A Bryanston businessman has accused storage landlord Stor-Age of taking the law into its own hands by auctioning off his property worth hundreds of thousands of rands after a protracted billing dispute.

Bongani Manjanja, the director of marketing agency NuMedia Direct Marketing, is challenging Stor-Age’s execution of a private, online liquidation of his property on the iBidOnStorage platform in July. 

News24 reports that he is now pursuing his complaint with the National Consumer Commission, alleging that Stor-Age overstepped by conducting the auction without a court order and while his billing dispute was still in mediation.

Stor-Age allegedly cut a padlock without a Sheriff of the Court present, says Manjanja, who argues that this deprived him of access to his property. He maintains that the items auctioned off have a provisional market replacement value of R293 000.

Stor-Age, in turn, says it twice offered to settle the billing dispute with Manjanja, who had not paid his bill for six months amid a back-and-forth over an allegedly stolen computer.

Manjanja provided News24 with a copy of a sworn affidavit he intended to file as a criminal complaint, but said that following discussions with detectives and a magistrate, he had decided to pursue a civil matter at the NCC, given that the decisions of its tribunal have the same status as those of the High Court.

Stor-Age told News24 that Manjanja was repeatedly made aware that his rental obligations were separate from the alleged theft, yet he made no payment from 27 January 2026 until the goods were auctioned at the end of July, a period of roughly six months.

News24 notes that a contractual clause authorising a landlord to seize and sell goods without a court order is unlikely to survive judicial scrutiny.

Section 14 of the Constitution provides that everyone has the right to privacy, which includes the right not to have their property searched or their possessions seized.

Section 25(1) reinforces this by providing that no one may be deprived of property ‘except in terms of law of general application’ and that ‘no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property’.

Section 34 guarantees everyone the right to have any dispute that can be resolved by the application of law decided in a fair public hearing before a court or, where appropriate, another independent and impartial tribunal or forum.

Taken together, these provisions establish a strong constitutional presumption against private seizure of property without judicial oversight.

Full News24 report