New allegations surface in family’s battle over Alexandra home
Nesta Mahlaba, a victim of unlawful eviction in Alexandra’s Ext 9, faces accusations of owning two government-subsidised houses.
Nesta Mahlaba, a resident of Ext 9 in Alexandra, is embroiled in a dispute following the unlawful eviction from her home by an anti-illegal immigration group. The group now accuses Mahlaba of owning two government-subsidised houses, one in Alexandra and another in the Free State.
Read more: Alex residents demand housing and jobs at community-based planning session
The allegations surfaced during a community meeting organised by ActionSA near Mahlaba’s occupied home. The meeting, led by ActionSA’s Gauteng Provincial Legislature caucus leader Funzi Ngobeni, aimed to provide a platform for community members and eviction victims to voice their concerns. However, members of the anti-illegal immigration group, stationed nearby, disrupted the discussion with their claims.
Initially, in June, the group justified Mahlaba’s eviction by alleging she was an illegal immigrant from Lesotho – a claim she consistently denied. At the recent meeting, the group acknowledged Mahlaba’s South African citizenship, but maintained their occupation of her home, citing her alleged ownership of two subsidised houses. Mahlaba, who was in the Free State during the meeting, could not address the claims directly. Her son-in-law, Lucky Moima, present at the meeting, said Mahlaba would clarify the ownership issue upon her return the following day.
On August 19, Mahlaba admitted to owning a house in the Free State. “I do have a house in the Free State, which I was allocated, but I was not allocated a house here. The house in Alexandra was allocated to my late husband, not me, and he listed my granddaughter as the beneficiary.”
Also read: Rental Housing Tribunal’s role in rental disputes
The operations manager of the local Human Settlement office, Jeffrey Ramphaka, confirmed that owning two subsidised houses is illegal and that married individuals cannot hold separate subsidised properties, but Mahlaba countered, noting that her marriage was not legally recognised, as no formal documentation was signed.
DESCRIPTION:
Furthermore, the group argued she lacks proof of ownership for the Alexandra property. Mahlaba maintained that they are rightfully entitled to the property as it belonged to her late husband. Despite her repeated assertion that they are entitled to the house, Ramphaka said Mahlaba’s late husband only received beneficiary education documents, not an official allocation letter.
He further noted that, while the housing database links Mahlaba’s husband to the Alexandra house, the allocation was never formalised on the system. He said this was an issue that occurred during allocation. Now, Mahlaba and her family continue their fight to reclaim the Alexandra property and prove their rightful ownership, despite the ongoing occupation and unresolved documentation issues.
Follow us on our WhatsApp channel, Facebook, X, Instagram, and TikTok for the latest updates!
