Mandatory Disclosure Form (MDF) — What Sellers Must Disclose Under Section 67
What sellers must disclose under Section 67 of the Property Practitioners Act — the complete guide to South Africa's Mandatory Disclosure Form (MDF).
Written by admitted attorneys — plain language, no legalese
Every property sale in South Africa carries a fundamental question: what does the seller know about the condition of the property — and has the buyer been told? The Mandatory Disclosure Form (MDF) exists to answer that question in writing, before the offer to purchase is signed.
Since the Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019 came into effect on 1 February 2022, every property practitioner (estate agent) is legally prohibited from accepting a mandate to sell unless the seller has completed and signed the prescribed MDF. This represents a decisive shift away from the old "buyer beware" approach — requiring sellers to put what they know about the property on the record.
This guide is for both sellers and buyers. If you are selling, it explains exactly what you must disclose, why it matters, and the consequences of getting it wrong. If you are buying, it explains how to read the MDF critically, what to look for, and what your rights are if the disclosure turns out to be incomplete or inaccurate.
What Is the Mandatory Disclosure Form?
Section 67 — Property Practitioners Act
The MDF is a prescribed form under Section 67 of the Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019. It requires the seller to disclose all known defects and material facts about the property before the buyer commits to the purchase.
Before the Property Practitioners Act, there was no statutory disclosure obligation in South African property law. The Estate Agency Affairs Act 112 of 1976 — the predecessor legislation — did not require sellers or agents to complete any disclosure form. While the Estate Agency Affairs Board (EAAB) Code of Conduct encouraged voluntary disclosure as industry practice, there was no legal consequence for failing to provide one.
The MDF changed this fundamentally. Its purpose is to shift the legal landscape from caveat emptor (buyer beware) toward mandatory transparency. The seller completes and signs the form, declaring what they know — and critically, what they do not know — about the condition of the property.
The statutory obligation in Section 67 is placed on the property practitioner (the estate agent): they may not accept a mandate to sell without a completed MDF. The seller completes the form, but it is the agent who bears the regulatory consequence if the process is not followed.
Plain Language
The MDF is a checklist the seller fills in before selling. It covers everything from roof leaks to boundary disputes. The idea is simple: put it in writing now, so nobody can argue about what was or was not disclosed later.
Private sales: The MDF applies equally to private sales. If you are selling your property without an estate agent, you are directly responsible for completing the form and providing it to the buyer before the offer to purchase is signed. There is no exemption for private sales — the disclosure obligation applies to every residential property transaction.
When Is the MDF Required?
When the MDF Is Required
The MDF is legally required for every residential property sale in South Africa — whether the sale is conducted through an estate agent or privately between seller and buyer.
Section 67(1) of the Property Practitioners Act is unambiguous: a property practitioner may not accept a mandate to sell unless the seller has provided a fully completed and signed mandatory disclosure form. The form must then be provided to the prospective buyer before the buyer makes an offer — this is the requirement in Section 67(1)(b).
The timing is critical. The MDF must be available to the buyer before they sign the offer to purchase, so that their decision to buy is informed by the seller's disclosures. An MDF completed after the OTP is signed defeats the purpose entirely.
In private sales (where no estate agent is involved), the seller is directly responsible for completing the MDF and providing it to the buyer. There is no exemption for private sales — the disclosure obligation applies regardless of whether an agent is involved.
Private sales
If you are selling privately, you must complete the MDF yourself and provide it to the buyer before the offer to purchase is signed. Without an agent to manage the process, the responsibility falls entirely on you.
What You Must Disclose — The Complete Checklist
The prescribed MDF covers a comprehensive range of categories. The following is a practical summary of the key areas the form addresses. This is not a reproduction of the prescribed form's exact categories, but a guide to help sellers understand the scope of what must be disclosed.
Mandatory Disclosure Categories
- Structural defects (walls, foundations, roof)
- Damp, water penetration, and leaks
- Plumbing and water supply systems
- Electrical installations and compliance
- Roof condition (tiles, sheeting, gutters, waterproofing)
- Pool, borehole, and water features
- Previous alterations or additions (approved/unapproved building plans)
- Boundary walls, fences, and encroachments
- Infestations (termites, wood borer)
- Environmental issues (flooding history, sinkholes, soil conditions)
- Security features (alarms, electric fencing, CCTV)
- Homeowners' association or body corporate rules and levies
- Known disputes with neighbours or authorities
- Any other material fact that could affect the buyer's decision
When in doubt, disclose
If you are unsure whether something is material — disclose it. Over-disclosure protects you; under-disclosure exposes you.
