Does Housing have magical powers ?

[george65]

Only one email BUT to the correct recipient. One of many possibilities, welcome to the lottery.

Well in fairness, that is on you to send any correspondence to the right people and I'm sure that the relevant dept would have been on any notification you got. Not necessary to send it to a specific person, these departments can either forward anything on if a specific person needs to deal with it ( which in this case it was not required hence the lack signature indicating it was just a form letter) or they just deal with whatever comes along as they get it.

You alerted them to the situation, they responded positively and quickly, I'd have to say job well done to them.

Guess we all have a bad impression of Gubbermint departments but I really can't see anything to complain about in this case as they were as about as accommodating as they could be to your request.
Would seem that if you have any other problems, going by this example they are on the ball and helpful to their clients.

Letting them know about any problems in the future straight away would be a good first step to getting things solved and saving yourself any stress and undue worry unless you have to. :0)

[Reschs]

Well in fairness, that is on you to send any correspondence to the right people and I'm sure that the relevant dept would have been on any notification you got. Not necessary to send it to a specific person, these departments can either forward anything on if a specific person needs to deal with it ( which in this case it was not required hence the lack signature indicating it was just a form letter) or they just deal with whatever comes along as they get it.

You alerted them to the situation, they responded positively and quickly, I'd have to say job well done to them.

Guess we all have a bad impression of Gubbermint departments but I really can't see anything to complain about in this case as they were as about as accommodating as they could be to your request.
Would seem that if you have any other problems, going by this example they are on the ball and helpful to their clients.

Letting them know about any problems in the future straight away would be a good first step to getting things solved and saving yourself any stress and undue worry unless you have to. :0)

I think the Gubbermint set the bar with this letter to him "Housing have threatened to send in a locksmith and bully boys to gain access to my one room palace just so they can do their annual property inspection and charge me $100 for the privilege".

[VroomVroom]

I think the Gubbermint set the bar with this letter to him "Housing have threatened to send in a locksmith and bully boys to gain access to my one room palace just so they can do their annual property inspection and charge me $100 for the privilege".

yes I agree that is over the top for a first letter , but the property does belong to the dept of housing and is not owned by the tenant , so the dept gets to call the shots . And its only an annual inspection not 6 monthly like private rentals.

[lsemmens]

I would suggest that, given their usual clientele, that this is a form letter. If they suggested anything less, they may never get any inspections done.

[Uncle Fester]

I still suggest that next time Reschs or somebody comes to visit that they check your smoke alarm and replace the battery if you can't do it yourself.
It can take still quite some time until the risk from Covid is officially cleared.

[george65]

I would suggest that, given their usual clientele, that this is a form letter. If they suggested anything less, they may never get any inspections done.

I agree. Imagine some of the deadbeats they have to deal with!

I Highly doubt that they sent an original letter that was threatening or anything but a request/advisory. Maybe they spelled out their rights to do the inspection which is probably covered in the lease but clearly some dramatic licence has been used here.
It would seem likely that their initial contacts were not responded to so it would be fair enough that they were a little more insistent and spelled out the tenants obligations and possible consequences when they were ignored. They have a job and obligations to fulfil so can't blame them for trying to do that. It's for the tennants protection as well as their own after all.

I am sure any " threats" made was not in the first contact. Had he responded to the initial letter / contact, I'm sure the more direct letter would not have need to have been sent. I would certainly like to see what was received before condemning the letter(s) as " Threatening Bully boys coming round". These Gubbermint departments have to mind their P's and Q's and generally take a very softly softly approach rather than laying the boot in even when that's what should be done.

I am also guessing with a good amount of confidence the OP posted here before responding to or contacting the relevant people. Contacting the Housing dept first would have probably eliminated some stress and worry and eliminated the need to post about it here at all.

Once he did contact the dept, seems the problem was rectified as quickly and favourably as it could have been.

[Reschs]

I agree. Imagine some of the deadbeats they have to deal with!

I Highly doubt that they sent an original letter that was threatening or anything but a request/advisory. Maybe they spelled out their rights to do the inspection which is probably covered in the lease but clearly some dramatic licence has been used here.
It would seem likely that their initial contacts were not responded to so it would be fair enough that they were a little more insistent and spelled out the tenants obligations and possible consequences when they were ignored. They have a job and obligations to fulfil so can't blame them for trying to do that. It's for the tennants protection as well as their own after all.

