumer is under debt review and a court order has already been granted but something goes wrong credit providers do have legal rights and can start new legal action.

When they do so, the credit provider (in their new court papers) will say they are taking legal action in terms of Section 88(2) …instead of Section 129 or whatever. They simply mention this section in their papers.

Many credit providers mention “Section 88(3)” when sending notice they intend to take legal action but the truth is that they actually have to proceed with enforcement for this section to mean anything.

They cannot simply walk away from debt review by quoting these numbers as if they are magic.

Has the Credit Provider Proceeded To Enforcement?

A large part of the presentation revolved around the interesting idea that once a credit provider issues a notice of something they intend to do (eg. a Section 129 notice or Section 86(10) notice), they actually need to follow through or the consumer has additional rights that can be granted by a court.

If the credit provider is too lazy to actually enforce something, then the consumer can ask a court to grant an order (eg. for debt restructuring).

This line of reasoning is interesting and has seen a lot of success with the courts across the country recently. 

If you say you are going to take new legal action, then do it. Don’t simply hide behind the notice of intent and never actually follow through or you may miss the chance to do so.

VHT To Hold More Workshops in 2026

The workshop was packed full of legal advice and insights into various parts of the NCA and 86(10) and 88(3).

‘VHT will be hosting more workshops next year’

If you were sad to miss the workshop, there is good news. VHT will be hosting more workshops next year.

There are many important legal aspects to debt counselling and all of us can learn more. It is part of the process of staying up to date with developments in the industry. 

Debtfree will be sure to notify you of when they will happen.