Hard News: Arrest the bastards at the border
142 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I, on the other hand, would respectfully suggest that there are huge communication problems between tenancy managers and Housing New Zealand management, since my relative is, in fact, following orders from his/her direct managers, and has done so for over ten years. And oh yeah, I was in a three-bedroom house. I was told I had to have flatmates by another one of HNZ's tenancy managers. So I got some. There appear to be more HNZ workers unaware of these policies than you think.
So if that's a real policy that isn't CYA, then perhaps it should be made clearer to your workers on the ground floor - who have particularly stressful jobs as it is. As you know, they spend a lot of their time wading through cockroach and rat-infested abandoned houses and being abused by the small minority of unreasonable tenants. But by all means, continue to imply that they're incompetent if you like.
(BTW, I'm not talking about 'evictions'. I'm talking about transfers to other, smaller HNZ homes. Do we have our wires crossed?)
-
If I hadn't bought a house, I would have tried to stay with them forever!
Hmmm. So you had enough money to pay a deposit and meet the mortgage payments? Methinks [presuming you didn't win Lotto/inheritance] you should have been required to leave a State House at the point your income took you out of the person in need bracket. Sure, you may have been paying 'market rent' towards the end, but you know that would have still been well below actual market rent. Which is possibly how you were able to save that deposit?
That you would have "tried to stay with them forever!" speaks to my earlier comments about the sense of entitlement some tenants feel.
-
Not that it's any of your business, InternationalObserver, but a) my partner moved from being a student to working full time and b) we did, in fact, receive an inheritance for a deposit. (I also got several raises, because I'm so awesome. ;)) So I'm afraid I can't be your scapegoat example in this particular instance.
I got so sniffy about this transfer-agreement policy that I rang said relative, who clarified: yes, tenants must agree (aha! so I am wrong, sorry!), but in over a decade my particular relative has never had anyone who refused to move. The wording of the transferral or flatmate-gaining request is, however, as per management instruction, meant to be pretty forceful, not wishy-washy. So Andrew, what's management policy on how these things are worded? Because I was never given the impression that I had a choice on the flatmate thing by that other tenancy manager, either. How are tenancy managers supposed to act? Do they get fired for sounding too imperative? I should let my relative know...
-
I just knew as I was writing my previous comment that it would be so! :-) (Hence my disclaimer)
Can you shed any further light on this requirement for flatmates/boarders? Do you have to find your own or do they assign one to you?! Sounds bizzare! And what about the rent/board they pay? Does that get added to your income? Reduce your Accommodation Supplement?
-
Retrofiting state Houses to improve Energy Efficiency - is a study by The Energy Management Group - at Uni of Otago.
Cost Benefit is still being done but initial results point to a 2/3rds saving on heating in a fully insultated house in Dunness.
Fuel Poverty indicates Christchurch having the larget fuel cost & number of fuel poor households.
Similar numbers as AKL but twice the costs with similar cost to Dunedin who have 1/2 the number of fuel poor households.If that's clear as mud.
-
You can find your own flatmates - HNZ aren't that draconian! You don't get an accommodation supplement if you're paying income-related-rent in an HNZ house - you're already being subsidised with your cheap rent. Board didn't get added to your total income as the holder of the tenancy, which is kind of a loophole for tenants I suppose, depending on how much board your flatmates paid. But this was a few years ago, so maybe they've changed that now...? Plus Andrew will probably tell me that management policy is actually totally different. :)
(The more I think about it, the crappier a tenancy manager's job is. You have to be all sound and fury, but in the end you signify nothing!)
-
I got so sniffy about this transfer-agreement policy that I rang said relative, who clarified: yes, tenants must agree (aha! so I am wrong, sorry!),
No sweat - I was wondering if the policy had changed since I left last year.
but in over a decade my particular relative has never had anyone who refused to move.
I can believe that - usually they're being transferred to a better property, or, as in the case of the Community Renewal projects (eg, Glen Innes), urged to move either temporarily or permanently. And offered a place in a new property in the same place when they're built or refurbished.
So Andrew, what's management policy on how these things are worded? Because I was never given the impression that I had a choice on the flatmate thing by that other tenancy manager, either.
I presume they are worded so as to comply with tenancy laws.
How are tenancy managers supposed to act? Do they get fired for sounding too imperative? I should let my relative know...