Creating your Offer to Purchase?
Our free OTP creator builds in disclosure requirements automatically — so nothing gets missed.
The Legal Framework — Section 67 of the Property Practitioners Act
Section 67 — Legal Framework
Section 67 of the Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019 creates a statutory disclosure regime that fundamentally changed how property sales are conducted in South Africa.
Section 67(1) establishes the core obligation: a property practitioner may not accept a mandate to sell unless the seller has provided a fully completed and signed mandatory disclosure form. The practitioner must provide a copy of the completed form to the prospective buyer before the buyer makes an offer.
Section 67(2) gives the MDF real legal teeth. The completed disclosure form "forms an integral part" of the agreement of sale. Critically, if no form was completed, signed, or attached to the agreement, the sale is interpreted as if no defects were disclosed to the buyer — placing the seller at maximum risk. This is a powerful incentive for compliance: the absence of a disclosure form does not benefit the seller; it harms them.
Section 67(3) creates liability for the property practitioner. A property practitioner who fails to comply with subsection (1) may be held liable by an affected consumer. Note that this creates liability for the agent, not the seller — the buyer's remedies against the seller for inaccurate disclosure arise under common law: the actio quanti minoris (reduction in purchase price) or rescission for fraud.
This regime represents a significant departure from the Estate Agency Affairs Act 112 of 1976, which had no statutory disclosure requirement. Under the old Act, disclosure was a matter of industry practice and the EAAB Code of Conduct — not law.
The MDF also operates alongside the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008. Sections 22 to 28 (Part D of Chapter 2) establish the consumer's right to disclosure and information, including the right to information in plain and understandable language. Section 55 establishes the consumer's right to safe, good quality goods — which is relevant to the condition of the property being sold.
Plain Language
The law says three things: the agent cannot sell without the form, the form becomes part of the sale agreement, and if there is no form, the law assumes the seller disclosed nothing — which is the worst possible position for the seller.
Latent vs Patent Defects — The Legal Distinction That Matters
Latent vs Patent Defects
Understanding the difference between latent and patent defects is essential for both sellers completing the MDF and buyers reading it. The distinction determines who bears the risk.
Patent defects are defects that are visible on reasonable inspection. A cracked window, peeling paint, or a visibly sagging ceiling are patent defects. The buyer is expected to notice these during their inspection of the property — and generally cannot claim against the seller for patent defects they should have seen.
Latent defects are hidden defects that are not discoverable on a reasonable inspection. Rising damp behind plastered walls, faulty underground plumbing, a compromised foundation, or termite damage concealed behind cabinetry — these are latent defects. The buyer cannot be expected to discover them, and the seller bears the risk.
The MDF specifically targets latent defects. The seller is required to disclose all known defects, including those that are not visible. This includes defects the seller has repaired — the fact that rising damp was treated, or that a roof leak was patched, is itself a material fact that must be disclosed. A repair does not erase the obligation to disclose.
Plain Language
If a buyer can see it, it is a patent defect and generally the buyer's problem. If a buyer cannot see it, it is a latent defect and the seller must disclose it on the MDF. Even if you fixed the problem, you must still mention it.
The Voetstoots Clause and How the MDF Changes Everything
Voetstoots and the MDF
The voetstoots clause has been a standard feature of South African property sales for decades. The MDF has fundamentally changed how it operates.
Traditionally, a voetstoots ("as is") clause in the offer to purchase meant the buyer accepted the property with all its defects — known and unknown. This gave sellers broad protection: once the buyer signed a voetstoots clause, they had limited recourse if defects emerged after transfer.
The MDF changed this calculus entirely. A voetstoots clause no longer shields a seller who knew about a defect and deliberately failed to disclose it. The legal test is fraudulent non-disclosure: did the seller know about the defect AND intentionally conceal it? If yes, the voetstoots clause offers no protection.
This is why the MDF is so important for sellers — not just as a legal obligation, but as protection. A seller who completes the MDF honestly and thoroughly creates a written record that they disclosed what they knew. If a dispute arises later, the MDF is evidence that there was no fraudulent concealment.
For a deeper analysis of voetstoots clauses and how they interact with other OTP provisions, see our guide on OTP clauses explained.
Voetstoots is not a shield
A voetstoots clause in your OTP does not override the MDF. If you knew about a defect and did not disclose it, voetstoots will not protect you.
