Labour govt 2020-23

[dobby41]

I'm the new face of poverty, thats what.

I mean to say, no garage remote, how will I ever cope?

And no manhole cover in the ceiling, heck, cant I find a spare towel or blanket to stuff over it in the meantime.

Such hardship, such new world problems!

BTW, got a spare $1000 you can give me?

If that was the only issue addressed with the payment then I'd agree with you.
Is it the sum total of the issue?

6 months isn't 'in the meantime'.
Maybe the landlord should have worked a bit harder on the timing front.
I have read the media report and the judgements many times and they often have a sparse relationship.

[Getty]

If that was the only issue addressed with the payment then I'd agree with you.
Is it the sum total of the issue?

6 months isn't 'in the meantime'.
Maybe the landlord should have worked a bit harder on the timing front.
I have read the media report and the judgements many times and they often have a sparse relationship.

Most tenants like a "sparse" relationship, they don't want the landlord hanging around all the time.

[Getty]

[QUOTE=Getty;927334]More being kind.

Story in todays Herald, a Canterbury tenant was awarded $1000, because along with another couple of minor matters, the landlord had not given him a garage door remote for @ 6 months.

Tenancy Tribunal Adjudicator J Greene said; " being without a remote is inconvenient to say the least"

The poor tenant, who looks in his 20's!!

I've managed such inconvenience for all my life, what about you ?

I never knew I was so under privileged!

Glad I've sold my rentals though...[/QUOTE

More landlords will view such judgements, and consider other anti enterprise measures Jacinda's punitive regime have introduced, and decide its time to reduce exposure to, or exit the market to cash out on the back of high prices caused by back firing policies, & escape future tax grabs.

Who will that benefit?

Not those that can't live without a garage remote, that's for sure!

[Bill Smith]

[QUOTE=Getty;927390][QUOTE=Getty;927334]More being kind.

Story in todays Herald, a Canterbury tenant was awarded $1000, because along with another couple of minor matters, the landlord had not given him a garage door remote for @ 6 months.

Tenancy Tribunal Adjudicator J Greene said; " being without a remote is inconvenient to say the least"

The poor tenant, who looks in his 20's!!

I've managed such inconvenience for all my life, what about you ?

I never knew I was so under privileged!

Glad I've sold my rentals though...[/QUOTE

More landlords will view such judgements, and consider other anti enterprise measures Jacinda's punitive regime have introduced, and decide its time to reduce exposure to, or exit the market to cash out on the back of high prices caused by back firing policies, & escape future tax grabs.

Well Luke Dyer from Rangiora, best you buy a house for your family as every PM and landlord in Canterbury will have made a mental note that you are not going to be their tenant.

[artemis]

More landlords will view such judgements, and consider other anti enterprise measures Jacinda's punitive regime have introduced, and decide its time to reduce exposure to, or exit the market to cash out on the back of high prices caused by back firing policies, & escape future tax grabs.

Well Luke Dyer from Rangiora, best you buy a house for your family as every PM and landlord in Canterbury will have made a mental note that you are not going to be their tenant.

Interesting to see what, if anything, happens with the new application for a rent reduction. Their earlier application for this was dismissed as their case was not made. The adjudicator at the Tenancy Tribunal declined to order tenant name suppression (as requested) or reimbursement of the filing fee as the tenant's case mainly failed. It is not that common to see criticism of a tenant applicant as in this case.

[fungus pudding]

Not sure what this has to do with Labour?
You need to read the actual judgement - more to it than a remote.

So why not post it !

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/canter...63GDXWVR3IERA/

[Entrep]

[QUOTE=Bill Smith;927401][QUOTE=Getty;927390]

More being kind.

Story in todays Herald, a Canterbury tenant was awarded $1000, because along with another couple of minor matters, the landlord had not given him a garage door remote for @ 6 months.

Tenancy Tribunal Adjudicator J Greene said; " being without a remote is inconvenient to say the least"

The poor tenant, who looks in his 20's!!

I've managed such inconvenience for all my life, what about you ?

I never knew I was so under privileged!

Glad I've sold my rentals though...[/QUOTE

More landlords will view such judgements, and consider other anti enterprise measures Jacinda's punitive regime have introduced, and decide its time to reduce exposure to, or exit the market to cash out on the back of high prices caused by back firing policies, & escape future tax grabs.

Well Luke Dyer from Rangiora, best you buy a house for your family as every PM and landlord in Canterbury will have made a mental note that you are not going to be their tenant.

Excellent, the less miserable, penny pinching landlords the better, they make the rest of us decent ones look terrible.

You are not a god merely because you are a landlord. Unbelievable attitudes. The level of entitlement and perceived superiority some of you appear to have over young people and/or renters is disgusting.

[Balance]

[QUOTE=Entrep;927436][QUOTE=Bill Smith;927401]

Excellent, the less miserable, penny pinching landlords the better, they make the rest of us decent ones look terrible.

You are not a god merely because you are a landlord. Unbelievable attitudes. The level of entitlement and perceived superiority some of you appear to have over young people and/or renters is disgusting.

Agree with you.

It is inexcusable to not give a tenant a remote garage opener for 6 months. It’s not that difficult or complicated!

[dobby41]

So why not post it !

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/canter...63GDXWVR3IERA/

[QUOTE=Balance;927440][QUOTE=Entrep;927436]

Agree with you.

It is inexcusable to not give a tenant a remote garage opener for 6 months. It’s not that difficult or complicated!

Maybe people should deal with facts.
The order is here - simple to find and public record
https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search...Number=4300439

The $1k was not for the remote - it was for

Patrick South and Jecasta South must pay Luke Allan Dyer and Paayal Preetika
$1,000.00 immediately, as compensation for delayed building and landscaping
matters and for breaches of the tenants’ quiet enjoyment

Much of what the tenant applied for wasn't given - the tenant didn't prove all their case (often happens).

The landlord was further ordered to complete the following
Patrick South and Jecasta South must complete the following work within 14
days of the date of this order. If they fail to do so they must pay Luke Allan Dyer
and Paayal Preetika $300.00 immediately after the expiry of the 14-day period. If
they fail to make that payment Luke Allan Dyer and Paayal Preetika are
authorised to complete the work and charge it to Patrick South and Jecasta
South:
 Repair the ranch slider door frame
 Install a lock (or provide a key to the existing lock) that enables the garage
side door to be locked from the outside.

Read the order then decide if it is reasonable, on balance, or not - don't just rely on a newspaper report (any landlord will tell you that they feel these are generally biased, the bias, though, depends on the narrative the paper is trying to give).

I still can't work out what this has to do with Labour but I may have missed some part of the thread?

[fungus pudding]

[QUOTE=dobby41;927445][QUOTE=Balance;927440]

Maybe people should deal with facts.
The order is here - simple to find and public record
https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search...Number=4300439

The $1k was not for the remote - it was for


Much of what the tenant applied for wasn't given - the tenant didn't prove all their case (often happens).


Read the order then decide if it is reasonable, on balance, or not - don't just rely on a newspaper report (any landlord will tell you that they feel these are generally biased, the bias, though, depends on the narrative the paper is trying to give).

I still can't work out what this has to do with Labour but I may have missed some part of the thread?

It doesn't have anything to do with Labour.