I am sure any " threats" made was not in the first contact. Had he responded to the initial letter / contact, I'm sure the more direct letter would not have need to have been sent. I would certainly like to see what was received before condemning the letter(s) as " Threatening Bully boys coming round". These Gubbermint departments have to mind their P's and Q's and generally take a very softly softly approach rather than laying the boot in even when that's what should be done.

I am also guessing with a good amount of confidence the OP posted here before responding to or contacting the relevant people. Contacting the Housing dept first would have probably eliminated some stress and worry and eliminated the need to post about it here at all.

Once he did contact the dept, seems the problem was rectified as quickly and favourably as it could have been.

He received his notice and refused on the Virus grounds. They then threatened him. He has a clean record with his previous inspections, so need for "Bully Boy" reaction.
He came here for help on how to proceed. He was given that information and acted on it. Problem solved.
No need to criticise him for asking for help.

[george65]

He received his notice and refused on the Virus grounds.

OK, and did he notify the housing dept of that when he was first notified or were they supposed to use " The force" to understand his situation?

They then threatened him.

Really? A gubbermint department " Threatened " a sick elderly man? Have you seen the letter?
I'd like to see that letter and I bet a Lawyer would too. He'd have an great case to get a lot of money if he could prove he was Threatened by a gubbermint department!

I'll wager the course of events went something along the lines of a notice of inspection and to get back to them to arrange a convenient time. My guess is the OP did not do that so a follow up letter was sent and he was notified of his obligations under his lease that he had to allow the people in for the inspection and most likely notified of the procedures if he did not allow that by arranging a suitable time for said inspection. His interpretation of that was they were sending the heavys in to get him.

It seems to me the first contact he had with them in response to this issue was when he posted the email he sent them here. If they sent a letter or 2 and were ignored, what would you expect them to do other than to start spelling out rules and consequences of failing to meet the obligations as a Tennant? We all know what deadshits these people would have to deal with every damn day so of course they would have to spell out the rules if their communications were ignored.

Now I'm just guessing this is the case as there has been nothing to suggest otherwise but if he did notify them and they did up the ante with more letters, that's a different thing. I also think it's also unlikely from what I can glean here.

He has a clean record with his previous inspections, so need for "Bully Boy" reaction.

Yeah well like I said, I think we all know a bit of dramatic licence was used there and that's OK but let's not go off on putting shit on people that don't deserve it based on that. No doubt this was a form letter and carefully scrutinised before it is sent out to what must be thousands of people, Generally vulnerable people at that.

He came here for help on how to proceed. He was given that information and acted on it. Problem solved.
No need to criticise him for asking for help.

I'm not trying to pick on anyone at all but I don't think it's fair to put shit on people that did nothing wrong either. The bottom line is you can't just ignore these things without advising the other party of your concerns. Just as when the op gets a notice of a review of his circumstances for the pension as he would get, if you ignore it they send another letter spelling out the consequences if you ignore them and that will result in further action, namely the pension being stopped. That's logical and understood by everyone. No doubt there is a procedure and chain of actions they have to follow or they get their arses kicked because this goes to a welfare and safety issue.

I have a first hand idea of the situation here. I had my grandmother living with me when I was younger because I was the only one that could take care of her. After that I looked after my father in law till he passed away . Neither of them wanted to go in homes, they wanted to stay in a normal home with family which was fair enough. Now I have to advise my 81 Yo father on things, do things for him or find out about them nearly every day. He and the OP are very similar in their approaches and attitudes as are all people of that generation. I can't begin to imagine the difficulties my father would have dealing with things on his own and it seems the OP is not fortunate enough to have family whom can help him which must make things bloody difficult coping with things like this that come up every day. For that he has my complete sympathy and intimate understanding.


Again, I'm not trying to pick on anyone but I'm not going to take a lefty like approach of automatically taking the side of the aggrieved and blaming the gubbermint dept just because someone was upset be they a vulnerable person or not. Fair is fair and I am looking at this through non biased and factual eyes. I take the same approach with my father. He blames things on anyone bar himself and I tell him what he did wrong and not to get upset with things when he did the wrong thing and to be aware of it or make me aware of things earlier next time.
If that seems harsh or unkind, that's unfortunate but it does not change the truth and putting the blame where it does not belong helps no one at all.
Still doesen't help my father a lot because his short term memory is not getting any better.


