COL3704
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Unique Number:
Due Date: 9 September 2025
QUESTION 1
The response provided by Co-pilot is incomplete because it focuses narrowly on the case of
Kaknis v Absa Bank Ltd & Another while failing to link the discussion directly to the purposes
of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA). Although case law is important, the question
requires an evaluation of whether the stated purpose of the Act, as set out in section 3, is
being achieved. Section 31 sets out a broad framework which includes consumer protection,
responsible lending, transparency, fairness, and accessibility in the credit market. An
effective answer must therefore critically evaluate these stated goals against practice.
Section 3(a) highlights the promotion of a credit market that is accessible to all South
Africans, especially those historically excluded. This shows that the Act aims not only at
regulating lenders but also at correcting the past injustices of economic exclusion. Many
consumers, especially from disadvantaged communities, now have greater access to credit
under regulated conditions, which aligns with this purpose.1
Terms of use
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
QUESTION 1
The response provided by Co-pilot is incomplete because it focuses narrowly on the
case of Kaknis v Absa Bank Ltd & Another while failing to link the discussion directly
to the purposes of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA). Although case law is
important, the question requires an evaluation of whether the stated purpose of the
Act, as set out in section 3, is being achieved. Section 31 sets out a broad framework
which includes consumer protection, responsible lending, transparency, fairness,
and accessibility in the credit market. An effective answer must therefore critically
evaluate these stated goals against practice.
Section 3(a) highlights the promotion of a credit market that is accessible to all South
Africans, especially those historically excluded. This shows that the Act aims not only
at regulating lenders but also at correcting the past injustices of economic exclusion.
Many consumers, especially from disadvantaged communities, now have greater
access to credit under regulated conditions, which aligns with this purpose.2
Section 3(b) provides for consistent treatment of credit products and providers. This
creates certainty in the market and prevents unfair discrimination between
consumers and lenders. The Act further encourages responsible borrowing and
discourages reckless lending, which is critical in protecting consumers from over-
indebtedness.3 Co-pilot’s answer fails to acknowledge this balancing function, which
is central to the Act.
Section 3(d) stresses the promotion of equity by balancing the rights and
responsibilities of credit providers and consumers. This ensures that both parties act
responsibly in the credit relationship.4 Similarly, section 3(e) addresses power
imbalances through consumer education, disclosure of standardised information,
and protection against fraud or deception by credit providers.5 These mechanisms
are crucial to ensure informed decision-making by consumers, a key feature missing
in Co-pilot’s analysis.
1
National Credit Act 34 of 2005
2
Ibid, s 3(a).
3
Ibid, s 3(b).
4
Ibid, s 3(d).
5
Ibid, s 3(e). Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
Assignment 2 Semester 2 2025
Unique Number:
Due Date: 9 September 2025
QUESTION 1
The response provided by Co-pilot is incomplete because it focuses narrowly on the case of
Kaknis v Absa Bank Ltd & Another while failing to link the discussion directly to the purposes
of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA). Although case law is important, the question
requires an evaluation of whether the stated purpose of the Act, as set out in section 3, is
being achieved. Section 31 sets out a broad framework which includes consumer protection,
responsible lending, transparency, fairness, and accessibility in the credit market. An
effective answer must therefore critically evaluate these stated goals against practice.
Section 3(a) highlights the promotion of a credit market that is accessible to all South
Africans, especially those historically excluded. This shows that the Act aims not only at
regulating lenders but also at correcting the past injustices of economic exclusion. Many
consumers, especially from disadvantaged communities, now have greater access to credit
under regulated conditions, which aligns with this purpose.1
Terms of use
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document as a guide for learning, comparison and reference purpose,
Terms of use
Not to duplicate, reproduce and/or misrepresent the contents of this document as your own work,
By making use of this document you agree to:
Use this document
Fully accept the consequences
solely as a guide forshould you plagiarise
learning, reference,or and
misuse this document.
comparison purposes,
Ensure originality of your own work, and fully accept the consequences should you plagiarise or misuse this document.
Comply with all relevant standards, guidelines, regulations, and legislation governing academic and written work.
Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is" without any express or
implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or liability for any actions taken based on the
information contained within this document. This document is intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes.
Reproduction, resale, or transmission of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
, +27 67 171 1739
QUESTION 1
The response provided by Co-pilot is incomplete because it focuses narrowly on the
case of Kaknis v Absa Bank Ltd & Another while failing to link the discussion directly
to the purposes of the National Credit Act 34 of 2005 (NCA). Although case law is
important, the question requires an evaluation of whether the stated purpose of the
Act, as set out in section 3, is being achieved. Section 31 sets out a broad framework
which includes consumer protection, responsible lending, transparency, fairness,
and accessibility in the credit market. An effective answer must therefore critically
evaluate these stated goals against practice.
Section 3(a) highlights the promotion of a credit market that is accessible to all South
Africans, especially those historically excluded. This shows that the Act aims not only
at regulating lenders but also at correcting the past injustices of economic exclusion.
Many consumers, especially from disadvantaged communities, now have greater
access to credit under regulated conditions, which aligns with this purpose.2
Section 3(b) provides for consistent treatment of credit products and providers. This
creates certainty in the market and prevents unfair discrimination between
consumers and lenders. The Act further encourages responsible borrowing and
discourages reckless lending, which is critical in protecting consumers from over-
indebtedness.3 Co-pilot’s answer fails to acknowledge this balancing function, which
is central to the Act.
Section 3(d) stresses the promotion of equity by balancing the rights and
responsibilities of credit providers and consumers. This ensures that both parties act
responsibly in the credit relationship.4 Similarly, section 3(e) addresses power
imbalances through consumer education, disclosure of standardised information,
and protection against fraud or deception by credit providers.5 These mechanisms
are crucial to ensure informed decision-making by consumers, a key feature missing
in Co-pilot’s analysis.
1
National Credit Act 34 of 2005
2
Ibid, s 3(a).
3
Ibid, s 3(b).
4
Ibid, s 3(d).
5
Ibid, s 3(e). Disclaimer
Great care has been taken in the preparation of this document; however, the contents are provided "as is"
without any express or implied representations or warranties. The author accepts no responsibility or
liability for any actions taken based on the information contained within this document. This document is
intended solely for comparison, research, and reference purposes. Reproduction, resale, or transmission
of any part of this document, in any form or by any means, is strictly prohibited.