Case Law — What Happens When Sellers Don't Disclose
Case Law
South African courts have consistently held that sellers who deliberately conceal defects forfeit the protection of a voetstoots clause. Two Supreme Court of Appeal decisions illustrate the consequences.
Odendaal v Ferraris (2009 (4) SA 313 (SCA)) — the seller failed to disclose water damage to outbuilding ceilings and a defective sewer manhole. The Supreme Court of Appeal held that the voetstoots clause was unenforceable because the seller had fraudulently concealed the defects. The seller knew about the problems and deliberately withheld the information from the buyer.
Banda v Van der Spuy (2013 (4) SA 77 (SCA)) — the property had a thatch roof that leaked persistently. The SCA found that the sellers were aware of the defects and had fraudulently concealed them, forfeiting voetstoots protection. This case is particularly instructive on the distinction between innocent non-disclosure (where the seller genuinely did not know) and deliberate concealment (where the seller knew but chose to remain silent).
The practical consequences for sellers who fail to disclose are severe: damages awards, potential rescission of the sale (the buyer can unwind the transaction), and significant litigation costs. In both cases above, the sellers would have been protected had they disclosed the defects upfront.
The legal principle
If you knew about a problem and deliberately hid it, a court will not let you hide behind a voetstoots clause. The MDF is your opportunity to disclose — and your protection if you do.
How Buyers Should Use the MDF
Using the MDF as a Buyer
The MDF is not just a formality — it is one of the most valuable documents a buyer receives before committing to a purchase. Used properly, it can save you from costly surprises.
Do not simply file the MDF away. Read it carefully before you sign the offer to purchase. Every item the seller has marked deserves your attention — and every item left blank or marked "don't know" is a potential risk you need to investigate independently.
Compare the MDF to what you observe. Walk the property with the disclosure form in hand. If the seller has marked "no" for damp but you can see water staining on the walls, that is a red flag that warrants further investigation — and potentially a renegotiation of the purchase price.
Ask follow-up questions about anything marked "yes" or "not sure." If the seller discloses that there was a roof leak that was repaired, ask when, by whom, and whether there is a guarantee. If alterations were made, ask whether the building plans were approved by the municipality.
Commission an independent building inspection for items the seller disclaims knowledge of. A professional inspection report is the buyer's best protection against latent defects that the seller claims not to have known about.
Your rights if the MDF is inaccurate after transfer: if you discover after transfer that the seller's disclosure was materially inaccurate, you may have a claim for damages (the actio quanti minoris) or, in cases of deliberate fraud, rescission of the sale. The MDF itself becomes key evidence — it shows what the seller represented in writing.
Common Disclosure Mistakes and How to Avoid Them
Most disclosure disputes arise not from deliberate fraud, but from carelessness. These are the five most common mistakes sellers make when completing the MDF — and each one can expose you to a claim. For additional pitfalls in private transactions, see our guide on common private sale mistakes.
Common Disclosure Mistakes to Avoid
- Leaving sections blank — a blank section is treated as non-disclosure, not "N/A." If a category does not apply to your property, mark it explicitly as "not applicable." Leaving it blank creates ambiguity that a court will interpret against you.
- Marking "don't know" for things the seller clearly should know — courts look at claims of ignorance sceptically, particularly where the defect is one the seller, as occupant of the property, would reasonably be expected to have noticed. A persistent roof leak or recurring damp is difficult to credibly claim ignorance of.
- Failing to disclose repairs — the fact that you fixed rising damp, patched a roof leak, or treated a termite infestation IS a material fact. A repair does not erase the defect from the record. Disclose the original problem and the repair.
- Not disclosing unapproved building plans or alterations — if you added a room, enclosed a patio, or built a boundary wall without approved plans, this must be disclosed. Unapproved structures are a significant risk factor for buyers and a common source of post-sale disputes.
- Omitting neighbourhood issues — known flooding in the area, persistent noise from nearby properties, planned road developments, or disputes with neighbours are all material facts. The MDF is not limited to the physical condition of the building itself.
If you are selling privately without an estate agent, these mistakes are even more consequential because there is no agent to check your work. For guidance on managing a private sale correctly, see our guide on private sale conveyancing in Pretoria.
Written by
Pretoria Transfer Guide
MJ Kotze Inc
Common questions
Frequently asked questions
R20,000 fixed fee conveyancing — no surprises
Most attorneys charge R35,000+ for a R2 million transfer. We charge R20,000, inclusive of VAT, no matter the purchase price.