sharetrader
Page 255 of 255 FirstFirst ... 155205245251252253254255
Results 2,541 to 2,548 of 2548
  1. #2541
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mistaTea View Post
    It is irrelevant whether you want to refer to it as it actually is (shelter) or use an emotive term (home).

    The relevant point is that I own the shelter/home.

    And I should have an avenue to stop renting it out to someone without having to make up a reason.

    Yes, a reasonable notice period needs to be given. I think 3 months is reasonable.

    You are trying to make a ‘big thing’ out of nothing. You should have gotten a job with Paddy while the going was still good if ‘making news’ is your business.
    You’ are right a home is a type of physical shelter. Home however is not an emotive term. It has quite a different meaning from shelter, which is more aptly applied to structures such as bus shelters, That people use sporadically. Similarly families, who are indeed human beings have homes in rental housing. For some reason you seem to want to make peoples homes into more of a transactional investment commodity.

    Sure the news for you is that some human beings form families and some of these families need to establish homes in rental accommodation.

    However if 40% plus of Aucklanders homes are treated more as mere shelters, then we will need to/ are dealing with the social consequences.
    Last edited by Bjauck; Today at 07:32 PM.

  2. #2542
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackcap View Post
    Exactly. Property rights. You own the property. You can do what you like with it.

    3 months is perfectly reasonable.

    Heck next Bjauck and others will be advocating that your personal vehicle is actually not yours and certain conditions are attached.

    You rightly point out that it is totally irrelevant whether it is a shelter, home or haven. That's just emotive nonsense and playing semantics.

    Either we have property rights or we don't.

    p.s I am a small landlord. Most tenants are great. But you need to be able to be selective and also not have to make up a BS reason if you want your house back.
    I look after tenants that look after my place. It's symbiotic and works well. They don't get annual rates increases and if there is one it is well below market.
    The tenants that do not look after the place, out they go.
    You certainly cannot do whatever you like with your “shelter “ that is a house. I remember there were all sorts of codes that have to be complied with. NZ law extends over your house. His Majesty bestows on us certain rights. The Crown can actually end up doing what it likes with your property.

    We have such property rights that the Crown allows us. You need to be aged over 15 to own a car for a start. Your motor vehicle can only be operated with a licence, with a warrant of fitness and driven by a licensed driver. Cars can be taken off owners, impounded, confiscated and destroyed in certain circumstances. The Crown can further limit property rights over cars, and anything else, if it so pleases.
    Last edited by Bjauck; Today at 08:08 PM.

  3. #2543
    Legend Balance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Posts
    21,549

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjauck View Post
    Sure the news for you is that some human beings form families and some of these families need to establish homes in rental accommodation.
    In which case, they must learn to be good tenants because there are very very few cases of good tenants being asked to leave for no good reason.

    Maybe you need to visit a few Kainga WTF Ora properties to see 'families' establishing homes in rental accommodation with the NO EVICTION policy :

    "Kāinga Ora has yet to cancel any tenancies or evict a single tenant since it was instructed to more vigourously employ the law against unruly renters.

    The housing agency has, however, moved 113 households, although it admits about half of those are tenants who have chosen to move away from their disruptive neighbours."

    Last edited by Balance; Today at 07:27 PM.

  4. #2544
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    In which case, they must learn to be good tenants because there are very very few cases of good tenants being asked to leave for no good reason.

    Maybe you need to visit a few Kainga WTF Ora properties to see 'families' establishing homes in rental accommodation with the NO EVICTION policy :

    "Kāinga Ora has yet to cancel any tenancies or evict a single tenant since it was instructed to more vigourously employ the law against unruly renters.

    The housing agency has, however, moved 113 households, although it admits about half of those are tenants who have chosen to move away from their disruptive neighbours."

    Bjauck needs a reality check.

    Going mental because the new govt says landlords can give a quarter of a year notice if they don’t want to rent their property any more.

    Jesus, what a bunch of despicable c*nts!!!

    As you say, good tenants getting the boot got no reason at all will be virtually zilch.

    Next!

  5. #2545
    Guru
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    4,716

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    In which case, they must learn to be good tenants because there are very very few cases of good tenants being asked to leave for no good reason.

    Maybe you need to visit a few Kainga WTF Ora properties to see 'families' establishing homes in rental accommodation with the NO EVICTION policy :

    "Kāinga Ora has yet to cancel any tenancies or evict a single tenant since it was instructed to more vigourously employ the law against unruly renters.

    The housing agency has, however, moved 113 households, although it admits about half of those are tenants who have chosen to move away from their disruptive neighbours."

    just to be clear I am not advocating for No Eviction policy, just against the “no cause” eviction.
    Last edited by Bjauck; Today at 08:01 PM.

  6. #2546
    Membaa
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Paradise
    Posts
    5,312

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjauck View Post
    just to be clear I am not advocating for No Eviction policy, just the “no cause” eviction.
    Let's just say you own a property, and you lease it to someone on a contract. The renter has no obligation to give reason (cause) why they might choose to terminate the contract and leave. You however think that you the owner and lessor of the property should be obligated to have a reason 'cause' for terminating the contract?

    Why would you suggest and support this imbalance in contract law, where one party has to give cause, whereas the other party need not give cause?

  7. #2547
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    963

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Balance View Post
    Deafening silence from dobby41 and the woke posters on this site.

    Deafening!

    Interesting considering these posters are the self-promoted champions of the parasites, beneficiaries and losers bred by their beloved Labour, Greens, Ardern & Hipkins.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/northern-...IYUF2BYYKYMDM/

    So this 'poor wretched woman' has 8 children and 5 of them, aged 4 to 16 live with her since since 2016 when she moved into the Kainga Ora (KO) 3 bedrooms apartment.

    Point #1 : She has been in the KO unit for 8 years and in that time, she has produced at least another 3 children (to how many fathers?) - while on full social welfare entitlements. No presumption required here.
    What kind of mother or human being does that - bring ever more children on welfare into the world?quote

    Read the article again. The 3 children maybe are older and have left home?

    westerly

  8. #2548
    Guru
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    3,858

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Baa_Baa View Post
    Let's just say you own a property, and you lease it to someone on a contract. The renter has no obligation to give reason (cause) why they might choose to terminate the contract and leave. You however think that you the owner and lessor of the property should be obligated to have a reason 'cause' for terminating the contract?

    Why would you suggest and support this imbalance in contract law, where one party has to give cause, whereas the other party need not give cause?
    Because like all the other woke, he hasn’t thought it through.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •