In this dispossessory action, Abimbola Olubajo, acting pro se, appeals the trial court’s grant of a writ of possession in favor of Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (“Deutsche Bank”). Because Olubajo failed to file a transcript of the bench trial, we affirm.

Deutsche Bank instituted dispossessory proceedings against Olubajo, claiming that Olubajo was a tenant at sufferance after a foreclosure sale. Olubajo answered, claiming simply that the foreclosure sale was “wrongful.” Following a bench trial, the court issued a writ of possession in favor of Deutsche Bank.

On appeal, Olubajo makes various arguments based on factual issues that would require us to review the evidence submitted at trial.

[Olubajo], however, failed to file a transcript of the proceedings and apparently did not attempt to reconstruct the transcript as allowed by OCGA § 5-6-41 (g) and (i). When a transcript of the evidence is necessary, as it is here, and the appellant omits it from the record or fails to submit a statutorily authorized substitute, we must assume that the evidence supported the grant of a writ of possession. As the *155 appellant[, Olubajo] had the burden to affirmatively show error by the record. This [Olubajo] failed to do. Therefore, we must presume the trial court’s judgment granting [Deutsche Bank] a writ of possession is correct.

Harden v. Young. 1 See Simmons v. Sopramco III, LLC. 2

Judgment affirmed.