PPRA: Estate access fees face scrutiny as FFC deadline nears

Two landmark High Court rulings put estate accreditation fees, BEE requirements and market access under the spotlight as the PPRA reports on its performance and transformation mandate.

• High Court refuses blanket protection for estate accreditation fees, leaving the PPRA to assess potentially restrictive arrangements individually.
• Practitioners can renew FFCs without BEE certificates under an interim court order, with the 31 October deadline approaching.
• PPRA reports 81.8% target achievement, but a qualified audit and licensing concerns highlight continuing accountability challenges.

Two court rulings put property regulation under the spotlight

Who gets access to South Africa's property market, what should practitioners pay to compete, and how effectively is the industry being regulated?

These questions dominated a media roundtable hosted by the Property Practitioners Regulatory Authority (PPRA) on Tuesday, 27 October 2026, attended virtually by Real Estate Investor (REI) alongside other media representatives in-person.

Led by PPRA Chief Executive Officer Thato Ramaili, the discussion examined two significant High Court judgments delivered within six weeks, the approaching Fidelity Fund Certificate (FFC) renewal deadline, transformation, consumer protection and the Authority's 2025/26 Annual Report.

The central message was that neither residential estates nor property practitioners should assume that recent court rulings have settled every regulatory question.

Ramaili stressed that estate accreditation fees have not received blanket judicial approval, while practitioners cannot currently be denied an FFC solely because they lack a BEE certificate.

The roundtable also provided an opportunity for journalists to question PPRA executives directly about licensing delays, the regulation of property advertising platforms and the Authority's ability to enforce its expanded mandate.

1. High Court refuses blanket approval for estate access fees

The first major issue concerns accreditation and access fees charged by gated residential estates to property practitioners seeking to market or sell properties within their communities.

On 20 October, the Johannesburg High Court dismissed an application brought by residential community organisations seeking broad protection for these arrangements.

The PPRA opposed the application, arguing that accreditation fees can create barriers to entry, particularly for smaller and emerging agencies.

During the roundtable, Ramaili said some gated estates charge practitioners between R40,000 and R80,000 annually for access.

The ruling has several important implications:

• No blanket clearance: The judgment does not establish that all estate accreditation fees are lawful.
• No automatic prohibition: Individual arrangements must still be considered on their facts.
• Competition concerns: High fees can exclude smaller agencies and emerging practitioners.
• Consumer choice: Sellers may have fewer agents to choose from where access is restricted.
• Regulatory enforcement: The PPRA must consider the applicable legislation and its jurisdiction in each case.

The Court's refusal to grant broad declaratory relief is significant, but it should not be interpreted as a finding that every fee charged by an estate is automatically unlawful.

For homeowners and sellers, the practical concern is whether an estate's arrangements improperly limit their freedom to appoint a property practitioner. For agencies, the question is whether paying for access creates an unfair commercial advantage or exposes them to regulatory consequences.

2. BEE certificate ruling changes current FFC requirements

The second judgment, delivered by the Pretoria High Court on 8 September, concerns Section 50(a)(x) of the Property Practitioners Act. The Court declared the statutory BEE certificate requirement unconstitutional, subject to confirmation by the Constitutional Court.

Pending the outcome of that process, the PPRA is implementing the interim order. What practitioners need to know:

• A BEE certificate is not currently required for an FFC application under the interim arrangement.
• The PPRA cannot refuse an FFC solely because an applicant lacks that certificate.
• Other applicable registration, qualification and compliance requirements remain in force.
• The judgment does not invalidate B-BBEE legislation generally.
• The Constitutional Court process remains relevant to the final legal position.

Ramaili told the roundtable that the ruling had not weakened the Authority's commitment to transformation, although it had challenged the legal mechanism used to pursue that objective.

The PPRA's legal representatives explained that the legislation had not clearly defined what constituted a valid BEE certificate, creating uncertainty over the requirements imposed on practitioners. The Authority maintained that transformation remains a legitimate regulatory objective, but acknowledged the need for clear, legally sustainable requirements.

3. FFC renewals: What practitioners must do before 31 October

With the renewal deadline falling on Saturday, 31 October 2026, the PPRA urged practitioners to ensure their applications are complete and submitted through official channels.

During the question-and-answer session, REI raised concerns about practitioners experiencing delays, inconsistent requirements and uncertainty over escalation procedures. PPRA representatives explained that the statutory 30-working-day processing period begins only once a fully compliant application has been received.

Key points clarified:

• Documentation: Requirements differ for firms, principals, directors and employees.
• Firm registration: Relevant company documents, tax compliance, trust-account information and other prescribed records may be required.
• Individual practitioners: Requirements depend on their registration status and category.
• Processing delays: Incomplete applications remain a significant cause of delays.
• Escalation: Practitioners can raise unresolved applications through PPRA officials and management.

