HIGH RENTS

Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 41, 17 August 1916, Page 2

HIGH RENTS

NEW LAW SAID TO BE

INEFFECTIVE

FURTHER INCREASES DEMANDED

The president of the Trades Council (Mr. M. J. Reardon) has written ■to the Prime Minister (Rt. Hon. W. F. Massey), drawing his attention to certain alleged evasions of the spirit of the rental provisions in the War Legislation Amendment Act: "You will remember," writes Mr. Reardon, "that when we were talking over the proposal to allow 8 per cent, you disagreed with the opinion expressed by me as to the effect of the amendment. I held the opinion that the new clause would enable .the landlords to increase their rents. I have now substantial proof that the are setting out to further increase the already high rents imposed in Wellington City. Since yesterday three cases have come under my notice in which substantial increases are asked for above what were being paid before the war." Particulars of the cases are given as follow :—(1) a railway employee, livin" at Newtown, went into the house four years ago at a rental of 17s per week. Later this was reduced to 16s 6d, but raised again to 17s 6d. This was before the wax. Since the war the rent has been further increased to 18s 6d, and has now been raised within the last few weeks to 20s. Pending the passing of the War Legislation Amendment Act, the tenant continued to pay his former rent only: ' .The landlord has now sued him for the difference and for possession of the tenement. He states that he can get 25s per week for it without any trouble. (2) The tenant in this case has been paying £1 per week for 15 months for a house which is very damp and much out of repair. This n-eek the landlord has requested an increase of 5s per week as from Monday last, (3) The tenant in the third case has been, in occupation for four or five years, starting at 14s per week. The place was pointed at a cost of probably £10 after the tenant had been in occupation for about 18 months. The rent was "then raised .to 15s. Nothing has been done for the last three years, except that the drain was occasionally cleared. A bath was recently pat in, at a cost of 30s or £2, and it was now proposed to raise the rent by 2s 6d per week, • with the alternative of giving up possession.

'"I feel sure," Mr. Reavdori continues, "that these three cases are the first of an upward movement of rent* on the part.of many of the most unscrupulous ownqrs of the city. lam sure also that these tenants are, not in a position to take test cases under the legislation recently passed. But even if they were, I feel sure that it will be possible for the landlords to set up fictitious values, supported by land agents, and defeat the main purpose of the Bill. In the case of the railway employee it is quite clear that he. would much rather pay tlie-extra, rent than have his name appearing as defendant in the Petty Debt 'Court, and in other cases that I mentioned, it is doubtful1 whether the tenants have the means, even if they have the will, to take up a fight in the Law Courts.

"I sincerely trust that, ■ before you leave the Dominion, you will be able to discover some means whereby it will be possible for you to prevent any further exploitation until such time as it is possible for the whole question, to be. again reviewed by Parliament. The fact that thes* people are, within a week of the-adjournment of Parliament,"demanding these extortionate rents* shows.thai; they feel they have nothing to fear from the-legislation recently passed."