Letter from Director of Government Relations Housing New Zealand

I will comment in line on these matters as that way it will keep things to the point and clearly categorised.

27 January 2011
Dear Mr Hooper

Thank you for your email of31 December2010toDrLesleyMcTurk,Chief Executive of

Housing New Zealand Corporation, about issues relating to the termination of your

tenancy at 353 Bucklands Beach Road, Bucklands Beach. Dr McTurk has asked me to

reply to your email, and I have looked into the matters that you raise.

In your email you say that Corporation staff have lied under oath, and that your tenancy

was terminated on the basis of incorrect information. However, I have looked into your

allegations and have found no evidence to support them. The Corporation made the

decision to end your tenancy and commence criminal proceedings after an investigation

found that you had failed to declare the true extent of your income while claiming an

 

You claim to have investigated however you have not contacted our accountants to ascertain what the correct figures were, You have not contacted witnesses who will testify that the damage you claim was done to the house existed prior to us moving in and you have not contacted us to ascertain what parts of the court transcripts show that your staff lied. It seems to me that looking in to the matter was nothing more than asking your own staff internally so therefore it could hardly be seen as unbias and fair.

In New Zealand we follow the Napoleonic Code and more importantly the Code of Criminal Instruction to which a person is presumed innocent until found guilty by a court of law however it appears that not just in our case but others Housing New Zealand feels they have the power to be Judge Jury and Executioner based on whatever information they feel like and without ensuring the correctness of that information.

In your email you also say that Corporation staff have breached the Privacy Act by

refusing to supply you with information that you requested about your tenancy. I

understand that you were provided with this information on 20 January 2011. It may be

helpful if I explain that your original request of 3 November 2010 was understood to be a

request for disclosure under the Criminal Disclosure Act, and was met on 9 November

This to me sounds more like an excuse than anything else, regardless of what we were asking for there is no reason HNZ had to withhold our tenancy information and even to this day they have failed to provide all of this information. Again this is not an isolated incident and we are well aware of others being refused their information.

You also say that the Corporation has charged you for the cost of repairing damage and removing rubbish that you are not responsible for. I can confirm, however, that the charges of $1,430.29 relate only to the cost of repairing damage and removing rubbish relating to the period of your tenancy. This work was required to bring the property to an acceptable standard for re-Ietting. Corporation records show that the property was tidy and in good condition before your tenancy commenced in November 2000. If these records you claim show the property was tidy and in good condition when it was let are in existence then why have they not been supplied to us as per the request for information under the privacy act? further it is quite clear that the windows you have replaced were all broken when we moved in as I had to repair them myself and covered them over with lexan. This was brought up with our tenancy manager when we first moved in.

Finally, you say in your email that the Corporation has not resolved the problem with water ponding under the house, and has not repaired the remaining defects in the window frames. You may be interested to know that this work has been completed. This may be the case now but given that while we were in the house the problems were not resolved and given that the photos we have are clearly dated as well as independent witnesses viewed the flooding after the work was completed brings in to question your organisations integrity.

I trust that this information is helpful to you. If you have any further concerns, I invite you to contact Peter Lauina, Housing Services Manager at the Otahuhu Neighbourhood Unit, on (09) 261 5502.

I think any contact would be a waste of time and given that HNZ have failed to communicate as per their customer promise as well as remedy the damage to my property caused by your contractors it is prety clear where your organisation sits.

Privacey Matters

Finally HNZ have released some of the information under the privacy act regarding our tenancy and I say some as there is a lot of information that has been withheld, the fact that some of the information provided actually refers to other information that has not been provided makes it pretty clear that Housing New Zealand is not playing by the rules.

We allready have a complaint in with the Privacy Commissioner and they are investigating this matter along with Housing New Zealands claims that they do not have to provide this information under the criminal disclosure act.

Fact is that disclosure is disclosure and I'm pretty sure this act is not a mechanism to be abused by government organisation so as to allow them to refuse to make available information that could paint them in a bad light. Such actions are really just an abuse of power and process.

Also keep in mind that the criminal matters are based on our alleged failure to provide HNZ with our earnings details and as such according to HNZ obtained  lower rent based on the rental assessment. This matter has nothing to do with out tenancy and HNZ's investigations team have reiterated this fact several times so there for information regarding our tenancy should be available.

When discussing the matter with the office of the privacy commissioner I asked them how would they know if HNZ was with holding information and they informed me they rely on HNZ's honesty.