Warrant of Fitness for rentals (including details)

[Leftette]

From what I saw on Campbell Live last week(?), obviously a setup, but the dutiful inspector reported back to the LL that the water exceeded 55 degrees, amongst other minor issues, and said that all the points needed rectifying. I inferred from that that no one point is optional (say you were happy with a slightly less grade on some star system) so took it as a pass/fail system only. IE A PIECE OF CRAP system.

[Perry]

3. Is there an adequate supply of hot and cold potable water?

How will 'potability' at be tested for? Usually requires a lab test.

6. Is there a suitably located bath or shower in good working order?

How does one test if a bath is in good working order? A test dive?

9. Do the bathroom, kitchen and all bedrooms have some form of ventilation to outside?

Would an openable window qualify?

12. Is there adequate indoor lighting?

Who determines what's 'adequate?'

15. Have high windows got security stays?

What's that about?

19. Does the house have ceiling insulation to WOF standards?
20. Does the house have underfloor insulation to WOF standards?

What (other) warrant of fitness is that?

21. Is the house weathertight with no evident leaks, or moisture stains on the walls or ceiling?

If it is leaking but that's not evident, what then?

23. Is the house in a reasonable state of repair?

Whose reason will be being used?

27. Does the house appear to be structurally sound?

How's she look, Trev? She looks OK to me, Fred. Well she appears to, anyway, Fred.

30. Is the address clearly labelled and identifiable?

The number falls off the letterbox and the house becomes uninhabitable?

[Glenn]

The children's commissioner was the driver for this.
I have just come back from India. The newspaper in Delhi had a complete list of mortality rates for children under 1 year old for every state.
Clearly many areas with non existent sewage and clean drinking water were high risk.
Our infant mortality rates are very poor as well.

May I ask what is the major reason for the poor performance in NZ. May I suggest it has something to do with race (oops sorry not very PC)
May I ask the ownership of the properties with the high mortality rates. Does public sector ownership feature in those statistics.

What is the relationship between private ownership and rentals on the mortality rates.

These good people shouting for improvements in child mortality are to be congratulated but surely they need to target the spending.
Perhaps there needs to be a higher standard for those ethnic groups with high mortality rates and a higher standard for those whose income is below the poverty line.

[Davo36]

Well the problem for me (as always) is council planners.

The reason we have a Samoan family of 7 living in a small garage in South Auckland is that you can't build houses in Auckland for love nor money. And that's because councils have rules which stop affordable housing being built.

So the poor people of Auckland end up not being able to rent a house! Which is of course ridiculous.

[Wayne]

3. Is there an adequate supply of hot and cold potable water? How will 'potability' at be tested for? Usually requires a lab test.

6. Is there a suitably located bath or shower in good working order?


How does one test if a bath is in good working order? A test dive?

Does it have taps?

9. Do the bathroom, kitchen and all bedrooms have some form of ventilation to outside?


Would an openable window qualify?

I would think so.

12. Is there adequate indoor lighting?


Who determines what's 'adequate?'

That would be in the standard - one 40w light for a lounge might not cut it

15. Have high windows got security stays?


What's that about?

Stop the kids falling out an upstairs window?

19. Does the house have ceiling insulation to WOF standards?
20. Does the house have underfloor insulation to WOF standards?


What (other) warrant of fitness is that?

Why does it have to be some other standard?

21. Is the house weathertight with no evident leaks, or moisture stains on the walls or ceiling?


If it is leaking but that's not evident, what then?

Then it passes obviously - if it has no leaks evident then it must be a pass

23. Is the house in a reasonable state of repair?


Whose reason will be being used?

Good question

27. Does the house appear to be structurally sound?


How's she look, Trev? She looks OK to me, Fred. Well she appears to, anyway, Fred.

Yip, that's the one

30. Is the address clearly labelled and identifiable?


The number falls off the letterbox and the house becomes uninhabitable?

No but it would fail that test and you would have to put the number back!

None of this seems hard to me.

[Learning]

I think that the real question should be what happens when a property fails the WOF. Does it then become illegal to rent? Can it be continued to rented but only if it is clearly stated that is it of unwarrantable standard? Is the LL given X days to get it up to standard "or else...."? Or does life continue as normal with the bureaucrat happy he's made yet more red tape for no good reason, the inspector happy he has another two hundy in is pocket for ticking boxes all day, another LL scratching his head wandering what was the point and a poor tenant still being charged through the nose for a damp draughty flat happy in the knowledge that the wheels of progress are still turning in their favour? (The wheel is turning but the hamster is long dead)

[gavinc]

I think that the real question should be what happens when a property fails the WOF. Does it then become illegal to rent? Can it be continued to rented but only if it is clearly stated that is it of unwarrantable standard? Is the LL given X days to get it up to standard "or else...."? Or does life continue as normal with the bureaucrat happy he's made yet more red tape for no good reason, the inspector happy he has another two hundy in is pocket for ticking boxes all day, another LL scratching his head wandering what was the point and a poor tenant still being charged through the nose for a damp draughty flat happy in the knowledge that the wheels of progress are still turning in their favour? (The wheel is turning but the hamster is long dead)

What happens when a formerly mould free flat is made mouldy by the tenants? Happens all the time. Are the tenants responsible or the landlord? Silly question Landlord of course.

[Perry]

15. Have high windows got security stays?
What's that about?

Stop the kids falling out an upstairs window?

Or to stop tall burglars or short ones with ladders?

It's far too open. You interpreted a "high window"
as an "upstairs window." What of a window that was
high up the wall in a single storey home? One up in
the apex of a gabled end wall; one that needed
a step ladder to reach to clean?

20. Does the house have underfloor insulation to WOF standards?
What (other) warrant of fitness is that?

Why does it have to be some other standard?

It doesn't. That's why "other" is in brackets.
The point is, in what standard is it specified?

It's just a make-work scheme - more intrusion in the
lives of others by meddlesome do-gooders, social
engineers and sycophantic politicians hoping to drag
in a few votes.

Bah! Humbug!

[Wayne]

I think that the real question should be what happens when a property fails the WOF.

No - that presumes that it is a pass/fail system rather than a grading system.
Without the detail we will continue to fill the vacum with conjecture.

[Davo36]

I think that the real question should be what happens when a property fails the WOF. Does it then become illegal to rent? Can it be continued to rented but only if it is clearly stated that is it of unwarrantable standard? Is the LL given X days to get it up to standard "or else...."? Or does life continue as normal with the bureaucrat happy he's made yet more red tape for no good reason, the inspector happy he has another two hundy in is pocket for ticking boxes all day, another LL scratching his head wandering what was the point and a poor tenant still being charged through the nose for a damp draughty flat happy in the knowledge that the wheels of progress are still turning in their favour? (The wheel is turning but the hamster is long dead)

Yep exactly. The local council extracts a bit more money out of the public and nothing improves.

[speights boy]

So the poor people of Auckland end up not being able to rent a house! Which is of course ridiculous.

Too many permanent beneficiaries living in areas with a housing shortage.
Why not have certain benefits which are only available for Auckland if you can show a real reason why you should live in that locale ?
Otherwise, if you want to continue receiving that assistance, you need to move to another area.

PS: For avoidance of doubt for our resident Orewa leftie, I do not consider Superannuation a benefit.

[elguapo]

None of this seems hard to me.

That is because you have approached it with logic and common sense. Put that questionnaire in the hands of a box ticking, officious git and all hell with break loose.

[eri]

Sorry but I don't see a problem with any of those 31 criteria.

define "adequate"

and when you do

remember that places like small apartments that have already been build, and were then legal

have very little space to expand, if for example food preparation space is now deemed inadequate

with W.O.F for cars

older vehicles that predate newer requirements are generally exempt them

which is why you see old vintage cars without; reversing lights, flashing orange indicators, hazard lights, seatbelts that run across the shoulder etc

will this rental warrant require more than the car warrant in this respect?

it seems so

out of 1 side of its mouth the leftist animal complains of a shortage of affordable rental accommodation

meanwhile everything the other side of the mouth demands

drives up rental costs

double-speak cunliffe will get a workout here

[John the builder]

Think swimming pool fences people and wait for the 'WOFazis' to get hold of this. Voluntary scheme yes, mandatory? No........ I don't trust them

[sidinz]

Or to stop tall burglars or short ones with ladders?

It's far too open. You interpreted a "high window"
as an "upstairs window." What of a window that was
high up the wall in a single storey home? One up in
the apex of a gabled end wall; one that needed
a step ladder to reach to clean?

A lot of the points in that list of 31 look very familiar to me from when I audited HNZ properties in readiness for their WoF introduction.

A window with a 'fall-height issue' was defined as one with an inside sill 1200mm or less from the floor and 2m or more to the ground outside and deemed to require a security stay.

There's an interesting discussion on that Trademe page about fall risks Vs. fire egress.