The real issue here is not this inspection at all.
It's the ability of the OP to handle these matters which could be something much more important and potentially detrimental. If the OP has difficulty handling his affairs like this, then someone, yourself being a prime candidate, needs to step in and help him make arrangements with the relevant social support people if there are no family to make sure there is someone to take care of him and see things like this do not cause him worry or significant life altering problems like eviction. It's not good enough to let people say they don't want help or to think it's not ones business, we all need to make sure we grow a pair and help people we can see are having difficulties because it won't be that long when we are in the same position ourselves and having a few points in the good Karma book is a bloody good idea.

[Reschs]

@george55. ma_baker is a senior citizen who has serious health issues. He is more than capable of managing his own affairs.
As has been pointed out, he received the annual request and then replied requesting a deferment during the lock down.
They did not negotiate. He came on here for advice and acted on it. Problem solved.
Could he have spent hours on hold to get the same result ? possibly.
I met him as a result of his enquiry, on this Forum, for assistance with a technical matter.
I am totally unaware of his personal situation regarding family etc. Just someone who helped with a technical problem on site.
If he needs help in the future, and has no one, yes I would try and help because that is the type of person I am.

[Ma_Baker]

There was no CV19 in the last five years, so I let them in, they spent more than half an hour doing sweet FA.

I can't go outside for that length of time.

Latest update:

For good or ill this is what I have just sent to FACS.

In receipt of threatening letter from Housing. The letter's writer does not disclose her name.

I am a disabled 70 year old, having a very low auto immunity threshold.

Housing have threatened to send in a locksmith and bully boys to gain access to my one room unit just so they can do their annual property inspection and charge me $100 for the privilege.

I have previously refused these contractors access due to the CV19 virus and whilst I am in quarantine.

Plus, I also believe that this unit will be available for inspection after the virus pandemic is passed.

Having checked with many different resources it is obvious to all parties that there is no requirement for housing to do any form of property inspection whilst the virus is active.

For your information I have included a link to NSW Health.



Disability 1800 643 787
Seniors Info 1800 171 866

Can someone please stop this situation until after this pandemic. I look forward to your prompt response by email.


Update and Follow up from Housing.

I am writing to you in relation to your email about the access for the smoke alarm and asset survey on 30th June. This appointment has been cancelled as per your request and noted that this will be put on hold until further restrictions are lifted.



Thanking you



| Client Liaison Officer – Central Coast District

************************************************** **********************************

It appears housing is not responsible for anything they write or say !!

It appears that there may be some confusion concerning this request and I would like to clarify the steps taken thus far so that we may be able to address the matter.



I am aware that you wrote to our DCJ Client Liaison Officer, Ms Nixon requesting that the work be cancelled and Ms Nixon advised you on 24 June 2020, that the initial appointment to complete the Asset Condition Assessment and Smoke Alarm Service was cancelled and had been put on hold.



This decision to cancel the appointment was reviewed and escalated to the Central Coast Manager Housing Services. On 15 July 2020, the Manager Housing Services has written to you advising that the Fire Safety program is an ongoing essential protection for the well-being of our tenants and needs to continue and advised that I would be in contact with you to arrange a date and time for the work to be undertaken.



A copy of this email is provided below in the email trail below.

We seek your cooperation to provide a date between Monday 10 August 2020 and Friday 14 August 2020 that is suitable for you, to enable the contractors to attend your unit to complete this work. Please notify me either by phone on 43235211 or email T207@facs.nsw.gov.au with the date and time by COB Thursday 06 August 2020.

If we are unable to arrange a mutually convenient date, a new date will be arranged for the work to be completed. A letter will to be sent to you confirming the date that the contractors will be attending to complete this essential work.



Our preference is to work with you to arrange for a date and time that works best for you.



Kind Regards





Julie Holden
Housing Manager/Deputy WELFAC
Gosford Office
Hunter/New England/Central Coast District
Department of Communities and Justice
Level 5, 221-237 Mann Street, Gosford NSW 2250
PO Box 397, Gosford NSW 2250
P: 02 4323 5211
T207@facs.nsw.gov.au

[wotnot]

This has nothing to do with politics ~ this is a corollary of contractual obligations that the state housing signed off on, when obtaining building insurance for the premise(s) ; this also applies to non-state run housing rentals.

For state housing, you can find references to this in the NCHSW documentation -> (qld.gov link, but it's the national guidelines)

Load that up in your pdf viewer of choice, and search for 'insurance' (unless you wanna read the whole thing), and you'll see what I mean.

