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.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Hollow Aplogies
Today we received a letter from our Tenancy Manger apologising for the confusion regarding the inspection but then later claiming or rather making an excuse that we had in fact arranged a meeting with he colleagues for the 6th. Apparently here colleagues arrived on the 6th and we were not home and this is why the letter was sent claiming we had not allowed access.
There are a few inconsistencies with this as,
Firstly neither my wife nor myself recall making any arrangements for the 6th and if this was requested given the history we would have requested the appointment in writing so as to have a paper trail.
Secondly I reviewed my phone records and email records and can state categorical I was here all day on the 6th with calls being made and received as early as 9:47 up to 14:56 and emails being replied to and sent from 8:21am to 7:50pm. and I'm pretty sure I did not leave home all day.
I would happily accept a genuine apology for a genuine error but given the circumstances and the continued attempts to cover up the facts I find such an apology to be conditional on us having to believe the untruths being told.
In the email Katrina does state that this recent inspection will be our last until just before we vacate the property in December so I can assume from that we will not see any further work being done to fix the issues with the house. This pretty much confirms to us that HNZ and more so Katrina has been angling for our eviction for some time.
We still have no idea how we are going to afford a new place as the rental prices are well above our combined income.
There are a few inconsistencies with this as,
Firstly neither my wife nor myself recall making any arrangements for the 6th and if this was requested given the history we would have requested the appointment in writing so as to have a paper trail.
Secondly I reviewed my phone records and email records and can state categorical I was here all day on the 6th with calls being made and received as early as 9:47 up to 14:56 and emails being replied to and sent from 8:21am to 7:50pm. and I'm pretty sure I did not leave home all day.
I would happily accept a genuine apology for a genuine error but given the circumstances and the continued attempts to cover up the facts I find such an apology to be conditional on us having to believe the untruths being told.
In the email Katrina does state that this recent inspection will be our last until just before we vacate the property in December so I can assume from that we will not see any further work being done to fix the issues with the house. This pretty much confirms to us that HNZ and more so Katrina has been angling for our eviction for some time.
We still have no idea how we are going to afford a new place as the rental prices are well above our combined income.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Flooding Continues Under House
Although in whole I was a little less than thrilled with the Adjudicators ruling in the Tenancy Tribunal he was pretty clear that he expected the Flooding under the house to be fixed and we have not in any way shape of form interfered with the contractors as per the order other than giving the Contractor a bag of lemons from our lemon tree.
Originally Housing New Zealand were going to fill under the house with cement and as indicated by them this was going to reduce the 2m+ from underfloor to ground unusable for storage. As indicated to us by a contractor this would not solve the water pooling and although it would cover it up the water would still be there and be absorbed and evaporate through the cement. Such a project would require approximately 5MX5MX2M or 50Cubic Meters of cement and at a cost of $192.00+gst per cubic meter this would not be a cost effective option not to mention the fact it is not likely to resolve the issue and just pouring cement would not work on its own as the foundations of the house would need to be modified.
Just the cement alone would cost over $10'000.00.
This is an issue we have been trying to remedy for over 7 years and have had little luck, the answer is pretty simple but it seems that rather than repair the problem properly in the first place like may other problems Housing New Zealands mentality is to slap a quick and dirty patch on it and hope for the best.
Out of frustration and concern that the job was not going to be done properly we obtained advice from a professional building inspector who also contracts to several large councils. His recommendation is to at the front of the house dig a trench below the depth of the ground at the rear of the house. The trench would need to go through the clay, Insert the relevant drainage tubing such as nova coil then fill with scoria.
It seems that someone was listening as after we submitted this document and went to court they changed their plans and partly did this however instead of going below the clay they dug down to it, inserted the drainage coil then filled it with gravel. In order to do this they had to dig up the path and replace it after the job was done.
While the cement was being poured it started raining and this has damaged the surface of the nice new footpath to a point where the surface just crumbles when rubbed. this may harden deeper down however I took a look under the house only to see that the rain had caused under the house to flood again. At this point I was not sure if this was due to the cement not being hardened or job not being 100% complete.
However around a week later (last night/this morning) 16th September 2010 we experienced come constant rain and this morning after taking a look under the house have found that its full of water again. Its pretty obvious where the water is coming from as I was able to watch it trickle out from around and under the foundations.
I think now I would be quite within my rights to claim that the job has not been done properly and the flooding has not been fixed. Our previous claims to the Adjudicator that work was not being completed properly was ignored and instead the Adjudicator chose to attack us in his summary. Needless to say that since we have now been evicted and have to leave 4 days before Christmas there is probably no need for Housing New Zealand to fix the problem.
New path and topsoil
Originally Housing New Zealand were going to fill under the house with cement and as indicated by them this was going to reduce the 2m+ from underfloor to ground unusable for storage. As indicated to us by a contractor this would not solve the water pooling and although it would cover it up the water would still be there and be absorbed and evaporate through the cement. Such a project would require approximately 5MX5MX2M or 50Cubic Meters of cement and at a cost of $192.00+gst per cubic meter this would not be a cost effective option not to mention the fact it is not likely to resolve the issue and just pouring cement would not work on its own as the foundations of the house would need to be modified.
Just the cement alone would cost over $10'000.00.
This is an issue we have been trying to remedy for over 7 years and have had little luck, the answer is pretty simple but it seems that rather than repair the problem properly in the first place like may other problems Housing New Zealands mentality is to slap a quick and dirty patch on it and hope for the best.
Out of frustration and concern that the job was not going to be done properly we obtained advice from a professional building inspector who also contracts to several large councils. His recommendation is to at the front of the house dig a trench below the depth of the ground at the rear of the house. The trench would need to go through the clay, Insert the relevant drainage tubing such as nova coil then fill with scoria.
It seems that someone was listening as after we submitted this document and went to court they changed their plans and partly did this however instead of going below the clay they dug down to it, inserted the drainage coil then filled it with gravel. In order to do this they had to dig up the path and replace it after the job was done.
While the cement was being poured it started raining and this has damaged the surface of the nice new footpath to a point where the surface just crumbles when rubbed. this may harden deeper down however I took a look under the house only to see that the rain had caused under the house to flood again. At this point I was not sure if this was due to the cement not being hardened or job not being 100% complete.
However around a week later (last night/this morning) 16th September 2010 we experienced come constant rain and this morning after taking a look under the house have found that its full of water again. Its pretty obvious where the water is coming from as I was able to watch it trickle out from around and under the foundations.
I think now I would be quite within my rights to claim that the job has not been done properly and the flooding has not been fixed. Our previous claims to the Adjudicator that work was not being completed properly was ignored and instead the Adjudicator chose to attack us in his summary. Needless to say that since we have now been evicted and have to leave 4 days before Christmas there is probably no need for Housing New Zealand to fix the problem.
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
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
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
Wednesday, September 8, 2010
Statement of intent
With the recent termination of tennancey and the lack of any formal reason for the termination I started to have a look at the Statement of Intent and found that in our case alone there were many discrepancies in both the response to problems and the way our case was handled.
http://www.hnzc.co.nz/hnzc/web/about-us/statement-of-intent/online-version---statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent_home.htm
It certinly makes for interesting reading.
http://www.hnzc.co.nz/hnzc/web/about-us/statement-of-intent/online-version---statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent/2009-2010-statement-of-intent_home.htm
It certinly makes for interesting reading.
Temination of Tennancey
We have have now received a letter from Kane Patena at Housing New Zealand informing us that our tenancy is to end in 90 days with a termination date of 20th December 2010. pursuant to s 51 of the residential tenancies act 1989.
No other information or reason has been provided in writing as to any breach or claim of breach.
The letter is dated 6th of September so it seems that the work being done is not being done to bring the house up to a reasonable standard for us but for the next tenant.
No other information or reason has been provided in writing as to any breach or claim of breach.
The letter is dated 6th of September so it seems that the work being done is not being done to bring the house up to a reasonable standard for us but for the next tenant.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Afirmative Action after 7 years
Today I received a call from Spotless who are the new contractors to Housing New Zealand. Apparently tomorrow the builders etc will be here to start work on the flooding under the house. From what i have been lead to believe they are putting drainage at the front of the house as was suggested in the independent report we requested and creating a path under the house to the water to get out if any gets under there.
At present the water is not too deep but the runoff down the drive has caused the drive to get pretty slippery.
The front lawn is really soggy at the moment and the contractor who came to repair the windows was not too impressed as he almost fell over.
At present the water is not too deep but the runoff down the drive has caused the drive to get pretty slippery.
The front lawn is really soggy at the moment and the contractor who came to repair the windows was not too impressed as he almost fell over.
A few repairs
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.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
90 Day Eviction Notice
Well it appears that we are to be evicted along with the likelihood of other action being taken.
Let me be quite clear that I have never hidden the fact that I have operated wireless network that provides broadband service to a community who's only other option for Internet is dial up. This business was created with the goal of attracting government funding and after this was lost due to the local council altering the plans for service the network was no longer viable. I however did not have heart to pull the plug on it and hoped that someday it would become viable.
We have on more than one occasion informed Housing New Zealand of this BUT due to our recent complaints HNZ decided to investigate and it appears have taken the entire network turnover as income ignoring the operational costs and are no claiming that we have undeclared income.
Based on this they have backdated our income related rent and sent us a demand for payment of around $81'000.00 as well as sending us a 90 day eviction notice.
To top this off I as informed today that the matter has been handed over to the crowns lawyers who will be contemplating the prosecution of both my wife and myself.
I have been in contact with various ministers and none of them seem to feel that there is anything they can do in relation to the repair of the property or the way that a government organisation seems to be swinging its might and using what ever means to cause as much stress as possibe to myself and my family.
At this stage I would say there is little left for me to do and although there may be some legal options the reality is that these cost money and contrary to what HNZ's claim is we do not have it. If we did we would have moved out long ago rather than having to live in a house full of problems that has had an adverse effect on our health.
Earlier tonight I came very close to suicide and this is not the first time whilst having to deal with these issues however I am mindful of the fact that even if i did this HNZ would still pursue my wife.
Let me be quite clear that I have never hidden the fact that I have operated wireless network that provides broadband service to a community who's only other option for Internet is dial up. This business was created with the goal of attracting government funding and after this was lost due to the local council altering the plans for service the network was no longer viable. I however did not have heart to pull the plug on it and hoped that someday it would become viable.
We have on more than one occasion informed Housing New Zealand of this BUT due to our recent complaints HNZ decided to investigate and it appears have taken the entire network turnover as income ignoring the operational costs and are no claiming that we have undeclared income.
Based on this they have backdated our income related rent and sent us a demand for payment of around $81'000.00 as well as sending us a 90 day eviction notice.
To top this off I as informed today that the matter has been handed over to the crowns lawyers who will be contemplating the prosecution of both my wife and myself.
I have been in contact with various ministers and none of them seem to feel that there is anything they can do in relation to the repair of the property or the way that a government organisation seems to be swinging its might and using what ever means to cause as much stress as possibe to myself and my family.
At this stage I would say there is little left for me to do and although there may be some legal options the reality is that these cost money and contrary to what HNZ's claim is we do not have it. If we did we would have moved out long ago rather than having to live in a house full of problems that has had an adverse effect on our health.
Earlier tonight I came very close to suicide and this is not the first time whilst having to deal with these issues however I am mindful of the fact that even if i did this HNZ would still pursue my wife.
Monday, August 30, 2010
The ballance of law
It is pretty clear that in our view Housing New Zealand while in court and under oath made several statements that both mislead the Adjudicator and i would go as far as to claim they knowingly committed perjury and by the adjudicators orders their claims were a big part of the way the order was made.
After visiting the police station and spending some time there they refused to take the complaint stating that such a complaint would need to be handled by the courts directly.
This may sound like nit picking to some however the fact that officials working for a government agency and in a such a position with these responsibility begin to show signs of low morals even by just lying under oath there is a very serious chance for corruption in that sector.
- HNZ claimed we denied access to contractors.
This is clearly not correct and can be backed up by a transcript where the contractor clearly states NO to the question of having been denied access. - The windows and Rot have been repaired in all rooms.
In the first hearing HNZ claimed that they had repaired all windows and rot even after seeing that there were still problems only a week prior to the hearing and taking photos of the problems. When I queried this HNZ clearly stated that the repairs were made prior to their last visit however their photos showed that the repairs were not done at all and even several months on they have still not been completed. - Damage to Vehicles.
A contractor working for HNZ damaged both vehicles by spilling cement on them from the roof. HNZ claimed that we never informed them of the damage to one of the vehicles despite having called the HNZ manager Robert Redford and telling him myself as well as calling the 0800 number and informing them.
After visiting the police station and spending some time there they refused to take the complaint stating that such a complaint would need to be handled by the courts directly.
This may sound like nit picking to some however the fact that officials working for a government agency and in a such a position with these responsibility begin to show signs of low morals even by just lying under oath there is a very serious chance for corruption in that sector.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Flooding under the house
If the water under the house were any deeper Council would require a fence around it.
But seriously we have been battling with this one for some 7 years and I'm sure this is the cause of many of the other problems. We have had contractor after contractor looking at the problem and still the problem has not been resolved.
On Monday a contractor from Spotless turned up with a builder stating that the way to resolve the problem was to put a drain in the front of the house and divert the water flow, this is pretty much the same conclusion as was given by the expert we hired prior to going to the Tenancy Tribunal.
However Housing New Zealand seem insistent on just filing up the hole, It seems to be the way they opperate and instead of fixing the issue they just hide it. These problems don't just go away if you cover them up.
Then today the person who came over from Spotless arrived to examine the window sill and was also asked to look at under the house. His comments intrigued me as he was of the view that Housing New Zealand wanted to just fill the hole up and concrete over the top. I don't have a problem with that and in all honesty gives me more storage space BUT the issue of flooding is not likely to be resolved by doing this.
Cement that has such a heavy flow of water under it is likely to be compromised as the water will wash away the sediment under it, in addition the cement unless sealed will just absorb the water and although you may not see the ponding the water will still evaporate much like water in a sponge.
Here are a few photos of the flooding we have been living with under the house.
The last image is of the underfloor insulation that was installed only around 6 months ago and is already showing signs of mold growth as well as rusty staples.
But seriously we have been battling with this one for some 7 years and I'm sure this is the cause of many of the other problems. We have had contractor after contractor looking at the problem and still the problem has not been resolved.
On Monday a contractor from Spotless turned up with a builder stating that the way to resolve the problem was to put a drain in the front of the house and divert the water flow, this is pretty much the same conclusion as was given by the expert we hired prior to going to the Tenancy Tribunal.
However Housing New Zealand seem insistent on just filing up the hole, It seems to be the way they opperate and instead of fixing the issue they just hide it. These problems don't just go away if you cover them up.
Then today the person who came over from Spotless arrived to examine the window sill and was also asked to look at under the house. His comments intrigued me as he was of the view that Housing New Zealand wanted to just fill the hole up and concrete over the top. I don't have a problem with that and in all honesty gives me more storage space BUT the issue of flooding is not likely to be resolved by doing this.
Cement that has such a heavy flow of water under it is likely to be compromised as the water will wash away the sediment under it, in addition the cement unless sealed will just absorb the water and although you may not see the ponding the water will still evaporate much like water in a sponge.
Here are a few photos of the flooding we have been living with under the house.
The last image is of the underfloor insulation that was installed only around 6 months ago and is already showing signs of mold growth as well as rusty staples.
Rot Repaired acording to Housing New Zealand
Earlier today an inspector from Spotless who are the contractors to Housing New Zealand some over to examine the work repair work to the window sill. I pointed out to him that the paint was cracked around where the bog/filler was put in and that the while paint has a brown stain in it from the rot underneath.
I also showed him the photos below in the previous post so he could see the extent of the rot.
