I wish houses would self clean, but they don’t.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/national/93141424/councils-cant-shut-down-dangerous-boarding-houses-fast-enough-as-homeless-kiwis-are-forced-into-houses-with-no-toilets-no-kitchens

I’m totally against slum landlords and this place does sound like a slum with fundamental problems, but a lot of the problems are caused by the tenants and they won’t fix unless the landlord kicks the people out. Carmel Sepuloni may have submitted the petition regarding better regulation of boarding houses but you can guarantee her motives are different to the neighbours who started the petition. The neighbours don’t want to live next to these type of people and want them shut down. The reality is most of the people here will have bad credit, criminal histories and rulings against them in the tenancy tribunal for the state they keep a rental in, no one else wants to rent to these people and definitely not at what they are paying. Anything decent will be a lot more. Get rid of the boarding houses and these people will be on the streets.

If you look at the list of complaints by the tenants, they are created by the tenants. The toilets probably weren’t ‘smashed to bits’ by the landlord. I feel for the KFC and petrol station they keep visiting to use their facilities, they provide – and clean, those for their customers. The house lacking doors and window panes could be the tenants fault or the landlord and it doesn’t say what happened to the stove – wear and tear or abuse? The filth and chaos is the tenants. The burglaries of the neighbouring houses seem to be the tenants – according to the attitudes of the neighbours. Rubbish dumping, agressive dogs, public urination, vandalism, threatening behavior, bail breaches, people on bail, police visits and police being assulted – all the tenants. A faeces strewn bathroom – was a cleaning service provided as part of the agreement? I don’t know how this works in terms of cleaning but faeces should never be strewn around a bathroom, that is the behavior of pigs. The kitchen is covered in sticky grime which not surprising means flies – I doubt this cheap accommodation comes with a cleaner of the kitchen, assimably people should clean up after themselves.

Tenants give their cashflow cards to the Property Manager and trust her to take out the cash. The tenants are too lazy to take out cash and pay or set up an automatic payment – which can be done with by internet, phone or in person at the branch. Giving out a PIN number is against all banks terms and conditions – they can’t even follow the most basic of bank security procedures and this is completely irresponsible but these are Work and Income cards – so that means none of the people living at this accommodation work and the state is providing for them.

One of the people living there says fights break out rarely but they are normally domestics involving her and her partner, everyone drinks and there is some glue sniffing. A 14 year old lives there occasionally but doesn’t bother going to school and no one seems bothered by that.

I’m not trying to make excuses for the landlords here but who wants these people living in a property they own? Do you know how much it costs to replace a toilet? I don’t but an internet search showed me the cheapest toilet currently at Mitre 10 is $159. From experience I know a plumber costs at least $100 and that is just a call out fee – your costs add up fast when you have people busting up toilets. And it doesn’t sound like they clean up after themselves and they dump rubbish – this costs landlords a fortune when they move out. They are unemployed, drink and occasionally sniff glue – do you think your house – which is a huge investment is safe with these types of people? Who should house and pay for people who don’t work and continually damage the property they live in? Why should the taxpayer do it? We don’t smash up our houses because we pay to fix it – they don’t. Would you want to live near these people? Admittedly there are also some who get stuck in these places due to poor health or unfortunate circumstances but a lot are there because they commit crimes and can’t get anywhere else to live because they have a record of damaging homes and not paying. So if the review is successful and houses like this shut down, where do they go? I mean this one doesn’t match current legislation. There aren’t enough state houses and no private landlord wants to rent to them and why should more state houses be built for them to smash up and abuse when many home owners have issues with their houses they can’t afford and many renters pay top dollar and work extremely hard for what they get for free. I don’t know the answer but claiming these people are vulnerable is a lie. These are people who expect everyone else to provide for them whilst they disrespect the very community that pays for them. Please stop calling people who are the cause of the problem ‘vulnerable’. Vulnerable are those who are get sick, care for the sick or who are widowed not criminals and people who destroy their homes.

Author: revisionisteditor

Editor in charge of Revisionist Media.