Did I say that? What I said was that they have to follow the rules. Your relative probably knows that already.
And on the subject of being told to get tenants - that was before you signed the lease? Because there wasn't a smaller property available to you? Yes, HNZC, with their Suitable Homes initiative, are quite keen to ensure their properties are utilised efficiently, they might (depending on demand & supply) decline to rent a 4 bedroom house to a single person or couple, but that's not the same as forcing you to get flatmates.
-
You can find your own flatmates - HNZ aren't that draconian!
And on a light note - you're maybe thinking of Corrections :)
-
I, on the other hand, would respectfully suggest that there are huge communication problems between tenancy managers and Housing New Zealand management,
and in the same vein... You might think that, but I couldn't possibly comment! :)
-
Board didn't get added to your total income as the holder of the tenancy, which is kind of a loophole for tenants I suppose, depending on how much board your flatmates paid. But this was a few years ago, so maybe they've changed that now...? Plus Andrew will probably tell me that management policy is actually totally different. :)
Actually as far as I know you're right & it hasn't changed. And it IS a loophole for some, although tenancy managers told me that it's a hard one to police because not everyone declares it.
it was/is a favourite parliamentary question. Some (not many) tenants were paying income related rents, taking in boarders & making a profit.
Oh and Danielle - one thing I didn't address before - no way do I consider HNZC tenancy managers incompetent in general. I've tagged along behind one or two on their rounds & I have nothing but respect for the jobs they do & the difficulties they face each day.
-
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Kumbaya my Lord, kumbaya
Oh Lord, kumbayaKUMBAYA
Traditional. Adapted and arranged by Robert DeCormier,
Peter Yarrow, Noel Paul Stookey and Mary Travers.
© 1998 Mapape Lake Music Publishing - ASCAP -
WH,
Last night I was out enjoying both the blustery cold and second hand reports of the Warriors' win. I got talking to a colleague who over the last seven years has made $1,000,000 on the property market. Over the same period he's earned about $500,000 in salary. Because of his savvy use of the LAQC structure, he faces a 10% marginal tax rate. (For comparative purposes, a worker on an average income faces a 33% marginal tax rate.)
I respect my colleague's achievement, and I believe that he is entitled to the rewards of his foresight and hard work. On the other hand, I believe that our property market is hurting our economy and disadvantaging ordinary people. IMO we face a problem that only a law change or a market correction can resolve.
My question is this: why was there so much momentum for the politically catastrophic Anti-Smacking Bill but so little behind moves to address a problem that affects so many ordinary New Zealanders?
Is it because almost everyone in a quasi-professional job has a second house or is thinking about getting one?Sue Bradford has frittered away the left's political support on an meaningless personal crusade. IMO it is incumbent on Bradford and her supporters to get it back. She might start by not putting up absurd private members bills.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10447178&pnum=0
-
This is a very warped thread.
I was hoping for much more comment pointed towards the two merchant bank tricksters, but on page one the subject was changed to welfare fraud in connection with state housing.
Having re-read the original post I am unable to see any mention of that topic.
I am looking forward to a future post on welfare accomodation fraud, so that those of you who know so much about housing might all be able to express some thoughts on Fay and Richwhite. -
I can only assume it's because there are about 3 people in these forums who know anything about Fay and Richwhite or care to comment on them.
-
So should it have been quite a short thread, Yamis?
-
Bryan you haven't added to the thread you've just complained, are you a British immigrant?
-
"why was there so much momentum for the politically catastrophic Anti-Smacking Bil"
Sues anti smaking bill is one whos time had come.
There is no better demonstration of this than the amazing accord of Green, Labour, National, Untied Future (he he), Maori - have I missed anyone? I mean was there a party against it?
And this may well save lives and will definately improve lives for families.
This means it wasn't 'just' a smack. As the rule of thumb has gone so too violence to kiddies needed to."Is it because almost everyone in a quasi-professional job has a second house or is thinking about getting one?"
Those who know are often paid by those who don't want to know or instruct them to tell them what thay want to know.
Who is speaking truth to power?
-
Is it True the BullDogs Rugby League Team have been banned from booze & porn?
-
Bryan you haven't added to the thread you've just complained, are you a British immigrant?
S'funny, it seemed to me that Brian made a damned good point about the rather strange direction that this thread's taken.
