Andrew's Life

Presented with the unpalatable decision

2012-02-08T11:04:00.000+13:00

Last week our lawyer's had a conference with the judge and the crown prosecution. We have now been provided with what the crown has interpreted as all of the evidence however due to the format and the nature of this information it is not a quick and easy process sorting it. The judge at this stage has refused our request to postpone the hearing so we can have time to look at it.

We have also received an indication from the crown that if I plead guilty to all charges from 2007 onward they will drop all charges against my wife.

Doing so will result in me loosing my job as well as accepting a conviction for something I strongly believe we did not do. on the other side of the coin if my wife and I are found guilty we will both loose our jobs.

given that we really don't have the resources and have not been afforded the same time as the crown to prepare and challenge the information with expert advice this puts us on the back foot.

This decision seems to be also causing some family issues and a rift is forming between my wife and I not for the fact that either one of us have done wrong but the fact that this would release us from a burden that has been hanging over our heads for well over a year now.

I guess we have to be thankful we are not in the shoes of Mr dotcom.

2011-12-21T12:58:00.000+13:00

We were in court a couple of weeks ago and finally it seemed that the Judge realized just how much of a crock this case is. The summary of accounts still had not been done and the index of evidence had not been received. In addition he asked the question as to How HNZ had laid the charges without having first done the summary of accounts and if they just laid the charges in the hope that we were going to plead guilty.

He made an order for the documents to be produced and stated that if these were not provided he would be open to a request from us to have the charges dismissed.

Today we had the a hearing to see if this had happened and, 2 days ago we received the summary of accounts however I have not yet seen them so have no idea what they/it is. In addition we have been informed that they can not provide the index of evidence as there is none. Now we have the summary of accounts we can move forward and have a forensic accountant look at the figures.

We asked for time to do this however the Judge stated that a fixture of 4 days has all ready been set and that this was not going to be changed. We have 2 months to deal with this and I am quite concerned that this will not be enough time. However from their summation in court the figures are pretty dismal.. Given that we know HNZ are trying to get a conviction their figures are going to be based in favor of a conviction. The prosecutor in summary told the judge that the income derived over this time was $43K. that's a combined income.... 3 kids, 2 adults. the figures my accountant has come up with differ from this greatly however even working on these figures and recalculating the income based on their figures their total claim is not correct.

We have also received a claim against us from Baycorp for 81K as HNZ have now lodged the debit regardless of the fact this has not been to court. Oh and yes the person who lodged the claim with baycorp was our wonderful ex tenancy manager who kicked this whole vexatious thing off Katrina O'Conner.

Drunk on power

2011-11-18T14:49:00.000+13:00

It just goes to show that all though we are comparing apples with houses the fact remains that when you give someone the power there is the chance they will abuse it as is our opinion that our old tenancy manager Katrina O'Conner has adopted a similar view and has not qualms about abusing the powers she has been entrusted with.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=VFygR_-wBsc

Baycorp

2011-11-15T10:50:00.000+13:00

Well we just received a call from Baycorp today. It appears that HNZ have lodged what they are claiming the income related debit is. and yes this was lodged by our then tenancy manager Katrina O'conner.

The matter has still not been to court.

I'm pretty sure this election year neither of the larger parties are getting my vote as both have made promises to look at this matter and neither have done anything about it.

So its now a Political Issue?

2011-08-04T21:36:00.000+12:00

You really have to wonder what politicians do to actually earn their money. Stating the obvious and making generalized statements seems to be the norm these days.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10742704

So OK, HNZ have busted some people but there are also a pile of people in those figures that are being victimized by the powers these guys are wielding. So when Phil and his cronies make erroneous accusations they should be open to prosecution.

But sadly this is not the case, they can make whatever claims they like and if they get it wrong they don't seem to even have to supply an apology or make amends.

I was shocked to see this.

2011-06-27T10:21:00.000+12:00

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/video/watch/25753816/

It seems to me that these guys just dont get it, It is all well and good for the haves to pass judgement on the havenot's and to try and shove people in to their own little category but that is not the way the real world works.

I do not deny there are some instances where people are abusing the system but from what we have seen and experanced there are more HNZ and SOE workers who are milking the government not to mention contractors who seem to be charging and putting in claims for work that either has not been done correctly or charges that have been balooned and are unreasonably excessive.

How about HNZ fix its internal strcuture first and make sure your staff adhere to the correct process and proceedure then look at your tennants. A problem exists and unless you deal with that problem at the core you are wasting time and valued resources not to mention putting the New Zealand people who you are supposed to be serving under undue stress.

And before any HNZ Associate or employee tries to take a swipe about unfounded allegations as I have previously stated I have evidence that shows your processes have not been followed on more than one account not to mention the other evidence where your staff have breached their duties and made false claim (including in court and while under oath).

Draging the chain

2011-06-15T10:15:00.000+12:00

On the 8th my wife and I appeared in court on the charges laid by HNZ however we were unable to proceed again as HNZ had again failed to supply full disclosure as well as a statement of claim, witness list and other relevant information pertaining to the case.

I am no lawyer but one would think that a statement of claim would have been prepared well before any charges were laid as is the case with any other court matter. and that all of the evidence would have been provided to the defence.

After speaking with our lawyers it appears they were pretty shocked as to the delays and reluctance to provide the required information. In the meantime we are struggling to bet by and are in essence being held ransom by the actions of this government agency and its staff.

HNZ and the Ministers Mandate

2011-04-17T13:20:00.000+12:00

So maybe someone can explain to me why an organisation has had a mandate set down by the crown but they can modify this mandate and create their own meaning, even worse the minister who is supposed to keep an eye on things can ignore the blatant disregard for what the crown has set down.

The crown formed HNZ and gave it the following functions.

Functions of Corporation

(1) The Corporation's principal function is to achieve its objectives.
(2) The Corporation's functions include—
- (a) providing rental housing, principally for those who need it most:
- (b) providing appropriate accommodation, including housing, for community organisations (in particular for community organisations that provide residential support services for people with special needs):
- (c) lending for housing purposes, and providing other help relating to housing:
- (d) giving people (in particular people on low or modest incomes who wish to own their own homes) help and advice on matters relating to housing or services related to housing:
- (e) undertaking housing and other development and renewal, whether on its own account or on behalf of other persons:
- (f) acquiring and developing land for housing or other development and renewal, whether by—
  - (i) providing housing amenities, facilities, services, or works; or
  - (ii) providing commercial or industrial amenities, facilities, services, or works; or
  - (iii) providing related amenities, facilities, services, or works; or
  - (iv) doing any other thing:
- (g) selling, leasing, disposing of, managing, or otherwise dealing with land, whether in the course of housing or other development and renewal or otherwise:
- (h) providing housing or services related to housing as agent for departments of State or Crown entities:
- (i) taking action, in relation to or in connection with the provision of housing or services related to housing, provided for in—
  - (i) the Corporation's current statement of intent; or
  - (ii) a notice or agreement under section 20; or
  - (iii) a plan under section 20A:
- (j) conducting research into, and monitoring trends in, housing and services related to housing:
- (k) advising the Minister of Housing on housing and services related to housing:
- (l) any other functions conferred on it by this Act or any other enactment.
(3) In performing any of its functions, the Corporation may consult any person or organisation whose views or knowledge it believes will enhance its performance of the function.
(4) Subsection (2) does not limit subsection (1).
Section 18 was substituted, as from 1 July 2001, by section 7 Housing Corporation Amendment Act 2001 (2001 No 37).

And on the HNZ website we find this:

The Corporation's formal mandate The Corporation is a Crown entity. The Housing Corporation Act 1974 sets out the Corporation's objectives and functions as follows⁸:

to give effect to the Crown's social objectives by providing housing, and services related to housing, in a businesslike manner, and to that end to be an organisation that:
1. exhibits a sense of social responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which it operates; and
2. exhibits a sense of environmental responsibility by having regard to the environmental implications of its operations; and
3. operates with good financial oversight and stewardship, and efficiently and effectively manages its assets and liabilities and the Crown's investment; and
to ensure that the Minister of Housing receives appropriate policy advice, other advice, and information, on housing and services related to housing

I can see how some of this can be interpreted and the act could be elaborated on, but then we see statements from both the Minister and HNZ claiming they are just acting as a landlord.
A clear case of this is the statement in the following article.
http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10719873&ref=rss

The case has been described as illustrating Housing New Zealand's new direction - a focus on managing houses rather than housing people.
But Minister Phil Heatley has demanded it is to"get back to core business which is tenancy management".

Is Mr Heatly really that far out of touch or has he just not read the act? Or is my interpretation flawed.
And now we also see that Government is also trying to sneak in an amendment to the legislation and, although it is online, I have not seen any other publicity about it and it is going to affect a lot of people.

In the case the herald has reported on it appears their reason for evicting the tenant was that he supposedly assaulted a neighbour. The question I have to ask is were criminal charges laid and pursued, and if not their actions are unreasonable. We have had something similar in our case where we have been evicted before prosecuted and given that HNZ were the ones who laid the charges in the first place and only follow a complaint we made to the tenancy tribunal and minister are really nothing more that an attempt to cause our family more stress.

The crown really needs to look in to how this organisation is conducting itself as it is causing more problems than it is fixing. It seems to be a haven for the power hungry who enjoy abusing their position and pushing people about.

Court Proceedings

2011-03-22T14:45:00.000+13:00

Yesterday my wife and I were in court regarding our appeal on the Adjudicators ruling that resulted in HNZ not having to pay for repairs we had done to the house, causing damage to our property and in our view misleading the adjudicator.

