|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 4, 2009 12:18:14 GMT 12
With thanks to Bingbong for this media statement:
Hon Phil Heatley
Minister of Housing
4 March 2009
Media Statement
Antisocial tenants won’t be tolerated
Housing Minister Phil Heatley says Housing New Zealand Corporation has his full support following news it has taken unprecedented action against antisocial tenants by issuing a swag of 90 day notices against Mongrel Mob members and their associates.
The Residential Tenancies Act provides landlords with the power to give tenants a notice asking them to leave after 90 days. There is no requirement under the law to give a reason for this action.
“Peaceful and respectful behaviour is expected of state house tenants, as it is of all New Zealanders. The vast majority of tenants are wonderful to work with. However, those few who blatantly disregard their tenancy agreement risk losing the opportunity of a state home,” Mr Heatley said.
He acknowledged that the presumption has been that because Housing New Zealand houses New Zealand’s most vulnerable families its tenancy actions should be tested in the Tenancy Tribunal.
“That will continue to be the case for the vast majority of tenancy issues the corporation deals with. They will still go through the Tenancy Tribunal,” Mr Heatley said.
“However, Housing New Zealand believes there are a small number of serious cases where the community deserves a swift and definitive outcome about what will happen to a tenancy, and I agree with them.”
“We can’t expect witnesses to give testimony in front of people they have been severely intimidated by, and often live next door to.”
Mr Heatley endorsed Housing New Zealand’s stand that it will in future act against tenants involved in serious anti-social behaviour.
“Time is up for those tenants who have cynically gamed the system by terrorising communities knowing their victims would never complain, or if they did complain they would never give evidence.”
The Minister confirmed he is talking to Housing New Zealand about options for sharpening the consequences of terminating a tenancy, such as introducing mandatory stand-down periods before tenants can re-apply for state housing, and probation periods for former offenders who resume state tenancies following a stand-down.
“If such people do not appreciate the opportunity of living in a state home there are plenty of needy families on the waiting list who do,” Mr Heatley said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Too true. Most tenants are good. It's the small minority that spoil it for the rest. Solution? Kick out the bad ones and give them to good people on the waiting list.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 4, 2009 12:57:27 GMT 12
With thanks to bingbong Eviction notices issued after court appearances Updated at 8:59am on 4 March 2009 www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/03/04/1245a36fc039Housing New Zealand is evicting five families after disturbances in the suburb of Pomare of Lower Hutt. Intimidation by Mongrel Mob members forced a woman and her two children to flee the neighbourhood on 1 February. Nine men are before the Lower Hutt District Court on a variety of charges including burglary, receiving stolen property and possession of cannabis. Three were remanded in custody on Tuesday on charges of threatening behaviour. Housing New Zealand on Tuesday served the tenants in Farmer Crescent with 90 day notices. The notices were issued under the Residential Tenancies Act. The agency says another 30 tenancies in Pomare are being closely monitored. Complaints about the family of a tenant in a state house in Auckland have taken over two years to resolve, with the occupants finally moving out of the premises in Range View Road. Listen to more on Morning Report Copyright © 2009 Radio New Zealand |
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 4, 2009 12:58:06 GMT 12
Once again - with thanks to bingbong:
'Terror' tenants told to get out
The Dominion Post
Last updated 08:57 04/03/2009
CRAIG SIMCOX/Dominion Post
A HARD LINE: Patria Tamaka says the partners and children of gang members will be the ones who are really hurt by the evictions.
Relevant offers
Housing New Zealand is evicting five people it says are terrorising the Lower Hutt suburb of Pomare.
The hardline approach comes after a woman and her two young children fled their Farmer Cres home last month following threats.
Housing NZ delivered tenancy termination notices to five tenants in and around Farmer Cres yesterday, giving them 90 days to leave.
Residents of the houses included three gang members charged with intimidating the woman and two men who allegedly burgled her home a day later.
The new national policy, which sidesteps the Tenancy Tribunal, follows a two-year legal battle to get the Salt family -dubbed "the neighbours from hell" - evicted from a state house in Auckland.
Housing NZ chief executive Lesley McTurk was satisfied the five tenants or their households had "severely disturbed the community", which deserved to have its safety protected.
They were monitoring nearly 30 other state house tenants in Pomare and may take action if they breached their tenancy obligations.
Dr McTurk said there had been home invasions and other anti- social incidents in Pomare during the past six months.
"We have not been able to take action in those cases because of the difficulty in getting evidence from witnesses who are too intimidated or terrorised by their neighbours to come forward."
