Nat/act/nzf 2023

[Bjauck]

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.

[Balance]

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."

[mistaTea]

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!

[Bjauck]

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.

[Baa_Baa]

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?

[westerly]

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

[mistaTea]

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.

[Bjauck]

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?

First, it would not necessarily be an imbalance as there are various rights and obligations on both sides. Contracts are also subject to public policy as reflected in the statutory requirements.

Second, for a variety of reasons I decided some time ago never to be a landlord of a residential property. This has probably cost me from a purely transactional investment point of view, as I think some of my peer group have had excellent investment returns from leveraged residential rental investments., in excess of the returns I have received from my shares and funds.

All investment classes have different laws and rules pertaining to them. I would recognise that renting out housing would have specific rules: Such as rules relating to health, safety and other standards. As this investment specifically relates to providing accommodation, for “human beings” some of whom may be bringing up families, then I would realise that would come with obligations. Of course, if I no longer wished to provide accommodation, I could sell the property giving the otherwise good tenants at least 90 days (I think) notice that I may need vacant possession for the sale.

[mistaTea]

Of course, if I no longer wished to provide accommodation, I could sell the property giving the otherwise good tenants at least 90 days (I think) notice that I may need vacant possession for the sale.

And good for you.

But there is no requirement to sell it if you want to stop renting it to someone (as you seem to think there should be).

If I have a tenant living in one of my properties - and I decide I no longer wish to rent the property out to the tenant, I quite rightly have an avenue to do so.

Whether I am doing it because I intend to sell the property, or prefer to rent the property out to someone else I know, or have split from my wife and need my own place to live, or want to move my whole family into the rental is actually none of my tenants business.

I don’t have to provide evidence or a good story as you seem to think. All I have to do is give a minimum of 90 days notice.

You are desperately trying to make a big deal out of a non-issue.

[Bjauck]

mistaTea;1048087 And good for you. Thanks. I was asked if I thought there is an imbalance in contract law. I do not. Even when coalition statutory changes come into force, it will just change the mix of rights and obligations. The whole housing and rental market is riddled with the effects of government policy, requirements and subsidies. This of course benefits landlords as well as tenants. There is not an uncontrolled free market. The fact NZ households seems to prefer to invest in residential housing by a margin over investing in equities indicates where the balance of cost/benefit of entering contracts has lain.

But there is no requirement to sell it if you want to stop renting it to someone (as you seem to think there should be. Sure, if a tenancy has legally ended. You can keep you investment property empty, or keep it is an extra home. It could become an expensive exercise, with negative returns in a consolidating property market. Not a good investment. However that is up to you if you can, and are prepared to bear those costs.

If I have a tenant living in one of my properties - and I decide I no longer wish to rent the property out to the tenant, I quite rightly have an avenue to do so. From 2025, when the Residential Tenancy Act amendments with no cause evictions take effect. Will the amendments be retrospective - and apply to pre-exisiting agreements?

Whether I am doing it because I intend to sell the property, or prefer to rent the property out to someone else I know, or have split from my wife and need my own place to live, or want to move my whole family into the rental is actually none of my tenants business.

I don’t have to provide evidence or a good story as you seem to think. All I have to do is give a minimum of 90 days notice.

You are desperately trying to make a big deal out of a non-issue.
You had the conniptions over my posts.