Given that HNZ have laid criminal charges against us we felt that as there is evidence that would be beneficial to us in the criminal matter rather than bringing this information to light in the civil matter we would vacate these proceedings and deal with it at a later date once the criminal matters are resolved.

The Judged hit us for $300.00 costs and had we known that we would be liable for costs we would not have done this however as we have tried to get legal assistance and to date not been able to we were none the wiser.

However while waiting out side the court rooms our ex tenancy manager meet with another person who I believe to be a tenancy manager from another region. They proceeded to discuss the cases they were working on including various matters that were completely unrelated to this appearance such as what my wife and I believe was information about our criminal case. Keep in mind that this discussion is going on within a public area and at one stage was taken out side in the courtyard.

From their conversation I was able to ascertain that the other tenancy manager was there for one of her tenants. I later managed to catch up with this tenant and had a discussion with them about their case. I found there to be quite a number of similarities in the way our cases had been handled and the attitude of HNZ to run in guns blazing as I feel they have done in our case with little regard for the facts or the procedure that has been set down for them to follow.

Unfortunately the lady we meet with has not been able to get legal representation to assist her and has also been evicted from her house. I do not know the full story behind her case and have my own problems to deal with but there was enough there to reinforce the view I currently hold of HNZ and their so called procedure.

I have spoken to the office of the Privacy Commissioner and have confirmed with them that the conversation that took place outside of the court rooms may be another breach in the privacy act but given that HNZ has not been held accountable for their previous breach I wonder if its even worth wasting my time and making another complaint.

Victimised

2011-03-14T09:51:00.000+13:00

Late last week we received a letter from HNZ claiming an income related rent debit of around $81k, it is quite clear that this is contestable and is directly related to the criminal matter before the courts at the moment however HNZ have made a demand for this money and haev further thretend legal action and state that this will impact on our credit rating.

The letter was sent to our new address after being forced in to having to release thiese details to HNZ by the tennancey tribunal when a previous adjudicator had supressed these details due to our concern for reprisal.

This weeken and allmost imediatly after receiving the letter some thugs smashed up our mail box in the middle of the night, I chased them up the road but it appears they had a car waiting for them. I should not be surprised by this as it is prety clear that our old tennancey manager has it in for us given the statements that we have read in the HNZ documentation and the lies that have been told by her in court.

Some may say that Im just being paraniod and this could be the case but on the entire street our letter box was the only one smashed and the fact a car seemed to be waiting up the road seems to me to be very strange.

It also was not an attack on the previous residence of this place as they were hear for quite a number of years and as luck would have it after moving in we found out we found out that I knew them for years before the move via another associate.

Who not to vote for

2011-02-14T14:42:00.001+13:00

Well after our dealings with government its pretty easy to make this decision, our local candidate is Jame-Lee Ross and last week my wife and I had the opportunity to have a brief encounter with him. He was on the street campaigning with Hon Maurice Williamson who we have also had discussions with about our HNZ issues and who undertook to assist us giving me his guarantees however shortly after his involvement we were hit with the investigation and eviction.

We put several questions to Mr Ross and to be honest he was pretty shifty then stated we could speak to him later when he was elected and had the power to do something.

Now I have lived in this area for most of my life and have never really followed the local politics other than had a few aquantances who have been involved over the years but all i can say is Why on Earth would we elect people who have no idea as to what it is like to be an average Kiwi?

My wifes first comment when we meet Mr Lee was that he came across as a silver spoon boy and a quick review of his acheivments as well as schooling seems to confirm these views. Holds a Pilots Licence, Went to Dilworth School...

Someone needs to make a rule that before you are allowed to represent New Zealand and its people you need to have at the very least rubbed shoulders with us and know what its like to be an average joe.

Who will we vote for? as yet I have not seen anyone who in our view would be suitable however so far the only people who have actually taken the time to review our situation and to even visit and make comment on the substandard house we were being forced to live in were Labour candidates.
In addition the only peope who seem to be asking and answering some of the hard questions again are Labour Candidiates.

An email that was sent to several National MP's seems to have just been ignored and a previous query to nationals minister of housing came back pretty much stating that he had spoken to HNZ and was happy with their response to questions regardless of us having provided evidence showing that their response was full of lies.

NOTE: I stand corrected. Dilworth is apparently not a silverspoon school and from what has been pointed out things have changed a lot over the years. Now apparently you have to come from a broken family or come from "struggle street" to attend.

Equal Opportunities

2011-02-13T11:58:00.000+13:00

Well there has been a few developments of late, however until we get to court I am a little reluctant to release some of the info as, although it's likely to be pretty embarrassing to HNZ I would rather not release it for HNZ to cook up an excuse for their actions.

However something that may interest the public is that it is a well known fact that we had tried to build a small business in order to try and get ourselves out of the hole we were in and into a self sufficient situation and that, as a result of a large council reneging on an agreement, we were left with a business that was not viable and was only just covering its costs.

We have also bore the brunt of some abusive trollers via this blog and been accused of all sorts of things, however the fact remains that out family is not well of and we are not making ends meet as we had hoped to after moving out of the substandard accomidation we've had, for the last 10 years, been forced to live in.

After we moved out, however, it appears that HNZ have now repaired the various issues we complained about and put a nice family into the house. They own a really flash late model holden and an exceptionally flash Harley Davidson.

Meanwhile we struggle to keep out heads above water. It looks like the boys will have to give up scouts as we are having problems even getting together enough money for their school stationary let alone other bills. Some may say how about getting child support and the other assistance, however have you ever tried getting this assistance when your already on the end of a government agenceis big stick.

Letter from Director of Government Relations Housing New Zealand

2011-01-27T15:51:00.000+13:00

I will comment in line on these matters as that way it will keep things to the point and clearly categorised.

27 January 2011
Dear Mr Hooper

Thank you for your email of31 December2010toDrLesleyMcTurk,Chief Executive of

Housing New Zealand Corporation, about issues relating to the termination of your

tenancy at 353 Bucklands Beach Road, Bucklands Beach. Dr McTurk has asked me to

reply to your email, and I have looked into the matters that you raise.

In your email you say that Corporation staff have lied under oath, and that your tenancy

was terminated on the basis of incorrect information. However, I have looked into your

allegations and have found no evidence to support them. The Corporation made the

decision to end your tenancy and commence criminal proceedings after an investigation

found that you had failed to declare the true extent of your income while claiming an

You claim to have investigated however you have not contacted our accountants to ascertain what the correct figures were, You have not contacted witnesses who will testify that the damage you claim was done to the house existed prior to us moving in and you have not contacted us to ascertain what parts of the court transcripts show that your staff lied. It seems to me that looking in to the matter was nothing more than asking your own staff internally so therefore it could hardly be seen as unbias and fair.

In New Zealand we follow the Napoleonic Code and more importantly the Code of Criminal Instruction to which a person is presumed innocent until found guilty by a court of law however it appears that not just in our case but others Housing New Zealand feels they have the power to be Judge Jury and Executioner based on whatever information they feel like and without ensuring the correctness of that information.

In your email you also say that Corporation staff have breached the Privacy Act by

refusing to supply you with information that you requested about your tenancy. I

understand that you were provided with this information on 20 January 2011. It may be

helpful if I explain that your original request of 3 November 2010 was understood to be a

request for disclosure under the Criminal Disclosure Act, and was met on 9 November

This to me sounds more like an excuse than anything else, regardless of what we were asking for there is no reason HNZ had to withhold our tenancy information and even to this day they have failed to provide all of this information. Again this is not an isolated incident and we are well aware of others being refused their information.

You also say that the Corporation has charged you for the cost of repairing damage and removing rubbish that you are not responsible for. I can confirm, however, that the charges of $1,430.29 relate only to the cost of repairing damage and removing rubbish relating to the period of your tenancy. This work was required to bring the property to an acceptable standard for re-Ietting. Corporation records show that the property was tidy and in good condition before your tenancy commenced in November 2000.

If these records you claim show the property was tidy and in good condition when it was let are in existence then why have they not been supplied to us as per the request for information under the privacy act? further it is quite clear that the windows you have replaced were all broken when we moved in as I had to repair them myself and covered them over with lexan. This was brought up with our tenancy manager when we first moved in.

Finally, you say in your email that the Corporation has not resolved the problem with water ponding under the house, and has not repaired the remaining defects in the window frames. You may be interested to know that this work has been completed.

This may be the case now but given that while we were in the house the problems were not resolved and given that the photos we have are clearly dated as well as independent witnesses viewed the flooding after the work was completed brings in to question your organisations integrity.

I trust that this information is helpful to you. If you have any further concerns, I invite you to contact Peter Lauina, Housing Services Manager at the Otahuhu Neighbourhood Unit, on (09) 261 5502.

I think any contact would be a waste of time and given that HNZ have failed to communicate as per their customer promise as well as remedy the damage to my property caused by your contractors it is prety clear where your organisation sits.

Privacey Matters

2011-01-26T22:14:00.000+13:00

Finally HNZ have released some of the information under the privacy act regarding our tenancy and I say some as there is a lot of information that has been withheld, the fact that some of the information provided actually refers to other information that has not been provided makes it pretty clear that Housing New Zealand is not playing by the rules.

We allready have a complaint in with the Privacy Commissioner and they are investigating this matter along with Housing New Zealands claims that they do not have to provide this information under the criminal disclosure act.

Fact is that disclosure is disclosure and I'm pretty sure this act is not a mechanism to be abused by government organisation so as to allow them to refuse to make available information that could paint them in a bad light. Such actions are really just an abuse of power and process.

Also keep in mind that the criminal matters are based on our alleged failure to provide HNZ with our earnings details and as such according to HNZ obtained lower rent based on the rental assessment. This matter has nothing to do with out tenancy and HNZ's investigations team have reiterated this fact several times so there for information regarding our tenancy should be available.