Housing NZ would work with police in Pomare to tackle gang activity, and would also review troubled tenancies throughout the country.
But the evictions of gang members would only really hurt their women and children, relatives say.
Patria Tamaka, who has lived in Farmer Cres most of her life, said the evictions would mean at least 15 children were wrenched out of the tight-knit community.
The news had left the gang members' partners wondering where they would go.
"I knew people would have to be evicted as the area was renewed, but not like this. It's not fair. It's the women and children who are going to pay."
- By BRITTON BROUN, The Dominion Post
|
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 4, 2009 14:29:55 GMT 12
Well Miss, Housing New Zealand tenant, re "the news had left gang members partners wondering where they should go"
Well I will tell where they CAN GO:
No not there.
They can go and get there life back on track without those weirdos that contribute nothing but havoc and destruction and the Housing New Zealand neighbours can start to live and feel safe.
The partners can leave there stupid gang remember boyfriends where as reported on another news story communicate with "bark and growl with" one another at home, !!!!!!! I prefer to converse at home rather than grunt myself.
That the state can start being a leader in providing housing rather than proving ghetto like environments.
That Housing New Zealand are no longer a soft touch and that there are real consequences for one's own actions ie live nicely or go to the gutter.
I say get rid of the scum bags.
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 4, 2009 15:46:08 GMT 12
Well Miss, Housing New Zealand tenant, re "the news had left gang members partners wondering where they should go" Well I will tell where they CAN GO: No not there. They can go and get there life back on track without those weirdos that contribute nothing but havoc and destruction and the Housing New Zealand neighbours can start to live and feel safe. The partners can leave there stupid gang remember boyfriends where as reported on another news story communicate with "bark and growl with" one another at home, !!!!!!! I prefer to converse at home rather than grunt myself. That the state can start being a leader in providing housing rather than proving ghetto like environments. That Housing New Zealand are no longer a soft touch and that there are real consequences for one's own actions ie live nicely or go to the gutter. I say get rid of the scum bags. Spoken like a true Nation party puppet. Problems don't just 'disappear'. Government departments exist to deal with them. Housing New Zealand exists to provide shelter for those who might otherwise be homeless. The cynic in me says that this government sees its housing stock as a saleable resource, and the 'nicer' the tennants who occupy it, the better the price it will command when it is either put into private management, or sold off altogether. I don't dispute that we have a gang problem, but I'm smart enough to realise that much as I'd like it to just go away, the removal of essential services will not change a single thing. |
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 4, 2009 18:01:15 GMT 12
I actually agree with bingbong, Naki and I can assure you both his and my party politics are centre-left. When you having waiting lists of people trying to get into HNZ homes and you have tenants that do not appreciate the opportunity they have been given, then they lose their privileges. As said earlier, about 95% of HNZ tenants are fine. About 5% aren't. There has to be some standard or level of behaviour/criteria to which they meet (or are prepared to meet). Instead the worst tenants make life a living hell for other good tenants. I have no sympathy for them and if they didn't want to lose their HNZ status, then they should have behaved to an acceptable level. They didn't. They're gone and if they find life tougher for them, too bad.
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 4, 2009 23:30:43 GMT 12
They won't find life a bit tougher.... they'll just find some other way to put a roof over their heads. As always, it will be their partners who shoulder the responsibility, and those partners will do whatever it takes to provide shelter. If Housing New Zealand is allowed to sidestep its social responsibilities, the private sector will end up paying for the damage caused by the clowns, and the average Joe who needs to rent a home will find it harder to get a tenancy as a result. If John Key insists on political showboating to retain the talkback vote, and the undesireable tennants get shunted into the private sector, it could result in a lot of small investors quitting the rental industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 4, 2009 23:59:29 GMT 12
So you are prepared to house gang members that make other tenants' lives miserable in order to protect their partners? Their partners aren't protected inside HNZ. Maybe the partners need to consider who they are partnering up with. I have little to no tolerance for these people now. They have been well resourced by the State and appear to view the same as a "right" and not a privilege. When people are prepared to act this way - time for them to have some real world consequences. If they didn't want to go to the private sector then they quite simply should have behaved in the HNZ homes they were given at the largesse of the State. They act this way because they think that their actions will be tolerated because people are worried about their partners and children. It's a real pity they aren't as worried about their partners and children. They might have acted better if they had been.
|
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 5, 2009 1:22:10 GMT 12
Naki, the private sector doesn't have a tolerance for this type of anti social behaviour nor should the state . Some of the people placed into HNZ accommodation have medical conditions are recovering and getting their lives back together after escaping from domestic violence, elderly and others who have fallen on hard times. I am glad we have a state housing system that can house these people who appreciate the states support and can lift them from the dirge.
Imagine being a domestic violence victim and the horror that experience is and then being placed in an environment the is hostile, like living next door to a gang member. The gang members that have partners usually have children. HNZ doesn't have a policy of housing gang members. How to they get there? Well they use there female partners and children to quality and cheat those who are authentically on the waiting list. The current national government clearly is taking an active approach and if a person cant behave they go.
Incidentally you have leaped in once again in a subject area clearly from your writing that you cant grasp the wood from the trees.
Landlords include HNZ don't chuck out good tenants.
Please Naki with your incredible insight and openness to the dysfunctional please open your home, you can have them.
Perhaps it will made some wake up and act as a deterrent to others that HNZ is no longer going to be soft on intimidation and anti social destructive behaviour which makes sense.
Your rational made no sense but then there is no sense in nonsense, although at some level Naki I did find your post a good expression of pathetic. I am prepared to acknowledge you do pathetic very well. ;D
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 5, 2009 1:29:01 GMT 12
You disagree with me, so you choose to insult me. Very mature.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 5, 2009 1:30:44 GMT 12
You disagree with me, so you choose to insult me. Very mature. Um Naki, you started with the insults i.e. "nation's puppet" etc. |
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 5, 2009 1:34:45 GMT 12
UI'm sure that bingbong accepts such titles as a badge of honour.
Speaking as an outsider, bingbong, what do you make of the human race?
[seems appropriate that this thread had dropped to name-calling, rather than seeking solutions. It's all those useless bastards in government know after 9 years in the sin bin]
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 5, 2009 1:46:24 GMT 12
A challenge to the know-alls who think that this policy is a good idea
Try to forget about what you'd like to happen to these people and focus on reality for a minute. Tell us what you think will be the most likely outcome for this policy will be.....
will the displaced gang members -
a/ See the error of their ways, get haircuts, get jobs, and start going to church on Sundays?
or b/ Find themselves alternative accomodation [or new partners who already have State housing] and continue exactly as before?
Clearly National is either clueless as to solving this issue, and would rather do something that appeals to the cheap votes than come up woith any long-term solution.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 5, 2009 10:46:27 GMT 12
I don't think a matter of what people would like to see what is going to happen, it's a matter of what is going to happen now with their policy direction.
A) Would be nice, but probably unrealistic.
B) They will have to find alternative accommodation - probably in the private sector which will cost them more.
C) Some of them might actually modify their behaviour while waiting for new accommodation at the back of the waiting list.
D) Some of them will continue their scuzzy behaviour - no matter what you do and if they just go and find alternative partners, then it gives substance to the point that they care less about their partners than the people who want to keep them in HNZ homes to support their partners.
E) If you can get booted from HNZ for bad behaviour, then it might serve as a warning to other tenants that there is a standard to meet.
|
|
|
|
Post by sparrow on Mar 5, 2009 10:47:45 GMT 12
UI'm sure that bingbong accepts such titles as a badge of honour. Speaking as an outsider, bingbong, what do you make of the human race? [seems appropriate that this thread had dropped to name-calling, rather than seeking solutions. It's all those useless bastards in government know after 9 years in the sin bin] Why? That seems ridiculous to me that you would descend to ad hominem because bingbong offered an opinion that, obviously, differs from yours (and mine) on this subject. |
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 5, 2009 10:58:27 GMT 12
Naki clearly National are making common sense it dealing with this PROBLEM. In that there is leadership and direction and this policy will flush out anti social people who will either make some personal adjustment or they wont but people who are just wanting to live there life happily in their state home can have a normal range environment.
What do you Naki consider how to deal with anti social state tenants and gang members who are terrorising other neighbours?
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 5, 2009 17:10:38 GMT 12
National are not dealing with the problem. They're more interested in making their tennant base more attractive to buyers of HNZ.
If National were serious about dealing with the problems arising from criminal activities by HNZ tennants, they would use the police and the law courts.
Housing New Zealand is NOT a kangaroo court.
|
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 5, 2009 21:39:02 GMT 12
Naki re reply 16. You are not making sense.
National are serious hence making decisions that are real with real affects. You clearly cant grasp tenancy law and the complications of it and the practicalities of it. The most affective way is the new direction.
