Despite laws such as the Housing Rental Act that aims to protect consumers from any form of unfair business practice, there are landlords who still find loopholes to exploit unsuspecting consumers.

Although the act is clear on what documents and statements landlords and/or their rental agents must give to their consumer, the case involving Uvest Property Group Investment shows how some companies are still exploiting consumers.

Uvest Property charges tenants exorbitant amounts for water consumption and does not give tenants and owners of the properties a copy of the bills from municipalities to justify their charges, even though the houses have individual water meters.

A former tenant, Todani Nodoba, 44, from Thohoyandou in Limpopo, tried everything in her power to assert her rights when confronted with such a problem, but Uvest Property ignored her cries.

Nodoba rented a house owned by Vernon Ball through Uvest Property in Cape Town when she found a job with the Department of Justice in 2012.

When she terminated her lease contract in April this year, her deposit was withheld to set off the debt of the water bill she had been paying without actually getting the bill.

She said, to cut electricity costs and water bills, she joined a gym and only took a bath at home once in the morning as she showered at the gym in the evening.

But her water bills went as high as R2453 a month.

When Nodoba terminated her lease agreement, she got the shock of her life when Uvest Property told her she would not be refunded her deposit of R6000 as she owed R4000 for the water she consumed.

She was told the balance amount would pay for items she had damaged in the house.

She said her deposit ,which should be refunded with interest, was used to set off this debt that she was never notified about.

Nodoba said the first signs of exploitation started showing when she moved into the property. The agent ignored her complaints after she requested Uvest Property to fix broken and defective items she listed soon after moving in, as required.

"I later repaired the geyser, door locks [and] cupboard handles. I was never compensated for fixing them," she said.

In August 2013, Nodoba started sharing the property with her cousin and their water bill fluctuated between R1500 and R2800 a month.

Even Ball came and checked if there were any leaks in the property and found none.

"The Home Owners Association checks the meters and submits the readings, and I'm not sure where the high meter readings came from," Nodoba said.

Ball told Consumer Line he sympathised with Nodoba but had no control over charges by the municipality. He once sent an e-mail to the rental administrator indicating he was unhappy about the way they handled Nodoba's account.

Part of the e-mail read: "There is a potential for malpractice if the meter readings are not shown. Consumers are entitled to see what they are paying for and this is not happening here. There would not have been an issue to this extent in the first instance if the meter readings were shown from the outset."

UVest Property client and liaison manager Michael Horack, however, said they once recorded that the house had a water problem and that it was later repaired. This he said resulted in the initial credit and account status being adjusted.

He said Nodoba's account was in arrears because the water and refuse bill had not been settled by her. Horack said if the account was kept up to date, Nodoba would have received R4410.54.

Horack also threatened Consumer Line with legal action if Sowetan published Nodoba's story.

He said whether Nodoba had a legitimate complaint or not only the Rental Housing Tribunal was the appropriate channel to take her complaint to.

Dr Sayed Iqbal Mohamed, the chairman of the Organisation of Civic Rights, who specialises in tenants' issues, said Nodoba ought to have been given a copy of the billing rather than a statement of account from the agent.

He said Nodoba must lodge a complaint of an unfair business practice with the Western Cape's Rental Housing Tribunal.

Alternatively, Nodoba can start legal proceedings in the Small Claims Court. Here the landlord has to appear in person and no legal representation is allowed, unlike at the tribunal.