Header Ad Module

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Public pays for court clash over flats

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Public pays for court clash over flats

    Public pays for court clash over flats

    By David Fisher
    5:30 AM Saturday Jul 7, 2012
    Judy Anderson and Adrian Chitty of the Pepperwood Mews Owners' Group have asked for rates relief as their units sit empty.Photo / Richard Robinson

    Two public organisations are using public money to sue each other in a case which could cost taxpayers and ratepayers millions of dollars.
    The case has been described as "destroying the savings and affecting the mental health" of a group of people whose retirement plans have been ruined.
    They have been caught between Housing NZ and Auckland Council after the failure of the $8 million Pepperwood Mews apartment complex they funded. The scheme was an early public-private partnership using private money to underwrite a public project.
    Those investors are suing Housing NZ, which helped plan, build and later manage the complex.
    They are also suing the council because building consents were approved by building inspectors.
    More in the Granny at
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10817969
    "There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says 'yes,' you know he is a crook." Groucho Marx

  • #2
    Just love these bits
    Those investors are suing Housing NZ, which helped plan, build and later manage the complex.
    The spokesman added it was up to property owners to do their own checks before buying.

    "While we sympathise with the owners and their plight, it's unreasonable to suggest that Housing NZ is liable for the quality of a complex we didn't build and don't own, and never have."
    "There's one way to find out if a man is honest-ask him. If he says 'yes,' you know he is a crook." Groucho Marx

    Comment


    • #3
      This is another case of a company trying to shift the blame for the failure of a property. When there is so much money to lose over a case like this, it is natural to try to deny the responsibilities.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by muppet View Post
        Public pays for court clash over flats
        The scheme was an early public-private partnership using private money to underwrite a public project.
        i hope a follow-up article clearly spells out what went wrong with this early public-private partnership

        and how the model can be rescued

        because in the halls of power

        they are pushing them as the answer to many of our problems

        reading between the lines

        HNZ were monitoring the dodgy build

        but didn't tell the owners, who they had gotten to pay for it,

        or the council who were going to rubber stamp it because HNZ were monitoring the build

        all the dodgy builders had to do was clean up on council inspection day and bather on about how HNZ were looking over their shoulder the whole way
        Last edited by eri; 27-08-2012, 08:27 PM.
        have you defeated them?
        your demons

        Comment


        • #5
          The only thing that I can say to this is that this is why it's important to get a good broker when you're looking at new real estate to add to your portfolio! All these houses for sale and land for development nowadays, you'd think that the builders would take a little bit more care in what they're doing so they can present something of quality when all the construction is done. But instead they salck off and we end up with a piece of worthless property that puts a huge dent in the scheme of things. Better to purchase a durable and sturdy condo to rent out rather than splurge on a "potential" dud.

          Comment

          Working...
          X