When discussing the matter with the office of the privacy commissioner I asked them how would they know if HNZ was with holding information and they informed me they rely on HNZ's honesty.

Damage to your home - paying for repairs

2010-12-21T11:44:00.000+13:00

On the 20^th December 2010 we received a letter from Housing New Zealand claiming we had damaged the property and informing us that we had to pay $1430.29 by the 24^th December. Clearly this is an early Christmas present from the government department to cap off the other vexatious actions they are taking.

When we moved in to the house some 10 years ago the house was not exactly in tiptop condition and, given our circumstances, was our only option so we accepted it. We had a reasonable relationship with our tenancy manager and over time some problems were resolved. As would be the case with any tenancy or landlord we liaised with him and sought his permission before doing anything to or in the house.

Housing New Zealand however has continued with their relentless persecution of our family in what appears to be a common practice to extort money from those in need. There seems to be a great lack of checks and balances to ensure fairness and equality and little interest in sticking to their charter and customer promise let alone the enactments of government put in place to protect tenants.

At this stage I am hesitant to comment on a completely itemised list of what they are claiming and as to the evidence we have that rebuts their claim due to the fact we have not decided as to what action we need to take to deal with this albeit via the tenancy tribunal, district court or government ombudsman and if criminal charges will be laid against them.

I am also mindful that Housing New Zealand as we have seen are a large government sanctioned organisation and that they have an endless budget and resources to throw at people as they have been doing to us to make people’s lives a living hell.

To give you an idea as to the pettiness of the matter in, Bucklands Beach we use recycle bins and these are collected every 2^nd Thursday. We moved out a week prior to the collection, and all that was required was on the Thursday after the next, the bin needed to be put on the side of the road for collection. HNZ charged us for the removal of this as well as the removal of bricks and other things that were at the property when we moved in.

These actions pretty clearly support my claims that Housing New Zealand have been using their position to victimise our family and relentlessly cause us as much grief as they can and regardless of the fact that we were forced to move out due to Housing New Zealand not adhering to the work order set by the tenancy tribunal and purposely misleading the courts and the tribunal.

And what does the government have to say about this? Well at present the only thing we have been told is that this is an operational matter with Housing New Zealand.

Due Process

2010-12-13T10:45:00.001+13:00

Over the weekend we were going over some of the information HNZ have provided and the information provided is definitely not full disclosure, but then this really comes as no surprise.

But while going over these details I re-read our legal aid application and it struck me that the system is clearly broken.

HNZ have a full time investigations team working to rake up any and all information and prepare a case that is then handed over to the crown. This investigative process, as we have been told, is extremely thorough and leaves no stone unturned, and has the backing of legislation so as to ensure all information is available to it.
The costs involved in running such a team must be huge and having a dedicated investigator work on a specific case for several months would not be cheap.

Then the report is prepared and HNZ have a meeting with the crown prosecutors office who seem to have an unlimited budget and can afford to call whatever experts they choose in to give opinion as well as continue the investigative process to prove your guilt.

Now someone who is on a low income such as us really only have Legal Aid to assist us and unlike the crown these guys draw a line in the sand only allocating a specific amount of hours to the lawyer to work on the case and only providing a certain amount of money to lodge a defense.

So you have a machine with an endless budget and unlimited funds going up against someone who has very limited resources, and people expect that person to be able to prove their innocence as this definitely seems to be the case these days because, without proving their case, HNZ have invoiced us for what they believe is the shortfall in rent, revoked our rental assessment and evicted us.

In addition to this the Prosecution seems to be able to pick and choose what it supplies as evidence and not have to hand up the details, warts and all. In a way I would say this is customizing the evidence to meet the allegation's.

Acceptable by Housing New Zealand Standards

2010-12-09T08:46:00.001+13:00

Yesterday I drove past the old place and spotted from the street that the wall paper has now been stripped from the walls. This is the same wallpaper that HNZ stated that was acceptable by HNZ standards.

Speaking with our next door neighbor he said that some woman from HNZ had been over and asked them to keep an eye on the place over Christmas as it was likely they would not be able to get anyone in there until the new year.
She further stated that if any vehicle was seen on the property he was to immediately call the police.

HNZ Staff not being treated with respect?

2010-12-02T00:35:00.001+13:00

Well how can HNZ staff expect to be treated with respect when they don't treat their tenants with respect. I am in two minds after reading this article outlining that HNZ has used "Bully Boy Tactics" on its staff but given that their staff have treated us in a less than reasonable manner over the years it comes as no surprise.

If the organisation is so inept then why are they not being held accountable to the public and why are they being given so many powers when it is very clear that these powers are often being misused,

http://msn.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10691378&ref=rss

This organisation seems to have forgotten what it was set up for and is being run by what I can only describe as power hungry little Hitlers. Yes HNZ I do know you are regularly checking these blogs and you did hear me right. It may also interest you to know there is a lot of international interest in the blog as well as many New Zealanders.

Long Term Mould Problems

2010-11-26T11:19:00.000+13:00

I have stated before in the blog that I suffer from depression and various other health issues and its all very well going to the doctor to get poked and prodded however there is only so much a doctor can do and test for.

Prior to moving in to the HNZ house we know for a fact that I did not suffer from depression or many of these other issues some of which have not been able to be checked out as I can not afford to run to the doctor every day.

During our 10 year stay in the HNZ house we know that I have been diagnosed with chronic depression, have had repetitive nose bleeds usually in the morning, fungal infections and man many other issues.

There now seems to be pretty conclusive evidence that mould can cause depression and many other problems. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070829162815.htm

The above link is only one of the many web sites that state this however even our own OSH documentation seems to back this up.

HNZ were alerted for these issues years ago but did nothing and from the information I have found it seems that the damage caused is not reversible. Thanks HNZ.

Handed over the keys

2010-11-23T16:11:00.000+13:00

We handed the keys to John Heaton who is the HNZ tenancy manager assigned by HNZ to work with us on the handover. While there he was taking photos of pretty much every scratch spot and pinprick so i suspect that although we had moved in the house some 10 years ago and the house was not in great condition when we moved in with windows broken, wall paper torn and other issues we aer going to get blamed for these issues.

But its great to finally be in a house that does not have these problems and is not so full of mould it causes health problems.

While we were doing the walk around I did capture some video of John opening the cupboards that were not repaired correctly and fell off after HNZ replaced them. as well as a few interesting comments regarding the state of the mould and paint that was flaking off the ceiling and other issues such as the rotten window frames that the tenancy tribunal stated should have been repaired in their order to HNZ.

A visit from David Collings

2010-11-22T22:21:00.000+13:00

Tonight I meet with David Collings at our old Bucklands Beach Road residence as we will be handing the keys over to Housing New Zealand tomorrow at 2PM and will no longer have access to the place.

I contacted Mr Collings as we felt that its all very well having Photos of the mould and various problems within the house that we have been living with for the 10 years we have been there but these do not describe dampness and smell in the house caused by the mould.

Mr Collings has agreed to be witness to the smell and other problems encountered and his testimony will only go to further solidify our claims that we were being forced to live in a sub standard house with little regard for our health and the safety of our children.

It is clear the Housing New Zealand believe that this house is according to them acceptable however I can guarantee that they will completely revamp it before it is given to any one else.

I am still very concerned as to what the long term exposure to the mould spores and the toxins in the house are going to be on both myself and my family and given that I was suffering from nose bleeds every morning however after having left have not had one instance its pretty clear that something nasty has been going on.

I am still finding myself short of breath but hope that over time this will get better.

Mould is Mould

2010-11-16T17:03:00.001+13:00

I think it is pretty clear that the HNZ house we have been living in has quite a bit of mould that has been caused by the flooding under the house creating a damp environment. The mould is not just on the walls and ceiling but is also in the new underfloor insulation recently installed.

Now I was under the impression that i only had to worry if the mould was Stachybotrys but it turns out that this is not the case and that I had been feed a bit of a red hearing. Mould is Mould and although Stachybotrys produce toxic compounds all moulds should be treated the same according to OSH, and from the CDC's website in the US its pretty clear that any mould can pose a health risk.

http://www.level.org.nz/health-and-safety/mould/
http://www.cdc.gov/mold/stachy.htm#Q7

While living in this house every morning I would wake with a blood nose, problems breathing and quite often it would feel like I was breathing with a plastic bag over my head and something sitting on my chest. I would often after waking be pretty lethargic and my motivation over the last 3 years had pretty much vanished. In addition to all this I was diagnosed with a Petty high level of depression.

Now according to Housing New Zealand this house is acceptable to them.

Its only been a week in the new place we have moved to and I have not had one blood nose other than the first night here and not had one headache. I am hoping that breathing gets a little better and some of the other issues sort themselves out in the near future.

I will be sure to take some recent photos of the mould and publish these before we hand over the house.

Moving House

2010-11-10T08:30:00.000+13:00

We have almost finished moving from the HNZ house to our private rental, finally by daily blood noses and headache seem to have stopped and there seems to be a dramatic improvement to the rest of the family even over such a short time. No more coughing and spluttering during the night. With all the furniture moved out its possible to see what we have been living with. Deep in the carpet is a white fungal growth under our bed in the master bedroom. The walls behind the furniture have quite a bit of mould on them and there is a distinctive damp smell in the house that was being absorbed by our clothing and furniture but how has nowhere to go and just lingers.

I invite anyone who is interested in seeing the condition of the house to contact me for a viewing, I have a journalist from a news paper meeting me at the house on Thursday evening however we will more than likely retain access to the house up until mid next week as there is some work to do outside with tidying up what we were told could not be stored under the house and disassembling the work bench and shelving in the garage.

