My Industry Sector: NHBRC responds to WCPDF's call for national intervention

The National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) has hit back at allegations of systemic dysfunction, refuting claims by industry bodies that it has become a "waste of taxpayers' money" and an inefficient bureaucracy.

The defence comes after the Western Cape Property Development Forum (WCPDF) formally petitioned the national government to intervene, citing concerns over the council’s R11.3 billion capital reserves, negligible research spending, and administrative failures.

Addressing the WCPDF’s concern that insurance claims paid to consumers amounted to less than 1% of revenue despite hundreds of millions in member fees, the NHBRC clarified its role as a secondary warrantor.

"The first responsibility for structural damages lies with the builder," the council stated, noting that it has made provisions of approximately R1.2 billion for warranty claims based on actuarial assessments.

Regarding its R11.3 billion investment portfolio, the NHBRC argued the figure is heavily influenced by market performance and high interest rates. The council maintained that these funds are being earmarked for industry development under the new Housing Consumer Protection Act. "The organisation cannot make material adjustments to its operation until the new Act is fully implemented," the council noted.

The NHBRC also dismissed claims that it neglects its mandate to innovate, despite research spending sitting at just 0.05% of income. The council pointed to the January 2026 accreditation of its civil laboratory as a turning point that will "drastically increase" research activities.

On skills development, the council defended its R23 million training spend for 2025, highlighting a 92% achievement rate on its Annual Performance Plan as evidence that operational delivery remains on track.

However, the WCPDF has labelled the NHBRC’s defence as "selective" and "unconvincing." WCPDF Chairperson Deon van Zyl argued that the council is using the upcoming Act as an "excuse" for past failures in research and training.

"The simple question was: why has this mandate not been met in the past?" Van Zyl asked. He further questioned how the council intends to manage increased documentation requirements when its internal systems are already failing.

Van Zyl also took aim at the regulator’s track record, citing the tragic George building collapse as a case where the council has yet to take real accountability. "You cannot be a regulator and yourself take no responsibility," he said, adding that the NHBRC’s response does not justify its duplication of municipal building regulations.

Despite the pushback, the NHBRC remains firm, framing its increased documentation requirements—including mandatory Geotechnical Reports—as a proactive strategy to prevent future structural failures and uphold the integrity of the homebuilding industry.