If you were attempting a joke with your 'British immigrant' reference, I'm afraid it slipped right by me. -
OK - Seems like people have very short memories.
Even though this action related to a separate episode in the Tranz Rail soap opera it is worth noting that the Brian Gaynor analysis from August 28, 1999 "Winebox winners and losers"
Thanks Paul Brislen, RB and others for mentioning it. It is still worth reading if anyone wants to return to the original post topic. (Thanks Merc for the wiki link - I went there and added the Gaynor link as they wanted a citation) so hopefully this information won't get lost again.
I remember when Gaynor wrote this particular column I cut it out an framed it as perhaps the first time FR had really called to account in a very public way. Gaynor
"The combined loss of minority shareholders is $277 million while the Fay, Richwhite interests have made a profit of $509 million.
These figures confirm two basic facts about the commercial scene in New Zealand:
*The tax avoidance business has been extremely lucrative for a number of individuals.
* Some company directors have insufficient regard for minority shareholders."Also thanks to Bryan for the sandpit story - really liked that one. Somehow they missed that little gem in the unauthorised Biography which came out in 1990 by I.Morrison, F.Haden and G.Cubis.
Anytime someone representing FR offers $20m you can be very sure that it was a great deal for them to do so.
-
Ahem, Michael -Bryan Dods offered us the sandpit story on page 2 of this thread which in my view has been one of the best contributions so far.
I was very upset by a lanky snooty sounding boy who wanted total control of all the toys in the sandpit.
Michael Fay was born on 10.04.49 - so 50 years ago he would have been 8 years old - But Bryan suggested it was longer ago than that so lets say 1955 when MF was 6 years old.
Very scary and funny all at the same time.
-
S'funny, it seemed to me that Brian made a damned good point about the rather strange direction that this thread's taken.
Masterful bit of derailment by Craig at the start - chuck a bit of beneficiary bashing in at the start, off the discussion goes at a tangent.
Interesting to see the claims of threats against the various investigating teams; wonder if they'll be substantiated.
-
No Michael, I am not British. Why ask? Are you a bigot?
Jason, my mention of time should have been 'circa' 50 years ago, not "over". Sir Michael F-F-Fay would have been about 8yrs if I figure that I was about 7.
His father was a well respected man in Insurance and Michael appeared to enjoy the importance.To those who contributed about housing; I enjoyed the knowledge that was spread and I have learned from it.
My frustration came from the weave of the thread.
I did so want to comment on the excerpt from "God Bless You,Mr Rosewater", but by the time I was able to come back to the forum discussion had moved well away from the topic of slurping.Kurt Vonnegut Jr. had a wonderful way of simplifying complex matters.
I reread "The Sirens Of Titan" a few months back. Even though the book is 'about' 50 yrs old it throws a very clear light on religious and personal beliefs that are still relevant now.
It makes me wish it was on Secondary School reading lists so that these values could be discussed by those who are learning about our brave new world.
R.I.P. K.V.Jr.My apologies to those who think I have wandered off-topic.
-
Bryan Dods
I thought that (page 2 post) was something you made up, a story, not the bitterness of an 8yr old held onto for 50years.
Spot the oxymoron "His father was a well respected man in Insurance and Michael appeared to enjoy the importance."
My bias is against 'Salty Dicks' as the Yarpies call them. A foot in each camp and the old fella in the sea (almost sounds like a compliment though).
Threads twist & turn and it seems dear Craig can take credit for this one. Which I think turned out more dignified than 50 years of envy coming to a crescendo with a sand pit story.
-
I am looking forward to a future post on welfare accomodation fraud, so that those of you who know so much about housing might all be able to express some thoughts on Fay and Richwhite.
The reason this thread went OT was because what more can be said about FR than hasn't already been said? (yes, the same could be said about state housing, welfare cheats, etc)
Also, some of us were discussing FR on another thread a week ago (prior to this settlement being announced) so are we meant to repeat orselves?
Also, the FR Gaynor link has been posted on this thread twice and if you've read it there's little more to be said. There seems little defence of FR here on PA at least, whereas the OT stuff is being debated.
Otherwise we're just venting?
Yes, it's galling to know that the'yre 'getting away with it' (despite the 20 mill no fault settlement) but lets hope Govt's now will be a little smarter. And maybe they are, judging by the termination of the South Island 'tenure review'. What a dumbRs rort that was.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.