It should be kept in mind that according the HNZ this house is fine given the age and character and our continued requests to get these matters resolved over 7 or so years were pretty much ignored. One of my only concerns at this stage however is what the long term health effect are going to be.

In order to gain access and look for yourself fire me a text to 021 212-9200 or phone me.

1st Call in District Court over Tennancey Matterrs

2010-11-09T13:23:00.000+13:00

We have filed an application in the tenancy tribunal to have the matters reheard and have obtained the transcripts from the tribunal hearing. The rehearing will take place some time next year in the District Court.

While in court I requested that the Judge make a ruling that HNZ has to hand over all the documents as requested under the privacy act however she stated that this was not within her powers and I would have to ask HNZ's lawyer for this.

Now keep in mind that our request for this information predates any action being taken by HNZ and that under the privacy act HNZ have to supply this to us. However their lawyer has refused this request stating that as HNZ have laid a criminal complaint they will not hand over the information at this stage.

At least someone gets it

2010-11-08T10:16:00.000+13:00

The new manager of Panmure branch so far seems to understand the problems and situation, I feel somewhat sorry for him as its pretty clear he has been dropped in the deep end and inherited a mess from his predecessor.

We had a short meeting with him last week and discussed moving out as well as several other matters including the new toilet that was installed by us. We have given HNZ the opportunity to reimburse us for half of this otherwise we would remove this.

Peter informed us at the time that after looking at our rental statement he believed we were in rental arrears and said that any reimbursement would be put toward any arrears. We agreed to this and he went away to look in to the matter.

On Saturday I received an Email from him stating that he had examined out rental account and we were in fact in credit for quite a reasonable amount and that although they would not change their position on the reimbursement for the toilet he offered to credit our account for an additional $200.00 as a token of good faith.

Tomorrow being the 9th November we have our first hearing in the district court over HNZ's breaches in the tenancy act and our other claims and given that HNZ have refused to provide information under the privacy act that would have been used to solidify the facts in court.

HNZ seem to think they are above the law

2010-10-22T22:51:00.000+13:00

On the 8th September 2010 I requested a copy of all information HNZ have on file about me/us under the Privacy Act 1993, The request had to be either fulfilled or reasons why the information was not going to be supplied had to be outlined within 21 working days.

After this time on the 6th October 2010 I contacted HNZ's privacy officer Karaka Tuhakaraina who stated he would look in to the matter.

The reason we need this information is that we are due in court 9th of November 2010 regarding HNZ's breach in the tenancy act and the appeal process.

Today being the 22 October 2010 we received a letter from Karaka Tuhakaraina denying us this information under section 29 (ia) of The Privacy Act 1993.

(ia) the request is made by a defendant or a defendant's agent and is

(i) for information that could be sought by the defendant under the Criminal Disclosure Act 2008; or
(ii) for information that could be sought by the defendant under that Act and that has been disclosed to, or withheld from, the defendant under that Act;

It should be noted that HNZ only filed their claim on the 4th October 2010 and from memory we were not served with any proceedings until the 7th October 2010 (actually this is the date on the video when I recorded both Debbie and I being served).

Now I am not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure that retrospectively denying access to information is a little unfair and given that we will not have this information for our hearing against HNZ on the 9th of November really goes to show what dirty tricks these guys are playing.

HNZ Boasting over 100 cases before the courts

2010-10-21T10:47:00.000+13:00

A colleague of mine has watched the events unfold and had been contacted by investigators. He was a little alarmed given the comments of the investigator that seemed to him to be somewhat inappropriate given the situation. Out of concern he contacted HNZ investigation team and asked them a few questions but found himself dealing with overly paranoid people who were not very helpful at all. The manager kept stating the phone was quite hollow and that he thought the conversation was being recorded but the fact that my colleague was calling from a cell phone would have been the reason for this quality of the call. It was clear to my collegue that with the level of paranoia displayed they seemed to have something to hide.

The manager was also asked in relation to their investigations "Have you ever got it wrong" to which after a long period of silence he asked if that was a question. My colleague then said of course and its a fair question but the investigations manager refused to answer.

A recent publication put our by HNZ called Close to Home dated September 2010 has HNZ posting they have freed up 114 homes for needy families and indicating that there are over 100 cases before the courts. Given the actions that have been taken against us and the fact that we have never been given the opportunity to review any evidence, it appears to me that quite a number of them are likely to be an abuse of process. Given the fact that it appears tenants have no rights as well as many people who are in a position such as ours would be on very low income, this makes proving your innocence pretty darn awkward.

In New Zealand you are supposed to be Innocent until Proven Guilty and the benefit of the doubt must always go to the accused however HNZ do not seem to hold the same views. They act by throwing all they can at you then you and don't even provide the information to you that would allow you to challenge their findings.

Based on what is clearly an erroneous investigations we have been evicted, had our rental assessment revoked and backdated resulting in us owing HNZ a considerable amount over the last 7 or so years and are facing criminal charges. All this has happened before there have been any checks done on the information and before it gets heard by an impartial authority.

Housing New Zealands Customer Promise

2010-10-17T10:07:00.000+13:00

Last week we received a glossy printed 12 page news letter from HNZ called Close To Home, this was Issue 27 September 2010. On page 7 I found two articles that were somewhat related to our situation the first being information about their Customer Promise.

The document is and Information Copyright Housing New Zealand Corporation 2010 and I have included the relevant extracts as reference material.

It is all very well HNZ making a customer promise but when this promise is breached who is held accountable. In our situation it is clear that this promise has been breached by Housing New Zealand on not just one account but all of them.

be honest fair and objective.Clearly this is not the case in relation to our requests for repairs of the retaliatory nature of the events after we were forced to take action via Tenancy Services. Further by their own statements they have used the GROSS TURNOVER of the business and assessed that as by income not taking in to account the operational expenses and have at no stage provided us with either any reports or fulfilled their obligations under the privacy act.
have the right skills and knowledge.This applies to more than one issue and the fact that we have for 7 years been trying to get HNZ to repair various house related problems and that there is the continuous growth of rot and black mold in the house shows that the skill set required to resolve these problems are not there. Further the contractors who were to repair the issues have taken shortcuts or not been able to complete the repairs due to their lack of skills.
do what we say we will do.
In court HNZ stated that all exterior walls in the bedrooms were going to be relined and insulation was going to be inserted, they have since decided not to do this. Further for 7 years we have been informed that the repair work of the flooding under the house was a priority and it still has not been repaired. Granted they did finally replace the cupboards in the kitchen but the fact that they are falling off the hinges and have not fixed them only goes to further show the lack of skill involved with their contractors.
listen and understand your individual circumstances.We have had several meeting with HNZ and highlighted the fact that the community wireless network is struggling after any hope of funding was pulled and that the income only just coves the expenses. The fact the network is still in place is only because I do not have the heart to pull the plug on the only form of broadband in the area and send them all back to dial up.
If we were bringing in the money that is being claimed I can tell you now that my wife would not be working insane hours for minimum wage.
Further they did not seem to care about the dangers of their repairs or damage that was caused by their contractors to our car.

When we moved in to the house there was ample storage under the house but were told to move our stuff our from under the house so the flooding could be repaired and not given any alternative for storage. The attempt to repair the flooding was done from outside the house not under it.
provide you with the right information at the right time.Only 2 to 3 years ago we were investigated by HNZ and i provided information to HNZ's investigator regarding the network and our situation. Surely if there was an issue or a perceived issue this would have been up to the investigator to inform us. Our circumstance have not really changed since then.
make it easy for you to communicate with us.Communications are a two way street, We have contacted HNZ many times and been promised that they would call us back with a resolution but we never received a call back and the matter just got ignored. I even have recorded conversations with the Panmure manager stating he would call me back over the damage and theft of property by their contractors but he failed to call back with a resolution.

I do understand that we have responsibilities as well and so as to be fair I will also publish these regardless of the fact that HNZ have laid criminal complaints against us.

provide us with the right information at the right time.We have always provided relevant information to HNZ and contrary to their claims have informed them about the business. When the fence was damaged by us accidentally reversing in to it we provided the relevant insurance details however HNZ chose to ignore this and demand that we pay for this ourselves.
keep any agreement with us.We have allowed access whenever it was requested and contrary to their claims have never denied access for anting that was pre arranged. Recently HNZ claimed we had done so (again) but it turns out that our tenancy manager sent us a letter with the wrong date listed. An earlier claim was refuted by the builder who was supposed to have been denied access.
tell us if your situation changes.HNZ have allways known that the network existed and it was with their blessing that part of the business was situated here. Allthough slightly out of my field I had helped a previous tennancey manager with his computer problems.
treat us like you like to be treated.We have always treated and welcomed HNZ however as observed by independent witnesses during some interaction with both our tenancy manager and her boss it was stated by the independents on two separate occasions that they seem to have it in for us. I suffer from chronic depression and their actions have only ever been confrontational and abusive.

On the same page as this there is also an article about 114 needy families housed claiming there are over 100 cases of tenant dishonesty before the courts. I will post about this in my next blog as its OK for a large government organisation with an unlimited budget to make claims against people who are just trying to make ends meet but the fact is that in their investigations HNZ seem to be ignoring their own responsibility and victimising people.

More Flooding under the house

2010-10-13T11:12:00.008+13:00

As HNZ have evicted us this is not going to be our problem for much longer but even after 7 years and despite us paying for an independent expert to take a look at the problem HNZ and the courts ordering HNZ to fix the problem they have still failed to do so.

Last night it rained and although it sounded pretty heavy this morning I took a look at one of the local weather sites. I have also put a call in to NIWA so as to get the official records.

The second to last photo shows the water is nearly 20mm deep.

In the last photo the orange paint was put there by the builders who came in to put some cement around the foundations as water had been tracking under them. The area to the right had been excavated and used to fill up with water so HNZ told the builders to just fill it with dirt. You can see that the dirt is becoming pretty damp and the discolouration of the paint is being caused by the water underneath.

Simplified Events

2010-10-12T06:35:00.000+13:00

I have received quite a number of comments from people who are a little confused about the situation so have decided to simplify and clarify what is going on. Dates unfortunately are to the best of my recollection as we did not keep records of these events and HNZ have not provided us a copy of our file so we can state an accurate timeline. I asked for this file over 4 weeks ago under the official information act but still nothing is being released to us not even the investigators report. So much for open and transparent government information even when it pertains to our own housing records that by the way is being used against us to evict us.

Some time around 2000/2001 Debbie, Myself and our two boys aged 8yrs and 3yrs were renting a very nice place in Pakuranga however for the safety of our sons we had to move quickly as as the neighbour was going to court over serious charges that unfortunately we did not want to be anywhere near. It was a reluctant move as we had been there for about 3 years.

We were put into emergency accommodation by Raymond Fitsmanu from Housing New Zealand and over the next few years we had a great relationship as our Tenancy Manager, Raymond was aware that I was working from home and even had me help him out with computer problems. It’s a pity no one from Housing NZ nor its investigative team has been able to locate nor talk to Raymond. Which is very useful in their current persecution of the our family. Its interesting the the HNZ investigative team states they have the powers to find all sorts of things but cannot find a ex HNZ employee of <6 years ago. Obviously just not in the brief to persecute and get our family out of this HNZ house.

The first winter after moving in 10 years ago in we found there were several flooding issues which were mostly resolved by Raymond and HNZ, however the persistent flooding under the house was never resolved. The house continued to have considerable mould growth appearing on the inside and outside walls and ceiling of the house. Inside the house was always damp despite us using a heater and burning a considerable amount of power trying to keep the place warm.

At this stage I was not working full time and the income from my radio networks and online business was rather sporadic, thus I volunteered some of my time to community organisations and new business indicatives for building community broadband in the under served communities of Tokaroa and Auckland areas.
Anyone will tell you I am a computer / radio techhead hence not all of my time was charged for and I will always admit that I am not all about commercial gain verses doing what others cannot because I could which isn’t always good for direct commercial results or record keeping. We have always helped others regardless our situation and around 2004 we helped a family get out their feet who had some over from South Africa and ended up with no where to stay. We managed to get a caravan down the back yard for the family of four where they stayed for about a month while they got on their feet.

In 2003/2004 I approached Raymond our HNZ Tenancy manager and explained to him how I wanted to try and build a community wireless broadband network in the area and had his permission to erect an 11m mast on the property that became the foundation for the community wireless network and the development of a unique communications system. HNZ are now prosecuting our family for running this business form the property.

This was reported by the Herald.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/telecommunications/news/article.cfm?c_id=93&objectid=3556244

HNZ was all good until Raymond left HNZ Panmure and went to work at another HNZ office and subsequently left HNZ around 2007/2008.
At this stage the new HNZ tenancy manager ordered us to remove the 11mtr mast claiming we did not have permission to put it there and we provided proof of us notifying them and what we believed to be HNZ approval and once again outlined how it was being used for our Wireless network business around Auckland.

Once again tried to get other issues resolved with the house such as leaking plumbing, leaking toilet, leaking cistern, flooding under the house, windows that don't close and leak when it rains, the ranch slider that opens out to a 1.2m drop and will not close correctly, excessive mould and rot in the house leaking guttering and the roof as well as many other more minor problems.

In or around 2006 A more immediate problem arose when the hot water cylinder located under the house began to squirt water from the high pressure cold side. This took HNZ some time to resolve despite the leak squirting water over the power outlet located under the house. This outlet however this was not replaced when the cylinder was replaced and to add my safety concerns the side panel on the hot water cylinder had not been installed leaving the electrical contacts exposed.

Some of these problems have been ongoing over the last 7 years and due to the lack of repair have resulted to damage to our own property and loss of things like personal records, clothing and family health issues. Some of the repairs completed by the HNZ cowboy contractors resulted in damage to our property including the splattering cement on my car and a glazier who replaced a window left shards of glass that ended up in one of my kids feet.

Out of frustration in 2010 we tried to get HNZ's management involved and then felt that the only way we were going to get any resolve and that was to take it to the tenancy tribunal. Shortly after filing the applications we got a call from a number of customers from the community wireless network stating they had been contacted by a fraud investigator and that we were being investigated for operating a business from a Housing New Zealand house as well as not declaring income from our business operating from the property.

We fully co-operated with the HNZ investigator having nothing to hide and provided all of the available information we had to them and attended their interviews.
The investigation was apparently concluded as the first we saw was a letter from the Tenancy manager stating the income related rental assessment was being reversed and a arrears invoice for $81,000 and sign here.

We have at no stage been given the opportunity to look at their investigation results nor review nor correct the information they claim to have however in conversation with one of the manager it turns out that the undeclared income is the gross turnover of the business and there seems to be little regard in their figures to the operational costs of the business. I advised the investigator that we were preparing the audited Accounts of the business which would be available to them as soon as they were completed.

Instead The HNZ actions indicates they are using the report to;

1. Evict us from our home.
2. Revoke our income related rent, and backdate the revocation from what we can see to when we moved in and bill us for the difference $81k.
3. Pass the information to the crown and file charges against both my wife and myself with imprisonment terms of 7 years each. Without the right to see and address the information they obtained nor even obtain a copy of our tenancy file so we can show where HNZ was aware of and approved the operation of the business form the property.

Where is the fair and reasonable right of reply to their claims gone in our case?

As for the fairness please keep in mind that at no stage other than being intimidated in to giving a statement and even applying for information under the privacy act as well as HNZ's claim that due process would have seen us having been given a copy of the investigation results so we could correct any problems have we ever seen any information from them.

We have been honest and forthcoming with information to the HNZ investigator however this information seems to have been ignored and this is clear by some of HNZ's claims being made.

Intimidation and Persecution by representatives of a Government agency

2010-10-07T23:18:00.001+13:00

Housing New Zealand tonight at around 10PM served us with documents with the effective statement that if we did not accept them an arrest warrant would be drawn up for us.

It is prety clear to us that Housing New Zealand want us out that that even the statements of witnesses who have been here and seen first hand the interaction have stated that Housing New Zealand really have it in for you.

We have been here for around 10 years and have been asking for the same repairs to be done for 7 years however instead of compleating these repairs the highly motivated government agencey has laid criminal charges against us on what can only be described as a poorly conducted and flawed income audit.

they have been informed that their information is not correct but continue to persue this matter via criminal action.

So much for getting a fair go in this country and being innocent until prooven guilty.

Information Obtained by HNZ

2010-10-07T09:22:00.000+13:00

We have fully fully co-operated with the HNZ investigator Ricardo Fyn as he seemed to want to ascertain a clear position on our elegability status and even seemed to be able to get backdated information out of our banks that even we are still unable to extract ourselves as the account holder (the power of a government department eh) may have something to do with him wearing a New Zealand Police Lanyard (holding his HNZ ID) around his neck in full view.

During the stress of the last four years we have neglected to keep good accounting records to table for his audit of income accessment hence NOT be able to refute their claims. We have been trying to get the bank details going back 4 years for our accountant to complete an audit of the books to provide HNZ.

We don’t mind being under the microscope but now the accessed $$ value of our alleged income over the last 3years since the last Audit is becoming a major issue as how the heck can we pay the incorrectly accessed $81,000 in arrears let alone correct some of what must be very erroneous information he has come up with based upon $$ amounts of a bank statement without allocation to the costs of the business verses the pittance in drawings we have taken out.

Questions being:

- Co-operation is a 2 way street, seems the only time we get to correct / refute incorrect information is during prosecution now.

- How can every unallocated withdrawl from my business account or wifes bank account be ever be used as Personnal Drawings thus accessed as 100% Income.

Hardly audited books but this enables HNZ to Labeled us as Fraud.

- How and when can we get the same information for our accountant

- The best government motivation is to Slap a big fine and then you refute it seems to be the norm BUT HNZ takes this one step further through intimidation of Sign our accessment and just pay us the money over time makes HNZ judge jury and persector in the same agency without providing the information. Power of the government.

Human Rights - ICESCR - The obligation to protect housing rights includes:

2010-10-04T12:27:00.001+13:00

From my previous posts it is quite clear we are getting a pretty raw deal and this morning after reading some of the information under the Human Rights Act and from http://www.hrc.co.nz/report/chapters/chapter13/housing01.html

I gave the Human Rights Commission a call and layed a complaint however were told pretty much that there was nothing they could do for us and they have no jurisdiction.

This seems to me to be a bit of a contradiction as to what is published in Chapter13.

The obligation to protect housing rights includes:

The commitment by the State and its agencies to prevent the violation of any individual’s rights to housing. The State must provide access to judicial redress if these rights have been violated.

The State must ensure effective protective measures against forced evictions, racial or other discrimination, harassment, and the withdrawal of services.

But then as was pointed out by the person I was speaking to, I'm probably taking it out of context.

After a second discussion with these guys they inform me that this is an international treaty signed by NZ and that they have no powers to do anything about this. The conversation took place over some 50 minutes as was pointed out to the chap on the other end of the phone albeit in somewhat of a condescending manner.

He has made it very clear that these matters can only be heard in court and that this is the only avenue available for us. He also informed me that it is up to us in essence to prove out complaint. I agreed but also informed him that this is a double edged sword and that HNZ have not proven anything and only speculated and bullied us in to giving statements. Even what little information we have been provide with has not been corrected after we informed them that it was not correct.