His comments were pretty much the same as we have heard from almost every other builder and expert in that the internal walls need to be striped back in order to access the damage as it is likely the damage extends further than what can be seen and the window frames should be replaced as well as the windows as the aluminium frames were warped and this is what is causing them not to close and seal properly.
However after going away and talking to Housing New Zealand they consider the job to have been done and feel the rot has been repaired and have instructed him to do nothing further.
So in essence someone that sits behind a desk and is likely not to have any building qualifications has decided to ignore the recommendation of a professional and take shortcuts that not only could pose a health hazard but will in tile compromise the integrity of the building and diminish its value.
I also showed him the photos below in the previous post so he could see the extent of the rot.
His comments were pretty much the same as we have heard from almost every other builder and expert in that the internal walls need to be striped back in order to access the damage as it is likely the damage extends further than what can be seen and the window frames should be replaced as well as the windows as the aluminium frames were warped and this is what is causing them not to close and seal properly.
However after going away and talking to Housing New Zealand they consider the job to have been done and feel the rot has been repaired and have instructed him to do nothing further.
So in essence someone that sits behind a desk and is likely not to have any building qualifications has decided to ignore the recommendation of a professional and take shortcuts that not only could pose a health hazard but will in tile compromise the integrity of the building and diminish its value.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Update Rotting Window Frames in Housing New Zealand House
These photos are AFTER the repeairs have taken place.
The contractors have been and gone, they may be back to put another coat of paint on the sill and remove their masking tape however it has become immediately apparent that there is still an underlying problem.
Firstly a brown train has begun to appear through the wood and from it location I would say that this is caused by the wet rotted wood underneath that was not removed.
The second problem is that the bog has cracked and separated from the wood around the edges.
The contractors have been and gone, they may be back to put another coat of paint on the sill and remove their masking tape however it has become immediately apparent that there is still an underlying problem.
Firstly a brown train has begun to appear through the wood and from it location I would say that this is caused by the wet rotted wood underneath that was not removed.
The second problem is that the bog has cracked and separated from the wood around the edges.
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Rotting Window Frames in Housing New Zealand House
This has been an ongoing battle for us as most of the bedroom's have extensive rot in the window frames caused by the excess buildup of moisture in the house and leaking windows. We have requested that the Rot be repaired several times resulting in Housing New Zealand sending a contractor our to scrape away the rot and fill the hole with filler or bog.
I have no problem with this method of repair if its done properly however the fact that within a short time frame wither the rot returns or the surrounding area begins or continued to degrade means that the job was not completed correctly in the first place.
There are also issues such as the symptoms such as the rot have been repaired but the cause remains.
Yesterday after months of battling and claims in court by the tenancy manager stating that the rot had been repaired contractors turned up to finally conduct these repairs. It is not my place to ensure the work is done correctly but keeping in mind that this rot is in a bed room and as a family we are already suffering from some nasal infections and respiratory problems I decided to take a few photos of the repair.
Originally the contractors stated that the entire frame should be replaced as the rot is extensive however HNZ sent a work order for them to just bog up the problem. As you will see in the photos this has been done several times before as there is existing bog work.
This is pretty much the extent to which the rot was scraped out before the hole was filled, it is pretty clear that not all of the rot was removed and that the problem penetrates muchh deeper than is visible as there is substantial rot underneath the are that was previously filled.
Anyone with even partial knowledge of handyman work or building knows that you can not or should not bog over wet wood. The dark patch in the corner is wet rotted wood and is very soft. This was not removed before filling and I suspect that if it had been the hole and possibly rot would have extended through the sill and into the framing.
To my knowledge the wood used for sills is 25mm thick pine, the depth of the visible are is pretty close to that.
A quick search on the net turns up many articles as to how to repair rotten window sills, probably the simplest one and easiest to follow is one from Diane Stevens published on eHow.
http://www.ehow.com/how_6457338_repair-rotten-window-sills.html
Although this process uses a specific repair kit it highlights the fact that the remaining wood needs to be be stabilised and the assumption can be made that this is to prevent further or continuing rot.
