Tenancy Act views aired

Press, 21 February 1987, Page 8

Tenancy Act views aired

The Minister of Housing, Mr Goff, attended an informal gathering of members of the. Tenants’ Protection Association, the Landlords’ Association, and various interested parties yesterday to discuss the introduction of the Residential Tenancy Act. The meeting was for Christchurch tenants and landlords to air their views on the recently introduced act. Mr Goff said the meeting was productive.

There were bound to be some teething troubles with the system, he said. It was the third time he had met Christchurch landlords, some of whom were still upset about the act, claiming the legisla-

tion favoured tenants.

“They would have liked to have had the legislation lean towards them but in fact this legislation was not designed to lean either way,” said Mr Goff.

There were only a minority of people who still objected to the new legislation. Many more had been satisfied by the act “because it works in practice,” he said.

In the weeks since the act wa?> officially instituted on February 1, 1987, the Tenancy Bond Division had received 3500 inquiries a week and settled 80 per cent of disputes. Mr Goff said that the Housing Corporation had already received $200,000 in bonds in spite of an

amnesty period of three months in which landlords had to front up with bond money. The two major criticisms from landlords were the 90-day notification period of eviction and the loss of investment returns on bond money. Landlords would prefer a notification period of only 14 days. “My view is clear — two weeks is insufficient time,” Mr Goff said. Although some landlords with numerous properties would lose substantial investment returns on bond money, they would gain in the long term from a fairer system. In the past, the system meant that the strongest person always won, Mr

Goff said. Disputes were resolved by long court decisions! which cost so much that one ; complainant would eventually give in, or the tenant would refuse to pay the last two or three weeks of rent in lieu of the landlord’s refusing to return a bond.

Ignorance had caused many disputes and many of the criticisms of the new legislation, he said. ' As well as the continued advertising campaign, Tenancy Bond staff would talk to groups, schools, and universities advising people of/, their rights and the regulations. The legislation was not meant to be "the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff but the fence at the top,” Mr t .