A couple of years ago, Michael removed a kitchen cupboard. He had been asking for it to be removed for about five years. The damp was spreading, the cupboard was slowly disintegrating, and there were cockroaches. It got the point that Steven's health was being affected. Recall that Steven has partial use of lungs. He was struggling to even breathe.
Michael called NT Housing and advised he was removing the cupboard himself. He took the cupboard and placed it on the driveway. NT Housing's record of events is quite interesting. According to NT Housing, they were just about to install a new kitchen. I find this pretty hard to believe. Michael had requested renovations for many years. I would recommend that anyone fighting NT Housing to take independent witnesses to meetings, and record any conversations with staff.
Mr Squire attended the property a few days later without notice and took pictures of the cupboard. On the communications history, he notes Michael's bad 'attitude' and 'damage to our property'. I wish I could be a fly on a wall. Alas that is not possible, and I am restricted to freedom of information (FOI) materials. Note the contemptuous attitude towards matters of health and safety. See how Mr Squire neatly characterises Michael's actions as property damage.
The first priority for NT Housing should be the health and safety of its tenants. And secondly, public housing belongs to the community, not to NT housing. We need to look at the link between health and well-being and housing. It is well known that the life expectancy of indigenous peoples is significantly less than white people. I have seen John Pilger's Utopia. We really need to look at the state of government housing in the Northern Territory. A review of NT Housing's policies and practices would be a step in the right direction.
I am also concerned NT Housing is charging excessive amounts for maintenance. One day, Michael's kids were playing football in the backyard and a window got broken. It happens. So NT Housing charged Michael for the replacement window. But Michael was charged $63 to remove broken glass when his son had already cleaned it up. It is a lot of money for a task that would take 5 minutes, and it is a lot of money for persons on fixed incomes such as the pension.
Public housing is supposed to be accessible and affordable to people in need of assistance. No wonder tenants can't get ahead if NT Housing is charging like a wounded bull. And no wonder tenants can't afford to improve their properties if they are paying for costs like this. In the end, Michael didn't have to pay for the charge. But what about people who are scared to challenge NT Housing?
I am also concerned that NT Housing might be hindering necessary and essential repairs. It has elevated bureaucratic intransigence to an art form. One strategy is to tell tenants to put their complaints in writing. This is quite amusing. I have reviewed Michael's file numerous times. He complained about the underground water leak almost every time he contacted NT Housing.
Recall that Michael requested a bayonet so he could install a heater. Steven needs a heater in winter because of his asthma. Michael had to go to the local media to even get NT Housing to pay up. NT Housing also withhold repairs when tenants are in arrears. This is totally irrelevant. It is about the house, not the tenant. It's not about whether the tenant is paying rent, it's about ensuring public housing is safe and in good condition.
We know that disadvantaged persons experience difficulty navigating bureaucracy, particularly those with little education. Michael says, 'I just wished I had a better education i.e. brain to work out how best to go about fighting this injustice. I feel I have let my family down'. I am told many indigenous persons find official processes difficult. For many, English is their second language. They grow up speaking their native dialect. Basic literacy shouldn't be a prerequisite to obtaining repairs. If they could request repairs over the phone, it would really help.
I think that NT Housing has lost sight of what their original mission is (or should be) - support vulnerable people by providing housing. It's more focused on rules and bureaucracy than results or helping tenants. Paperwork must be kept, but it can be minimised. To be effective, NT Housing needs to change.
Another strategy is to tell tenants to ask for permission to renovate premises themselves. This practice puts the financial burden of maintaining public housing on tenants. Tenants should not have to pay for repairs and improvements. A stock of well-maintained public housing benefits everyone, not just individual tenants.
NT Housing puts the onus of repairs on tenants. It is making tenants pay for things that should be its responsibility. NT Housing goes in and inspects houses. Tenants are told what they need to fix. If the tenants don't make arrangements, they have to pay for the cost of repairs as estimated by NT Housing. It doesn't matter if tenants are paying their rent on a consistent basis, they will get behind as these charges are added to their account. I am quite disgusted.
Despite repeated requests, the house hasn't been painted for fifteen years. Michael's family made the best of a bad situation by putting up posters. The ceiling is flaking and there is mould everywhere. In some places there are holes because of water leaks. Michael even threatened to go to the health department. That didn't work either. I also asked Michael about the writing on the wall. He tells me the only wall with writing is the one where he measures the height of his children.
Another strategy that NT Housing uses is one known to lawyers as the 'receding horizon'. It makes promises about repairs, upgrades and improvements that never eventuate. In 2004, the NT Government promised that the public housing would be upgraded. Then in 2012, NT Housing told Michael that it would be renovating his house. This never happened. After 20 years of waiting, I'm pretty sure it's never going to happen.
I am quite concerned about the attitudes of some workers at NT Housing. A comment here is quite telling. In response to a request for repairs, Ms Joy says, 'Basically tenant wants everything for nothing'. She explains to Michael that the ability of NT Housing to make repairs is dependent on funding. Excuse me, I thought tenants were entitled to repairs as a consequence of paying rent. Under s 57(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 2000 (NT), landlords must maintain premises in a reasonable state of repair. I wouldn't be surprised if NT Housing is breaching its statutory obligation.
NT Housing is in dire need of a major overhaul. NT Housing is deaf and blind to the needs of its tenants. It presents as arrogant, paternalistic, condescending, and uncaring. And moreover, it is resistant to transparency and accountability. And that is just not good enough.
Click here to sign the petition on change.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment