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.
Showing posts with label Rental. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rental. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Monday, March 14, 2011
Victimised
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.
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.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Letter from Director of Government Relations Housing New Zealand
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
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.
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.
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.
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
Damage to your home - paying for repairs
On the 20th 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 24th 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 2nd 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.
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Acceptable by Housing New Zealand Standards
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.
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.
Friday, November 26, 2010
Long Term Mould Problems
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.
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.
Monday, November 22, 2010
A visit from David Collings
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.
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.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Moving House
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.
Monday, November 8, 2010
At least someone gets it
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.
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.
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
More Flooding under the house
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.
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.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Simplified Events
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.
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.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Market Rent
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?
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?
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Meeting with Labors HNZ Spokesperson
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.
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.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Its the little things
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.
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.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
A few repairs
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.
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.
Monday, September 6, 2010
First Call
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.
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.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Tenancy Matters with Housing New Zealand and Tenancy Services
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.
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)