You're complaining to the muppet puppets, not the puppeteer ... simply put =)

[lsemmens]

Not sure how helpful s/he will be but your local member might be able to knock some heads together. Otherwise legal aid might also assist. This is insane. Maybe you should give them permission and if they turn up with out all the appropriate PPE (i.e. full hazmat suit) refuse them entry for non-compliance.

[Ma_Baker]

Not sure how helpful s/he will be but your local member might be able to knock some heads together. Otherwise legal aid might also assist. This is insane. Maybe you should give them permission and if they turn up with out all the appropriate PPE (i.e. full hazmat suit) refuse them entry for non-compliance.

I have scoured the web as best I can and I can't find any compliance rules or laws that apply to this situation, especially housing (If anyone here has Coutts Trotter email I will be eternally grateful ).

The best I can come up with is that persons entering my hovel must sign in with their full name and HOME address and contact number prior gaining admission.

It's going to be hard for an old fart like me to physically enforce.

[george65]

Pretty Fking easy to put them off short term till you can get better advise.
Tell them you suspect you may have the China Flu and are awaiting for test results to come back so will need a minimum of 14 Days in case you have to isolate and do have the virus .

Their request is neither unreasonable nor a threat. Lets be dead honest here, You were happy enough to let Reeches in to install your new TV and you had no more Idea if he was infected than you could anyone else. I'd suggest people from a gubbermint department are pretty closely Monitored and may even have to be regularly tested and they probably do take more precautions than anyone else. This is really a matter of you don't want them there rather than can't have them in the place.

Your circumstances may be special in you can't go out and if so, then I would suggest getting something from your doctor stating your position and that you can only have one person in the house for a max of 5 Min or whatever the situation is. If he will state that you cannot be exposed to potential risk and the inspection will have to wait till all threat has passed, then you'll have something concrete to hold them off with. They won't be able to defy a medical concern that's for sure. If your doctor won't give you that, then you may just have to grin and bear it.

Alternately, write and explain the situation and ask only one person comes in and the inspection is done in a max of 5 Min to minimise your risk. It's not going to go away so may as well get it over and done with before the situation gets any worse, both with the spread of the Pox and with the housing dept.

[Reschs]

Pretty Fking easy to put them off short term till you can get better advise.
Tell them you suspect you may have the China Flu and are awaiting for test results to come back so will need a minimum of 14 Days in case you have to isolate and do have the virus .

Their request is neither unreasonable nor a threat. Lets be dead honest here, You were happy enough to let Reeches in to install your new TV and you had no more Idea if he was infected than you could anyone else. I'd suggest people from a gubbermint department are pretty closely Monitored and may even have to be regularly tested and they probably do take more precautions than anyone else. This is really a matter of you don't want them there rather than can't have them in the place.

Your circumstances may be special in you can't go out and if so, then I would suggest getting something from your doctor stating your position and that you can only have one person in the house for a max of 5 Min or whatever the situation is. If he will state that you cannot be exposed to potential risk and the inspection will have to wait till all threat has passed, then you'll have something concrete to hold them off with. They won't be able to defy a medical concern that's for sure. If your doctor won't give you that, then you may just have to grin and bear it.

Alternately, write and explain the situation and ask only one person comes in and the inspection is done in a max of 5 Min to minimise your risk. It's not going to go away so may as well get it over and done with before the situation gets any worse, both with the spread of the Pox and with the housing dept.

Really George55, read your own posts!!!

The reason Victoria is a basket case is due to the Government and their Contractors.
NSW Cruise ship anyone.

If the they turn up, keep their distance, wear gloves, masks and then wipe down anything they touch he will be happy to let them in.

[george65]

The reason Victoria is a basket case is due to the Government and their Contractors.

Fair enough.

If the they turn up, keep their distance, wear gloves, masks and then wipe down anything they touch he will be happy to let them in.

Well I guess in that case that's all he has to make clear when he gets back to them to make the appointment.

That's different to the impression I got and still have after re reading Ma's posts but that being the case, he just needs to let them know the precautions he requires due to his condition, as suggested make sure they are wearing PPE before they come in and shouldn't be any cause for concern at all.

He wont need to email michael-coutts-trotter about this, just let them know in his email to the address they gave him in the letter they sent when he arranges the inspection date.