The Authority acknowledged that administrative errors and delays do occur and said improvements to its digital systems should strengthen service delivery.

4. Do property advertising platforms need FFCs?

Another important issue raised during the discussion concerned whether property portals, advertising platforms and businesses such as Airbnb fall within the PPRA's regulatory definition of a property practitioner.

The distinction is particularly relevant to digital property businesses, which increasingly connect buyers, sellers, landlords and tenants. PPRA's legal representatives clarified that a platform providing advertising or listings alone does not automatically require registration as a property practitioner.

However, the position may change where the business undertakes activities such as negotiating transactions, facilitating contracts or performing other regulated property services.

The practical distinction:

• Advertising-only platforms are not automatically regulated as property practitioners.
• Platforms performing additional property practitioner functions may require registration.
• The PPRA will assess individual business models and the activities performed.
• Businesses offering multiple services should establish which activities fall within the Act.

The discussion also raised questions about short-term rental platforms and Airbnb-related activities. The recorded response provides a general framework for assessing platforms rather than a definitive ruling covering every short-term rental business model.

5. PPRA Annual Report: Performance improves, but challenges remain

The Authority used the roundtable to present its 2025/26 Annual Report, reporting improved operational performance alongside continuing governance and capacity challenges.

PPRA 2025/26 PERFORMANCE HIGHLIGHTS

• 81.8% - Annual targets achieved
• 32,170 - Applications processed
• 7,757 - New registrations
• 423 - Compliance inspections

Additional performance highlights:

• 18 of 22 annual targets were achieved.
• 21,682 renewal applications were processed.
• 1,756 complaints were received, with 1,411 resolved.
• 80.4% of complaints were resolved within six months, marginally exceeding the 80% target.
• Four performance targets were missed.

Ramaili acknowledged the challenges associated with regulating a sector that has expanded from traditional estate agencies to 12 categories of property practitioners. The Authority also reported a qualified audit opinion, relating to the accounting treatment of penalties in the correct reporting period.

The Property Practitioners Fidelity Fund and Transformation Fund received unqualified audit opinions, although material findings were identified. The PPRA says it is implementing corrective measures and targeting an unqualified audit outcome for 2026/27.

6. Transformation: From registration to sustainable businesses

Transformation remained a central theme throughout the roundtable. The PPRA reported progress in learner development, professional advancement and support for emerging property businesses.

Transformation highlights include:

• 1,656 candidates placed through the One Learner, One Property Practitioner programme towards a 2029 target of 2,500.
• 844 practitioners enrolled in the Principalisation programme, including 500 Black women.
• 30 SMME incubation grants awarded, including 16 to women.
• Youth programme enrolment declined from 839 to 607, highlighting continuing retention and recruitment challenges.

Ramaili emphasised that successful transformation should be measured not only by the number of people entering the profession but also by their ability to remain active, progress into leadership and establish sustainable businesses.

This is particularly relevant where high accreditation fees, business operating costs and limited access to property mandates restrict opportunities for emerging agencies.

7. What practitioners and consumers should do now

The roundtable reinforced the importance of practical compliance and informed consumer decisions.

For property practitioners:

• Submit complete FFC renewal applications before 31 October.
• Verify the current documentation requirements for your registration category.
• Retain submission confirmations and proof of payment.
• Seek written clarification where estate accreditation arrangements raise concerns.
• Escalate delayed applications through official PPRA channels.

For property buyers, sellers, landlords and tenants:

• Verify a practitioner's registration and FFC status.
• Understand any restrictions affecting the choice of estate agent.
• Keep transaction agreements, payment records and correspondence.
• Report suspected misconduct, supported by relevant evidence.

The PPRA also highlighted the importance of fair investigations, particularly where allegations involve client funds, deposits or property management activities.

The bottom line: Regulatory certainty must translate into action

The PPRA's media roundtable highlighted an industry facing important legal and operational changes. The High Court has refused to give residential estates blanket protection for accreditation fees, while the interim BEE ruling has changed the immediate requirements for Fidelity Fund Certificates.

At the same time, the regulator is reporting improved operational performance while acknowledging outstanding challenges in licensing, governance, transformation and enforcement. For South Africa's property industry, the next test will be how consistently these decisions are implemented.

Clear rules, fair access to property markets, efficient licensing and effective consumer protection will ultimately determine whether regulatory reform delivers meaningful benefits.

The PPRA's commitment to transformation and accountability must now be measured against practical outcomes for practitioners, homeowners, buyers and investors. FFC renewals close on 31 October 2026. Practitioners should confirm their requirements and application status directly with the Authority.

MORE INFORMATION: Visit the PPRA official website

Reporting from the PPRA media roundtable, 27 October 2026. Based on the PPRA's supplied statement, annual performance information and recorded executive discussions. Court rulings are described according to their stated scope and interim status.