I have no problem with this method of repair if its done properly however the fact that within a short time frame wither the rot returns or the surrounding area begins or continued to degrade means that the job was not completed correctly in the first place.
There are also issues such as the symptoms such as the rot have been repaired but the cause remains.
Yesterday after months of battling and claims in court by the tenancy manager stating that the rot had been repaired contractors turned up to finally conduct these repairs. It is not my place to ensure the work is done correctly but keeping in mind that this rot is in a bed room and as a family we are already suffering from some nasal infections and respiratory problems I decided to take a few photos of the repair.
Originally the contractors stated that the entire frame should be replaced as the rot is extensive however HNZ sent a work order for them to just bog up the problem. As you will see in the photos this has been done several times before as there is existing bog work.
Anyone with even partial knowledge of handyman work or building knows that you can not or should not bog over wet wood. The dark patch in the corner is wet rotted wood and is very soft. This was not removed before filling and I suspect that if it had been the hole and possibly rot would have extended through the sill and into the framing.
To my knowledge the wood used for sills is 25mm thick pine, the depth of the visible are is pretty close to that.
A quick search on the net turns up many articles as to how to repair rotten window sills, probably the simplest one and easiest to follow is one from Diane Stevens published on eHow.
http://www.ehow.com/how_6457338_repair-rotten-window-sills.html
Although this process uses a specific repair kit it highlights the fact that the remaining wood needs to be be stabilised and the assumption can be made that this is to prevent further or continuing rot.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Housing New Zealand claimed we denied access
Following a the formal notification from Tenancy Tribunal in their order and a letter that forwarded to me from Housing New Zealand claiming we had denied access to the property for contractors to undertake repairs I thought it prudent to publish the transcript between myself and the Housing New Zealand contractor.
This information was provided to the Adjudicator and both the Tenancy Manager Katrina O'Connor and the Manager of the Panmure Branch Robert Redford were informed that we had not denied access and given the opportunity to rectify their statement but seem to have ignored this.
Whilst in court and under oath Katrina O'Connor whilst representing Housing New Zealand on at least two occasions claimed that we had denied access to contractors.
Here is an extract from a transcript of a recording between myself and Housing New Zealands Contractor.
Andrew:
That’s good. That’s good. Hey just had some issues come up, we’ve been going through some of the bits and pieces and doing some preparation, we’ve been told by Housing that they have cancelled the work order because we denied access.
Contractor:
No, what I said was I emailed them and told them that you weren’t happy with the way that it was going to be to just have the hole filled up so that’s why as far as I know they’ve cancelled it. I’m not too sure. That’s as far as I’ve gone with it so …
Andrew:
Right, OK. No, they’re claiming and stating and certainly got written in their notes on the system that we denied access to the builders to be able to fill it up.
Contractor:
No, I just said to them that you weren’t going to be happy with what was done so there wasn’t much point in us doing the job so … they’ve got the notes for that so …
This information was provided to the Adjudicator and both the Tenancy Manager Katrina O'Connor and the Manager of the Panmure Branch Robert Redford were informed that we had not denied access and given the opportunity to rectify their statement but seem to have ignored this.
Whilst in court and under oath Katrina O'Connor whilst representing Housing New Zealand on at least two occasions claimed that we had denied access to contractors.
Here is an extract from a transcript of a recording between myself and Housing New Zealands Contractor.
Andrew:
That’s good. That’s good. Hey just had some issues come up, we’ve been going through some of the bits and pieces and doing some preparation, we’ve been told by Housing that they have cancelled the work order because we denied access.
Contractor:
No, what I said was I emailed them and told them that you weren’t happy with the way that it was going to be to just have the hole filled up so that’s why as far as I know they’ve cancelled it. I’m not too sure. That’s as far as I’ve gone with it so …
Andrew:
Right, OK. No, they’re claiming and stating and certainly got written in their notes on the system that we denied access to the builders to be able to fill it up.
Contractor:
No, I just said to them that you weren’t going to be happy with what was done so there wasn’t much point in us doing the job so … they’ve got the notes for that so …
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)