Your comment "Housing New Zealand is NOT a kangaroo court" No. Naki, Housing New Zealand issuing a 90 day notice to quit to tenants is not some arbitrary process. It is following the rule of law is what civilised people do and a useful decision with tenants that are not functioning in a reasonable neighbourly way. The 90 day options is one that many private landlords give to tenants as well.
Landlords never want to get rid of good tenants.
You have a shallow thought process that lacks depth in cognition possibly. There are many levels in thought a surface level is just that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lux on Mar 5, 2009 21:52:54 GMT 12
I wonder though what effect it would have if gang members are evicted, they do tend to live close to other gang associates unless they want to change the life style.
If they are evicted from one area will that mean the problems they cause are wider spread?
There are definitely ways to get around the housing problem as someone else said they'll just get someone else to seek accommodation for them at where ever they want to be. They do that anyway.
It will be interesting to see what actually comes of it, because I can't see the problem disappearing into thin air.
What housing corp could also consider is to relocate good tenants into areas where they could enjoy a safer environment.
National would be pretty stupid to start selling off state owned housing in this current downturn - though they have considered it in the past and they could be looking at long term solutions to paying off massive debt that they will being creating over the next few years.
|
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 5, 2009 22:49:59 GMT 12
re Lux i think it starts to change the culture of the HNZ accommodation where the 90 day notice is part of a sequence of things;
*an initial flush out of anti social via a way one 90 days notice
*new tenancies created that are probationary ie a series of 60 days tenancies renewed and no problems, then the usual periodic tenancy that is easier to manage. If the new tenants hood wink via the application process as in the old way. HNZ stuck with a bad tenant that was difficult to dislodge.
*Gang and partners will always try an manipulate but becoming harder to get away with it in terms of naming the actual people on the tenancy and for them only as the old tenancy agreement may have specified a total of 3/4 not named difficult to dislodge.
*More inspections of tenancies.
I don't think moving the gang problem in the community will mean that it is wider it isolates them out more. In HNZ properties concentration of them creates climates of fear and in numbers more people feel intimidated and difficult to flush out.
Actually the problems of some do evaporate into thin air as they dont have a state housing management system that tolerates vile behaviour so the really dumb ones will go others will modify behaviour as the reality of a market rent for many will kick in some realities but it is encapsulated by a multi approach of monitoring and swift management approaches. The prior way didn't work and created a state tenant folk law of can do what ever one want as there were very little consequences.
I think many tenants are good it is a small intense anti social lot that create little tornadoes and wreck havoc and there power base is now diminishing.
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 5, 2009 23:48:17 GMT 12
You have a shallow thought process that lacks depth in cognition possibly. There are many levels in thought a surface level is just that. You are the one with the simplistic 'solution'. You seem to lack the basic brain cells required to comprehend that simply throwing these people out of houses will never make them go away. National's batty policies will nerver be a substitute for responsible government. They might appeal to blue-collar conservatives, but the realists know that they are just window-dressing. |
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 6, 2009 0:01:37 GMT 12
re Naki reply #20. Well Naki throwing them actually out does make them go away. They are not in state houses any more. Actually I have never been a particular fan of National however I am able to look at the merits of a given situation rather than the pre written script that you cant get out of your head and evaluate.
You offer no solutions as requested.
I also can make adjustment for those who are limited, here I have made a substantial adjustment in fact the void is so large I wont go into it.
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 6, 2009 0:10:45 GMT 12
You must be even thicker than I first thought.
I have offered the obvious solution in post 16.
Perhaps you should look up solution in the dictionary, you appear to be using it out of context.
|
|
|
|
Post by bingbong on Mar 6, 2009 0:43:03 GMT 12
Naki I was aware of what you wrote in reply 16 when I posted and that isnt a solution if you understand the Residential Tenancies Act which clearly you don't. I do however and you haven't offered a solution that is real. Provide real solutions, what are they, Naki?
|
|
naki
Full Member
Posts: 233
|
Post by naki on Mar 6, 2009 7:36:39 GMT 12
You are wasting my time. The Residential Tenancies Act was not written with the intention that government ministers could issue mass eviction notices against tennants based on their membership of a specific group. If it is now against the law to be a gang member, by all means allow the police to act within their powers. If these people are committing offences, again, the mechanisms exist to deal with them through the law courts.
If , however, tennancies are being terminated at the whim of politicians in the hope of political gain, then it is the politicians who need evicting.
This country should not be mismanaged to appease the simpletons who infest talk-back radio.
|
|
