Court Proceedings

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.

Equal Opportunities

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.

Damage to your home - paying for repairs

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

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.

Mould is Mould

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.

1st Call in District Court over Tennancey Matterrs

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.

HNZ seem to think they are above the law

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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.

Creative History

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

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.

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.