Market Rent

2010-10-04T08:00:00.000+13:00

We have been informed that our rent is going to change and that we will be paying market rent for this place until we move out. Unlike a private rental house when you move in to an HNZ house up until recently the house is pretty bare. There are no curtains, netting or even tracks and hooks to put them on. There are no light bulbs in the house at all and in our case sure there was a splash of paint thrown over some parts of the house but the handover condition was not great.

As we are currently looking for a private rental we are getting the opportunity to see what is out there and condition as well as a good idea as to what the rental market is like. It seems that a freshly redecorated house in this area can fetch between $370.00 to $410.00 per week. These houses have brand new carpet, new wall paper and are fully insulated. This seems to be in line with tenancy services estimations and figures.

What I would like to know is where HNZ gets off charging what I can only describe as above market rates for their houses. OK many people who are in these houses get rental assistance and have the rent reduced to an affordable level BUT as far as I can tell HNZ claims the difference and is paid the difference between what the tenant is paying and the the market rent.

Given many of the houses are in such a poor state of repair and that in commercial terms they are not let as a complete house one has to wonder where the money is going.

One thing that is very clear is that Contractors getting more than their fair share as from our experience they arrive and do a half arsed job and get paid for it only to be called back within a short time to revisit the repair. In once such instance we have seen a contractor revisit repairs more than what was really required and while the contractor was on the job he spent more time texting than actually doing the job.

However my point is not the fact the contractors are in my view ripping off the system but HNZ are them selves creating their own false economy and may fraudulently be handing on a bill to the government that is well above what it should be.

If a private landlord can maintain his investment to such a standard while charging what seems to be a lower rent than HNZ and even get a return on his investment then why can HNZ not do this? Are the people who are running the show that incompetent and if so then why are they on such high salaries?

Meeting with Labors HNZ Spokesperson

2010-10-02T17:32:00.000+13:00

Last Thursday we has a rather productive meting with Moana Mackey who is the Labour Housing New Zealand Spokes Person. As far as I could tell she was somewhat shocked by the problems we have encountered however was not surprised and stated that of late this type of thing seems to be the norm.

There seems to be little to no protection for the tenants of Housing New Zealand houses and and increasing number of unfair and unjust rulings from the Tenancy Tribunal most likely caused by the close association built between HNZ and the tribunal/adjudicators.

There was some agreement that the problems for us may not be resolvable but our situation could be used as a key example of a government organisation how seems intent on rewriting their own mandate and not following the one laid out by the government in the first place.

Our hope was to be able to move to a privately owned house however due to our financial situation and the claim from HNZ that we now owe over $81k such a move is not viable and we can not find a house what is within our limited budget.

At present it clearly looks like we will become homeless along with out 3 kids in December as a result of the ongoing issues. Certainly comments made by our tenancy manager to an agent who was assisting us with an application for at least one house resulted in what i feel in not being accepted. She stated that there were no issues with our rent and that the place was all ways tidy bit that we had a personality conflict thus making us out to be difficult tenants.

Its the little things

2010-09-22T09:07:00.000+12:00

A couple of days ago a new tenancy manager inspected the house and as stated previously we were surprised that he was in agreement with quite a number of the issues we raised. It appears that he has taken these matters seriously and yesterday a workman turned up to fix the sharp piece of metal sticking out of the wall in the bathroom.

I had preciously cut my foot in it after getting out of the shower and the adjudicator played this down as being a trivial matter however the new tenancy manager seems to have taken a different view on this and taken affirmative action.

Hollow Aplogies

2010-09-21T10:29:00.000+12:00

Today we received a letter from our Tenancy Manger apologising for the confusion regarding the inspection but then later claiming or rather making an excuse that we had in fact arranged a meeting with he colleagues for the 6th. Apparently here colleagues arrived on the 6th and we were not home and this is why the letter was sent claiming we had not allowed access.

There are a few inconsistencies with this as,
Firstly neither my wife nor myself recall making any arrangements for the 6th and if this was requested given the history we would have requested the appointment in writing so as to have a paper trail.
Secondly I reviewed my phone records and email records and can state categorical I was here all day on the 6th with calls being made and received as early as 9:47 up to 14:56 and emails being replied to and sent from 8:21am to 7:50pm. and I'm pretty sure I did not leave home all day.

I would happily accept a genuine apology for a genuine error but given the circumstances and the continued attempts to cover up the facts I find such an apology to be conditional on us having to believe the untruths being told.

In the email Katrina does state that this recent inspection will be our last until just before we vacate the property in December so I can assume from that we will not see any further work being done to fix the issues with the house. This pretty much confirms to us that HNZ and more so Katrina has been angling for our eviction for some time.

We still have no idea how we are going to afford a new place as the rental prices are well above our combined income.

Flooding Continues Under House

2010-09-16T10:34:00.001+12:00

Although in whole I was a little less than thrilled with the Adjudicators ruling in the Tenancy Tribunal he was pretty clear that he expected the Flooding under the house to be fixed and we have not in any way shape of form interfered with the contractors as per the order other than giving the Contractor a bag of lemons from our lemon tree.

Originally Housing New Zealand were going to fill under the house with cement and as indicated by them this was going to reduce the 2m+ from underfloor to ground unusable for storage. As indicated to us by a contractor this would not solve the water pooling and although it would cover it up the water would still be there and be absorbed and evaporate through the cement. Such a project would require approximately 5MX5MX2M or 50Cubic Meters of cement and at a cost of $192.00+gst per cubic meter this would not be a cost effective option not to mention the fact it is not likely to resolve the issue and just pouring cement would not work on its own as the foundations of the house would need to be modified.
Just the cement alone would cost over $10'000.00.

This is an issue we have been trying to remedy for over 7 years and have had little luck, the answer is pretty simple but it seems that rather than repair the problem properly in the first place like may other problems Housing New Zealands mentality is to slap a quick and dirty patch on it and hope for the best.

Out of frustration and concern that the job was not going to be done properly we obtained advice from a professional building inspector who also contracts to several large councils. His recommendation is to at the front of the house dig a trench below the depth of the ground at the rear of the house. The trench would need to go through the clay, Insert the relevant drainage tubing such as nova coil then fill with scoria.

It seems that someone was listening as after we submitted this document and went to court they changed their plans and partly did this however instead of going below the clay they dug down to it, inserted the drainage coil then filled it with gravel. In order to do this they had to dig up the path and replace it after the job was done.

While the cement was being poured it started raining and this has damaged the surface of the nice new footpath to a point where the surface just crumbles when rubbed. this may harden deeper down however I took a look under the house only to see that the rain had caused under the house to flood again. At this point I was not sure if this was due to the cement not being hardened or job not being 100% complete.

However around a week later (last night/this morning) 16th September 2010 we experienced come constant rain and this morning after taking a look under the house have found that its full of water again. Its pretty obvious where the water is coming from as I was able to watch it trickle out from around and under the foundations.

I think now I would be quite within my rights to claim that the job has not been done properly and the flooding has not been fixed. Our previous claims to the Adjudicator that work was not being completed properly was ignored and instead the Adjudicator chose to attack us in his summary. Needless to say that since we have now been evicted and have to leave 4 days before Christmas there is probably no need for Housing New Zealand to fix the problem.

New path and topsoil

Creative History

2010-09-15T11:24:00.003+12:00

It seems from where we are standing Housing New New Zealand's staff practice the rewriting of history to suite their needs and in all honesty from what we have seen make false claims as to the count of events as well as create documents and backdate them so as to create their own paper trail.

On the 17th of August 2010 we received a letter from our tenancy manager Kartina O'Conner for access to the house for an inspection to take place Monday 30th August between 9AM and 12PM stating she would need to check all the rooms in the home. My wife and I arranged our schedule so as to be here however after waiting all day Kartina did not turn up.

Monday the 13th September 2010 a message was left on our phone from Katrina O'Conner and although I did not pick this up my wife said that Katrina wanted to arrange access for an inspection. That morning I sent an email to katrina.oconner@hnzc.co.nz asking her to clarify in writing when she would like this meeting.

Katrina then sent me a response and in noted under our name in bold the following statement
AS previously discussed It is necessary to complete an inspection of your home
I took this to mean as per the previous letter and the phone call.
This email was dated 13th September 2010 11:23am and the request was to visit Monday 20th September 2010 between 10am and 11am.

On the 14th we received two letters from Housing New Zealand both written by Katrina, Postmarks on the envelope were for the 13th of September however on the letterhead one was dated 9th September and the other dated 13th September

The letter dated the 9th September implies that we have denied access or at the least made it difficult for Katrina to conduct her inspection and makes threats as to the tenancy tribunal and exemplary damages. As stated above the reason the previous inspection did not take place was nothing to do with us as we waited here all day on the 30th and Katrina did not turn up nor did she phone us to arrange an alternative time.

The other letter received was dated the 13th September and was in essence the same as the email received requesting access for Monday 20th September 2010.

This is not an isolated incident as We have previously received notices claiming we had denied access to contractors and despite being provided with information to the contrary these complaints have never been retracted. Even in court both Katrina O'Conner and her boss Robert Redford made these claims. We have a transcript that has been attached to one of the previous posts between myself and the contractor who states we had not denied access.

Another instance was when the window frame fell apart after having been repaired and the glass broke almost decapitating my youngest son, HNZ claimed we denied access to the contractor however the contractor refused to conduct the repair as requested by HNZ due to safety concerns. HNZ wanted only the glass replaced in the faulty frame.

I am sure that if this was a member of public and not a government employee questions would be asked as to what was going on and why this false information was being created and recorded in what can only bee deemed as an an official government document.

I have sent an email to katrina.o'conner@hnzc.co.nz he boss robert.redford@hnzc.co.nz and who I believe is the Chief Executive of Housing New Zealand Lesley.McTurk@hnzc.co.nz however as we have been evicted from the house in what we believe to be a retaliatory manner I do not hold out much hope of anything being done.

Here are copies of the original documents in order. Click on the image for a larger view

The original inpection date that Katrina failed to attend

Complaint implying we denied access

The recent inspection request

Envelopes that both the Complaint and Recent inspection request were received in

Statement of intent

2010-09-08T17:22:00.000+12:00

With the recent termination of tennancey and the lack of any formal reason for the termination I started to have a look at the Statement of Intent and found that in our case alone there were many discrepancies in both the response to problems and the way our case was handled.

http://www.hnzc.co.nz/hnzc/web/about-us/statement-of-intent/online-version---statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent_home.htm

It certinly makes for interesting reading.

Temination of Tennancey

2010-09-08T14:05:00.000+12:00

We have have now received a letter from Kane Patena at Housing New Zealand informing us that our tenancy is to end in 90 days with a termination date of 20th December 2010. pursuant to s 51 of the residential tenancies act 1989.

No other information or reason has been provided in writing as to any breach or claim of breach.

The letter is dated 6th of September so it seems that the work being done is not being done to bring the house up to a reasonable standard for us but for the next tenant.

Afirmative Action after 7 years

2010-09-07T14:32:00.000+12:00

Today I received a call from Spotless who are the new contractors to Housing New Zealand. Apparently tomorrow the builders etc will be here to start work on the flooding under the house. From what i have been lead to believe they are putting drainage at the front of the house as was suggested in the independent report we requested and creating a path under the house to the water to get out if any gets under there.

At present the water is not too deep but the runoff down the drive has caused the drive to get pretty slippery.
The front lawn is really soggy at the moment and the contractor who came to repair the windows was not too impressed as he almost fell over.

A few repairs

2010-09-07T14:23:00.001+12:00

This morning my wife received a call from a company who was being set out to look at the windows and why they don't close correctly. He was only sent to repair one window however decided to look at the others as well. The curvature in the aluminium extrusion was not repairable and as he stated the only way to fix this is to replace the frame. The best he could do was to ensure the window catches pull the window tight into the seal as best as possible.

A piece of aluminium was cut and screwed to the frame so as to allow the catch strike it and pull the outer frame in to the inner frame. The curvature of the frame still prevents the window from closing correctly however it is a lot better than it was previously.

The same was done on several other windows and one in the lounge had new catches fitted. However that one now has the top of the window pulling outward from the frame.

The contractor seemed to think that the reason the windows have bowed is because of the lateral movement in the house however he has never seen this before. I then showed him a window that has cracked in the corner and is behind the couch in the living room. It looks like the frame has moved sideways causing the window to flex and crack.

He voiced his concern as apparently any windows at that height should have been replaced by safety glass and eh stated that we were lucky that we had something over the window. I then showed him a window that was replaced around 4 or 5 years ago and he stated that at that time it really should have been replaced by law with safety glass as it is below a specific height.

The contractor finished up his work and stated he would make notes of the cracked glass, safety glass and problem with the frames.

I did not get to examine the work before he left however after taking a look was surprised that he had not cleaned up after himself and had left aluminium turnings in the window channel, on the window sill and on the floor.

First Call

2010-09-06T13:41:00.000+12:00

on the 27th of August the courts set down a time in October as the first call on the rehearing of the matter taken to the tenancy tribunal and the order made on the 13th of August. Unfortunately it appears that all remedial work has now been stoped as we have not heard from anyone in relation to the repairs.

As yet we have not received the 90 day notice however have begun looking for alternative accommodation as it appears that due to the way HNZ have investigated and sent us a claim for the $80k we would not be able to appeal this in the tenancy tribunal as it is well above the amount they can hear.

90 Day Eviction Notice

2010-09-01T02:53:00.000+12:00

Well it appears that we are to be evicted along with the likelihood of other action being taken.

Let me be quite clear that I have never hidden the fact that I have operated wireless network that provides broadband service to a community who's only other option for Internet is dial up. This business was created with the goal of attracting government funding and after this was lost due to the local council altering the plans for service the network was no longer viable. I however did not have heart to pull the plug on it and hoped that someday it would become viable.

We have on more than one occasion informed Housing New Zealand of this BUT due to our recent complaints HNZ decided to investigate and it appears have taken the entire network turnover as income ignoring the operational costs and are no claiming that we have undeclared income.

Based on this they have backdated our income related rent and sent us a demand for payment of around $81'000.00 as well as sending us a 90 day eviction notice.

To top this off I as informed today that the matter has been handed over to the crowns lawyers who will be contemplating the prosecution of both my wife and myself.

I have been in contact with various ministers and none of them seem to feel that there is anything they can do in relation to the repair of the property or the way that a government organisation seems to be swinging its might and using what ever means to cause as much stress as possibe to myself and my family.

At this stage I would say there is little left for me to do and although there may be some legal options the reality is that these cost money and contrary to what HNZ's claim is we do not have it. If we did we would have moved out long ago rather than having to live in a house full of problems that has had an adverse effect on our health.

Earlier tonight I came very close to suicide and this is not the first time whilst having to deal with these issues however I am mindful of the fact that even if i did this HNZ would still pursue my wife.

The ballance of law

2010-08-30T08:40:00.001+12:00

It is pretty clear that in our view Housing New Zealand while in court and under oath made several statements that both mislead the Adjudicator and i would go as far as to claim they knowingly committed perjury and by the adjudicators orders their claims were a big part of the way the order was made.

HNZ claimed we denied access to contractors.
This is clearly not correct and can be backed up by a transcript where the contractor clearly states NO to the question of having been denied access.
The windows and Rot have been repaired in all rooms.
In the first hearing HNZ claimed that they had repaired all windows and rot even after seeing that there were still problems only a week prior to the hearing and taking photos of the problems. When I queried this HNZ clearly stated that the repairs were made prior to their last visit however their photos showed that the repairs were not done at all and even several months on they have still not been completed.
Damage to Vehicles.
A contractor working for HNZ damaged both vehicles by spilling cement on them from the roof. HNZ claimed that we never informed them of the damage to one of the vehicles despite having called the HNZ manager Robert Redford and telling him myself as well as calling the 0800 number and informing them.

These are only three of the instances to which there is substantial evidence to back up my claim however when the courts were contacted about the matter they informed me that if I wished to make a complaint regarding perjury against HNZ I would need to go to the police station.

After visiting the police station and spending some time there they refused to take the complaint stating that such a complaint would need to be handled by the courts directly.

This may sound like nit picking to some however the fact that officials working for a government agency and in a such a position with these responsibility begin to show signs of low morals even by just lying under oath there is a very serious chance for corruption in that sector.

Flooding under the house

2010-08-25T16:35:00.001+12:00

If the water under the house were any deeper Council would require a fence around it.

But seriously we have been battling with this one for some 7 years and I'm sure this is the cause of many of the other problems. We have had contractor after contractor looking at the problem and still the problem has not been resolved.

On Monday a contractor from Spotless turned up with a builder stating that the way to resolve the problem was to put a drain in the front of the house and divert the water flow, this is pretty much the same conclusion as was given by the expert we hired prior to going to the Tenancy Tribunal.

However Housing New Zealand seem insistent on just filing up the hole, It seems to be the way they opperate and instead of fixing the issue they just hide it. These problems don't just go away if you cover them up.

Then today the person who came over from Spotless arrived to examine the window sill and was also asked to look at under the house. His comments intrigued me as he was of the view that Housing New Zealand wanted to just fill the hole up and concrete over the top. I don't have a problem with that and in all honesty gives me more storage space BUT the issue of flooding is not likely to be resolved by doing this.

Cement that has such a heavy flow of water under it is likely to be compromised as the water will wash away the sediment under it, in addition the cement unless sealed will just absorb the water and although you may not see the ponding the water will still evaporate much like water in a sponge.

Here are a few photos of the flooding we have been living with under the house.
The last image is of the underfloor insulation that was installed only around 6 months ago and is already showing signs of mold growth as well as rusty staples.

Rot Repaired acording to Housing New Zealand

2010-08-25T15:30:00.001+12:00

Earlier today an inspector from Spotless who are the contractors to Housing New Zealand some over to examine the work repair work to the window sill. I pointed out to him that the paint was cracked around where the bog/filler was put in and that the while paint has a brown stain in it from the rot underneath.

I also showed him the photos below in the previous post so he could see the extent of the rot.

His comments were pretty much the same as we have heard from almost every other builder and expert in that the internal walls need to be striped back in order to access the damage as it is likely the damage extends further than what can be seen and the window frames should be replaced as well as the windows as the aluminium frames were warped and this is what is causing them not to close and seal properly.

However after going away and talking to Housing New Zealand they consider the job to have been done and feel the rot has been repaired and have instructed him to do nothing further.

So in essence someone that sits behind a desk and is likely not to have any building qualifications has decided to ignore the recommendation of a professional and take shortcuts that not only could pose a health hazard but will in tile compromise the integrity of the building and diminish its value.

Update Rotting Window Frames in Housing New Zealand House

2010-08-23T09:49:00.002+12:00

These photos are AFTER the repeairs have taken place.

The contractors have been and gone, they may be back to put another coat of paint on the sill and remove their masking tape however it has become immediately apparent that there is still an underlying problem.

Firstly a brown train has begun to appear through the wood and from it location I would say that this is caused by the wet rotted wood underneath that was not removed.

The second problem is that the bog has cracked and separated from the wood around the edges.

Rotting Window Frames in Housing New Zealand House

2010-08-21T09:02:00.002+12:00

This has been an ongoing battle for us as most of the bedroom's have extensive rot in the window frames caused by the excess buildup of moisture in the house and leaking windows. We have requested that the Rot be repaired several times resulting in Housing New Zealand sending a contractor our to scrape away the rot and fill the hole with filler or bog.

I have no problem with this method of repair if its done properly however the fact that within a short time frame wither the rot returns or the surrounding area begins or continued to degrade means that the job was not completed correctly in the first place.

There are also issues such as the symptoms such as the rot have been repaired but the cause remains.

Yesterday after months of battling and claims in court by the tenancy manager stating that the rot had been repaired contractors turned up to finally conduct these repairs. It is not my place to ensure the work is done correctly but keeping in mind that this rot is in a bed room and as a family we are already suffering from some nasal infections and respiratory problems I decided to take a few photos of the repair.

Originally the contractors stated that the entire frame should be replaced as the rot is extensive however HNZ sent a work order for them to just bog up the problem. As you will see in the photos this has been done several times before as there is existing bog work.

This is pretty much the extent to which the rot was scraped out before the hole was filled, it is pretty clear that not all of the rot was removed and that the problem penetrates muchh deeper than is visible as there is substantial rot underneath the are that was previously filled.

Anyone with even partial knowledge of handyman work or building knows that you can not or should not bog over wet wood. The dark patch in the corner is wet rotted wood and is very soft. This was not removed before filling and I suspect that if it had been the hole and possibly rot would have extended through the sill and into the framing.

To my knowledge the wood used for sills is 25mm thick pine, the depth of the visible are is pretty close to that.

A quick search on the net turns up many articles as to how to repair rotten window sills, probably the simplest one and easiest to follow is one from Diane Stevens published on eHow.
http://www.ehow.com/how_6457338_repair-rotten-window-sills.html

Although this process uses a specific repair kit it highlights the fact that the remaining wood needs to be be stabilised and the assumption can be made that this is to prevent further or continuing rot.

Housing New Zealand claimed we denied access

2010-08-17T12:00:00.002+12:00

Following a the formal notification from Tenancy Tribunal in their order and a letter that forwarded to me from Housing New Zealand claiming we had denied access to the property for contractors to undertake repairs I thought it prudent to publish the transcript between myself and the Housing New Zealand contractor.

This information was provided to the Adjudicator and both the Tenancy Manager Katrina O'Connor and the Manager of the Panmure Branch Robert Redford were informed that we had not denied access and given the opportunity to rectify their statement but seem to have ignored this.

Whilst in court and under oath Katrina O'Connor whilst representing Housing New Zealand on at least two occasions claimed that we had denied access to contractors.

Here is an extract from a transcript of a recording between myself and Housing New Zealands Contractor.

Andrew:
That’s good. That’s good. Hey just had some issues come up, we’ve been going through some of the bits and pieces and doing some preparation, we’ve been told by Housing that they have cancelled the work order because we denied access.
Contractor:
No, what I said was I emailed them and told them that you weren’t happy with the way that it was going to be to just have the hole filled up so that’s why as far as I know they’ve cancelled it. I’m not too sure. That’s as far as I’ve gone with it so …
Andrew:
Right, OK. No, they’re claiming and stating and certainly got written in their notes on the system that we denied access to the builders to be able to fill it up.
Contractor:
No, I just said to them that you weren’t going to be happy with what was done so there wasn’t much point in us doing the job so … they’ve got the notes for that so …

Tenancy Matters with Housing New Zealand and Tenancy Services

2010-08-16T15:40:00.005+12:00

Some 9 or so years ago our family ran in to some strife and needed to move house pretty quickly. We were lucky at the time to be offered and able to move in to a government owned house managed by Housing New Zealand. The first winter came and we had issues with excess condensation and moisture that appears to have been partly caused by the lack of insulation in the house as well as water ponding under the house. On the walls and the roof there is a mold that grows as well as a rotten smell under the house.
We brought this to the attention of Housing NZ who i will refer to in the future as HNZ some 7 years ago and after promises to have the matter remedied nothing to date has been done other than frequent visits from contractors stating what should be done to resolve the problem.

Out of frustration we decided to finally lodge a complaint with the arm of the courts who are responsible for hearing tenancy matters "Tenancy Tribunal" who essentially first try to mediate the matter then hear the case in court and make the appropriate orders that can then be enforced.

The mediation was a waste of time in that the representative from HNZ claims she had no idea as to what they were there for despite having been given a 10 day notice to remedy the faults with the house. Once mediation has failed the next step is to hand the matter up to an arbitrator. This was done and a hearing date was set.

During the arbitration process both my wife and I were concerned that the arbitrator denied us the ability to enter in to evidence the recorded conversations between HNZ and ourselves showing that there indeed was an issue and that we had notified HNZ of these issues including a leaking/problematic toilet that we replaced at our own cost as HNZ did not remedy the problem in a timely manner.

Later during the hearing the representative from HNZ claimed while under oath that the leaking windows and rotten wood in the window sills had been repaired however this was not the case and she well knew it as at her last visit just prior to the hearing she poked her finger through the rot in the wood in the master bedroom.

HNZ stated that the bathroom and bedrooms were to be remodeled and this would take care of any remaining rot, mold and dampness problems in the bedrooms.

We were accused by HNZ of denying access to contractors and allowing them to complete their job however according to the contractor this is not the case and he declined to do the job as the window frame that had fallen apart if repaired in the manner he was instructed to would have posed a danger to my son who sleeps below it and who was previously almost severely injured when the frame fell apart while opening it.

The Adjudicator created an interim order on the matter and although we compromised on several points we were happy to at least make some headway however over the coming and allocated 6 weeks the primary problems were not dealt with or resolved.

A second hearing took place that was supposed to result in finalising the matters and enforcement orders being drawn up for work that had not been completed however we also had to bring to the attention of the courts matters whereas HNZ had sent contractors to the property without notifying us and these contractors committed not only theft but damaged property that belonged to us.
In addition as the flooding under the house had not been repaired we enlisted the assistance of an independent building inspector to provide a report of the problem and make a suggestion as to cause and repair. This seems to have been ignored by the adjudicator.

One of the contractors who were to repair leaks and problems with the roof snapped off a 2.1m mast, removed a satellite mast and spilt cement on the roof of both of our vehicles. Regardless of us providing photos of the damage the adjudicator plays this down and he claims we did not attempt to wash the vehicle despite having been told we did on one vehicle but can’t do this to the other one. Regardless he dismisses any compensation for this damage.

At the close of the second hearing the Adjudicator said his ruling would follow however after a month of waiting nothing had been provided to us. We contacted the principal tenancy adjudicator to find out what the delay was and if this was normal then two weeks after this we received the ruling. It clearly appears that the adjudicator has ignored all evidence provided by us and has not made his ruling in an impartial manner. His ruling contradicts what was stated in court regarding contractors having to give notice before work is done and to be honest regardless of the spelling and grammatical errors in the document it seems that the ruling is a little one sided and more of an attack on me personally.

Most of our requests have been dismissed and the promise in court that the bedrooms would be remodeled has been dropped leaving us with mold and mildew build-up and the rot in the visible woodwork is only to be scraped out then bogged and painted over. In my sons room this has previously been done only a year or so ago and the bog is now rotting. The windows still do not close because the frames are badly warped and instead of putting drainage under the house they intend on just filling the holes with dirt regardless of being told by their own contractors that this is unlikely to solve the problem and having been given the independent report we paid for.

In order to have under the house fixed we needed to more all our personal belongings out and have had to store them outside, the adjudicator states that we could store it in the shed as that is what HNZ have suggested but there is no space in there.

To add insult to injury he makes specific reference to the fact we have declined access to contractors to fix the problems despite having been given evidence to show we did not deny access and being told this during the hearing.

Our faith in the New Zealand legal system , fairness and equality has really gone out the window with this matter. We have been told we have the right to appeal but honestly would you? The fact is after 7 years of trying to get some resolve, promises and abuse from HNZ’s tenancy managers and their dirty tactics we are fed up. If we had another option we would grab it with both hands but as a low income family we do not and have to deal with the what is feed to us.

We have even tried to take this matter to a ministerial level and despite promises that something would be done just get to see a lot of buck passing and no action. HNZ sent a response to the minister’s office stating that we denied access and we sent back a response and evidence showing this was not the case however nothing is being done. The HNZ representatives were free to commit at least 2 counts of what i consider to be perjury and have not been held accountable for this either by their bosses or the courts yet is it were you or I who did this we would be in deep trouble.

Attached are some of the documents and evidence presented including photos of the damage to vehicles, flooding and other supporting evidence.

Statement outlining problems to Tennancey Tribunal
This was our accompanying document to the Tennacey Tribunal outlining the problems with the house and requesting HNZ remidy them. This also highlights the vindictive nature of the tennancey manager.
Refreance Photos for the above statement

Interum Orders from Tennancey Tribunal to be carried out within 6 weeks
The interum orders were put in place however only some of the work was done.

Statement for Continuance
Statement for continuance and highliting/clarifiying issues as well as informing the tribunal of the damage caused by contractors.

Final Order from Tennancey Tribunal
It appears that much of the evidence we provided has been ignored by the adjudicator such as photos of the damage to the car where cement was spilled in it, we stated in court that one of the cars had been washed. Also that in our view HNZ commited Purgery and we later provided a transcript from the HNZ contractor stating that we did not deny access to the property.

It is hard not to take the comments made by the Adjudicator personally and I find the tone somewhat unprofessional for an officer of the New Zealand Court.