A Diepsloot woman and her daughter claim they were scammed out of almost half a million rand in an RDP property transaction in October 2022, leaving them repaying bank loans for a house they have never occupied.

Despite the unresolved ownership dispute, individuals allegedly involved in facilitating the sale continue to collect monthly rent of R11,000 from tenants residing on the property.

Sindiswa Mzekwa told Sowetan she became interested in the RDP house after seeing it advertised. The property is located a few streets from where she lives with her partner in Diepsloot Extension 2.

“I was told the house originally belonged to a man from Zimbabwe, Mr Moyo, who had passed away. His wife was allegedly selling it because she was relocating to Zimbabwe,” Mzekwa said.

She said she dealt with two people — Akim Zulu and Eunice Mashego — who she understood were acting as agents for the Moyo family.

Mzekwa said she wanted to buy the property as a gift for her eldest daughter.

They told us we had taken time to cover the outstanding balance and therefore can’t have the property, and only R50,000 would be returned to us.

—  Sindiswa Mzekwa

“She took good care of me when I was sick and after I suffered a stroke. This was my way of saying thank you,” she said.

Unable to afford the purchase price of R300,000, Mzekwa applied for a bank loan and was approved for R220,000.

“I paid the R220,000 into Zulu’s account. The agreement was that the outstanding R80,000 would be paid within five months,” she said.

To raise the balance, Mzekwa said she and her daughter proposed building outside rooms on the property that could also be rented out.

“This was agreed to by both parties. My daughter took a further loan of R50,000 to build the rooms. The understanding was that she would move into the main house once the outstanding amount was settled,” she said.

Mzekwa said she and her daughter were later taken by Zulu and Mashego to the Tshwane municipal offices, where they were told they were meeting a lawyer at the deeds office to finalise paperwork.

“We met the lawyer outside the building and were asked to sign documents that we were told were for the title deed change of ownership. After signing, the lawyer asked for R15,000 to file the documents,” she said.

Mzekwa said they could not pay the amount immediately and were told the documents would not be processed until payment was made.

She said Zulu and Mashego continued collecting rental income from the outside rooms for two years. When she informed them in November last year that the outstanding amount had been paid and her daughter intended to move into the house, the arrangement was disputed.

“They refused and blocked my daughter from moving in,” Mzekwa said.

“They told us we had taken time to cover the outstanding balance and therefore can’t have the property, and only R50,000 would be returned to us, which does feel like we are being scammed.”

The matter was then escalated to community leaders, with a complaint allegedly submitted to the ward councillor last year.

However, Ward 95 councillor Julius Maake told Sowetan he was not aware of the complaint.

Diepsloot Extension 2 block leader Bafana Mvelase confirmed that the matter had been reported to the community leadership.

“When it came to my attention, I questioned the procedures followed and whether the matter had been taken to the ward councillor. I was told it had been, but there was no assistance,” Mvelase said.

He said he accompanied Mzekwa’s daughter to what they believed was the Tshwane deeds office.

“We were taken to a municipal office, not a deeds office. When we tried to locate the lawyer, he could not be found. Officials there told us we were not the first people to complain about similar issues,” he said.

Mvelase said it became clear that the process may have been staged, prompting the involvement of the police.

“Police called meetings with Zulu and Mashego on several occasions to mediate, but they did not attend. As a community, we want the family to either gain access to the property with the title deed transferred into their name or for their money to be paid back in full,” he said.

Sowetan contacted both Mashego and Zulu for comment. Mashego had not responded by the time of publication.

Zulu said he would provide a full response but did not do so. He later said: “That thing was not a hijack. It was a property sale that did not go as per the agreed terms.”

The Gauteng human settlements department confirmed to Sowetan that the property is registered under the name of Moyo.

Spokesperson Tahir Sema said: “The department does not have records or visibility of private transactions concluded between individuals and is therefore not in a position to confirm the circumstances of the alleged sale.”

Sema cautioned residents against using unregistered “estate agents” and advised people to only transact through those who are accredited with the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority.