Overbearing Landlord!! Please help! I'm just writing to get some advice

[egan123]

If the dwelling has been listed as unsafe by EQC, then you are not covered under your contents insurance. Tell your insurers and get them involved, I can tell you that your L/L will be responsible for any contents loss resultant from a failure with the structure, and I can gaurantee you that your isurers will get the report to lay a claim for loss against the LL. Contact your insurers and tell them of your situation and explain that you are worried about risk under your policy. Also go to council and file a (compliance service request) and ask them to act quickly on it. The council can assist you to fill out the form and it costs nothing to you. They are FREE. Council will then have to act, it is against the law to rent a dwelling that has been listed as unsafe by EQC, your LL will be up for accommodation costs for you and he will be entitled to claim those costs against his insurance, pick a nice motel. Good luck and don't let them scare you, your LL is being unreasonable and when they request another inspection tell them you will charge them for baby sitting if they bring there toddler along and expect you to baby sit, DON'T DO IT, JUST LEAVE THE BABY ON ITS OWN, ITS NOT YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.

[lolajane]

EGAN123: thank you so much for your advice it could be the best advice since iv been asking, but i am now moving on in 6 days so it will not be a concern for me then. I did ring my insurers last week and they did say i would not be covered but that they can pursue the LL for costs if something happens, they also said something i found interesting because i never knew this, some policies DO NOT cover theft from an open home or from the LL sending people to our homes! therefore i beleive the tenancy tribunal should change the rule that the LL can send whoever he llikes to the property whenever he likes.

They have stopped bringing the baby, since i gave them my 21 day notice letter stating the reasons why i am leaving, that being 1 of them

[TheLiberalLeft]

Egan123's advice may be a way around you not actually telling prospective tenants the EQC info, if you're concerned about the technical legalities. Just advise them to check their contents insurer as you're not certain of the property's status with the EQC.

[Perry]

My spelling/grama/punctuation/capitalisation/age and anything else negative you have aimed at me. yes i am a 32yr old mother with 3 children aged 13,11 and 6 who i personally along with most other mothers consider to be my babies! with all due respect, maybe my lack of punctuation etc is from the fact that i am on a computer asking for advice on the internet, and i am not really bothered about being overly fussy about how it is all set out etc, from what i have written i have tried to be thorough, and have been completely honest so i can get the correct advice, and im sure you can understand what i have written as noone has a problem with replying. i came on here for advice about the way my LL was treating me and my family as im not the only adult here frustrated with it all, i did not come on here for any attack on me personally as a person or on my spelling etc, as this is "a professional site" i wouldnt expect personal critisim from anyone.

Pointing out how difficult you make comprehension is
a constructive criticism. A moderator has tidied up your
first post, to make it more readable, to assist everyone.

As for no one having difficulty with replying, there may
be others who would help, if they didn't need to decode
your posts. It's only going to help you if you take the
time to communicate more correctly, as has already
been observed, here:

By the way, part of why your posts sound emotional is because you aren't always using much punctuation. There's an easy way to tell when to use punctuation: read the post aloud. You'll find yourself pausing fairly often. Every place you pause, put a comma if it's a short pause, or a full stop if it's a long pause.

If you do end up filing or placing documents before a TT
Hearing, accuracy is essential. Should you think that it
doesn't matter, be aware that there's a world of diff-
erence between the following examples. A capital letter
makes all the difference.

• Go and help uncle Jack off his horse.
• Go and help uncle jack off his horse.

You've been offered lots of help and advice. Now you
just need to make the best use of it and have a little
good luck and this debacle will fade to a bad memory.
.

[egan123]

The Tennancy Act, and Tribunal, also has a moral responsibility to enforcement, so if you are aware that a dwelling has been listed as unsafe and you had the ability to make a prospective tennant aware, then, I believe, you should. If you don't and the LL re-rents to someone who for whatever reason is injured by the dwellings failure, then you and the LL could be held accountable. Its no good if we turn a blind eye, we must all pass information on to those who can be affected, to prevent injury, or even fatalities. I am so opposed to LL's who chase the $s over there tennants wellbeing, its criminal. Its simple, it is against the law to rent a dwelling that has a unsafe listing, and if I ever here of anyone doing that, then I will personally report them to the DOL, Mr John Profitt, safety inspector.

[TheLiberalLeft]

By the way, part of why your posts sound emotional is because you aren't always using much punctuation. There's an easy way to tell when to use punctuation: read the post aloud. You'll find yourself pausing fairly often. Every place you pause, put a comma if it's a short pause, or a full stop if it's a long pause.

That last comma is superfluous and incorrect. Be watchful of moderators 'correcting' posts. English professors they are not.

[muppet]

Go and help Uncle Jack off his horse.
Go and help uncle jack off his horse.

Laugh of the day.

[Shalodge]

I will say it one more time... EQC (or an Insurance company) do not decide if a building is safe to inhabit or not..they just decide if it is worth fixing..

The power to declare buildings unsafe is excercised solely by Local Authorities under the Building Act.. Below is Section 124 Building Act 2004 (ammended 2010)


Powers of territorial authorities in respect of dangerous, earthquake-prone, or insanitary buildings

• (1) If a territorial authority is satisfied that a building is dangerous, earthquake prone, or insanitary, the territorial authority may—
  • (a) put up a hoarding or fence to prevent people from approaching the building nearer than is safe:
  • (b) attach in a prominent place on, or adjacent to, the building a notice that warns people not to approach the building:
  • (c) give written notice requiring work to be carried out on the building, within a time stated in the notice (which must not be less than 10 days after the notice is given under section 125), to—
    • (i) reduce or remove the danger; or
    • (ii) prevent the building from remaining insanitary.
  (2) This section does not limit the powers of a territorial authority under this Part.
  
  (3) A person commits an offence if the person fails to comply with a notice given under subsection (1)(c).
  
  (4) A person who commits an offence under this section is liable to a fine not exceeding $200,000.
  
  Compare: 1991 No 150 s 65(1), (2)

Many buildings in Christchurch have damage that does NOT make the building unsafe to live. It doesnt not matter if the Pope himself thinks the building is not safe to live it.. it is a TLA resonsibility to make that call and I will assume that because there is no notice on the door or tape around the house then IT IS SAFE TO LIVE IN!

[egan123]

I never said that Insurance companies list buildings as unsafe, I know its the Local Authority, I'm not stupid, I have issued unsafe certificates, I have reported unsafe dwellings to council, also, after an earthquake, if EQC condem the dwelling, council will never oppose, the risk is just to great, they always follow with an approval to accessment. However, if the building has been listed as unsafe, then it also has a, stop work order, and no one can oppose a council engineers prohibition notice, under section8, you can be prosecuted for noncompliance.

[Perry]

That last comma is superfluous and incorrect. Be watchful of
moderators 'correcting' posts. English professors they are not.

Accuracy is indeed important. So is truthfulness.
There is much guile present in the quoted poster,
author of the post above.

The implication that the earlier post quoted was
from a Moderator is wrong. It was from another
PT forumite, who was trying to be helpful.
.

[Shalodge]

Sooo? If EQC have said this building is unsafe why have they not told Council that?

Why doesnt Lolajane tell council that EQC has declared the building unsafe?

Why didnt the person from EQC who told her that building is unsafe tell Council that?

[Shalodge]

so if you are aware that a dwelling has been listed as unsafe .

Thats just it.. It hasnt been "listed as unsafe" has it? Cracks in the concrete floor dont mean it is "unsafe".

[Shalodge]

I'm not stupid, I have issued unsafe certificates,

Under which enactment did you have the authority to issue an "unsafe certificate" and what was that in relation too? You dont give me the impression you are a local authority!

[TheLiberalLeft]

Pointing out how difficult you make comprehension is
a constrictive criticism. A moderator has tidied up your
first post, to make it more readable, to assist everyone.

The first comma above is incorrect. The second is arguable but regardless, the structure is poor.

I believe that IS a direct quote from a moderator. Case closed.

[Perry]

Case broken and in disarray. Notice the typo?
No? Then retreat seems apposite. You seem
to have little leeway left. From now, staying
on topic seems prudent.