Pretoria – The contractor of Tshwane House – the capital’s headquarters in the inner city – and the metro are at each other’s throats regarding the state-of-the-art new building.
The contractor says the building is ready and waiting to be occupied, but claims the city is refusing to issue an occupation certificate.
Tsela Tshweu Construction Joint Venture Trencon Ltd has turned to the Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, in an urgent bid to force the city to issue the certificate.
The contractor accused the city of nitpicking and trying to find fault with the completion of phase one, which comprises the building itself.
The applicant said the building had been completed and ready for occupation for weeks now.
The company accused the city of refusing to issue the required occupation certificate as it wanted to stall paying the developer.
The city, in return, denied that it ever received the application, stating in court papers that it could not issue the certificate, as this would amount to agreeing that the building was ready for occupation.
The city said the building was not yet ready for staff to move in, as there were a number of outstanding issues which first had to be addressed.
It, however, agreed to issue a temporary occupation certificate, which would be valid for about a month, and give the developer time to fix some aspects of the building which the city was not happy with.
The application was, meanwhile, removed from the urgent roll by Judge Jody Kollapen, as it was no longer urgent in light of the temporary certificate being issued.
The judge, however, said the parties could file further court papers and later enrol the matter again if they felt the need for further court intervention.
Joint venture director Daniel Ranoko said a public-private partnership was signed in March 2015 regarding the design and construction of the building in two phases.
In terms of the agreement, the city was due to relocate most of its staff to the building when phase one was complete, he said.
In order to trigger the city’s payment obligations to the contractor – said to be about R500 000 a day – an occupation certificate had to be issued.
The city could not occupy the building without this certificate.
Ranoko said the city was refusing to issue this certificate and instead found fault.
“The situation has become intolerable,” Ranoko said in court papers.
Various inspections of the building were conducted, he said.
Every time, city representatives found fault with something different, ranging from plumbing demands such as requiring an “inspection eye in every toilet pan”, to landscape-related issues.
Ranoko said where relevant, they complied with the city’s demands.
He explained that essentially, the issuing of the occupation certificate related only to matters of safety and inhabitation of a particular building. He said this building was built according to the exact building plans and all was in order.
He accused the city of simply wanting to dodge its financial obligations towards the contractor, who in turn is now battling to pay its workers.
Simon Sithole of the city’s litigation department said the contractor never applied for an occupation certificate.
He said plumbing and building work had to be done according to the approved building plan, as were landscaping and health and safety issues.
“The building is clearly not completed,” he stated.