Contact us if
you would like to submit an opinion piece. We are seeking
commentators on a range of topics, including: RMA, crime and
justice, environmental issues, Maori issues, a NZ constitution
and governance. Contact
NZCPD.
At
a time when there is a waiting list for state houses of over
10,000 people, you would think that the Government would be
attempting all it could to resolve this issue. To be fair, it
has initiated some practical measures that should help
landlords to provide good accommodation. However they are also
looking into measures that could drive private suppliers of
rental property out of the market. There is also the question
of whether in fact the 10,000 waiting list is a true
indication that there is a shortage of rental property at all.
If
you say to someone, anyone, that you will save them upwards of
$40 a week on their accommodation costs without reducing their
standard of living, do you think they would be interested? Of
course they would and that is the reason for the waiting list,
because there are 10,000 others who also think this way.
This
does not mean that there are not people and families in
New Zealand
that do not have an urgent and desperate need for
accommodation. It is a sad fact people such as this are part
of the 10,000, yet they can’t get access to a state house.
Estimates
put the number of state house tenants who pay market rental
prices at 10%, which means there are around 6,000 people who
don’t need their state house. Surely it is unjust to keep a
struggling family living in a garage when there is another
family in a state house when they could easily be in private
sector housing. There is a desperate need for policy changes
regarding who should and shouldn’t occupy state houses. This
would have a dramatic affect on housing those with serious
needs.
There
is also a need to look at why low-income families are being
coerced into State Houses when they could be housed in the
private sector. Some people believe that there is no place for
a profit motive in providing housing and that is why the state
needs to provide housing for low income earners. Over the long
term there is certainly good reasons to invest in property,
however on a year to year cashflow basis, it is certainly not
easy to provide rental accommodation that pays its own way let
alone makes a profit.
Everyone
knows that rental yields have fallen dramatically over the
past two years. There has never been a time when such a large
gap between the cost of renting and the cost of home ownership
has existed. Renting a property is considerably more
affordable than home ownership and private landlords are
taking on risk and considerable effort in providing rental
accommodation.
For
the most part, private rental accommodation providers do a
good job at housing a significant proportion of our
population. With low rental yields it is not an easy financial
environment to work in and we need all the help we can get.
Unfortunately the capital gains made in the housing market
over the past few years has led to envy and the inevitable
calls for the property investors job to be made harder. One of
these moves is to introduce taxpayer funded advocates for
tenants.
While
no system is perfect, the current operation of tenancy matters
through mediation services and the Tenancy Tribunal works
quite well. The system recognises that most providers of
rental accommodation in
New Zealand
are not professionals but hard working ordinary New
Zealanders. This is why Lawyers currently play little part in
our tenancy dispute handling system. This all may change if
Government decides to introduce Government funded Advocates
for tenants and will permanently bias justice in favour of
tenants. The Australian experience has shown the unjustness of
such a system.
In
Australia
, Tenants can have a lawyer appear for them at Tenancy
Tribunal hearings at no cost to themselves. Landlords are not
allowed to have lawyers represent their interests even if they
pay for them. This is completely unjust and we must never
allow such a system to be introduced in
New Zealand
.
The
vast majority of cases in the Tenancy Tribunal are for rent
arrears and damage to property. The fact that many landlords
lose millions of dollars every year through these two issues
is the main concern within the industry. Even tenant groups
admit that there is a serious problem and that it is a
significant barrier to the provision of more rental
properties.
Government
has certainly tried to help in this area. They have introduced
the ability to have beneficiary rental payments made directly
to landlords (although there are strings attached). They have
made it easier to gain access to the Tribunal by allowing an
application to be made when a 10-day letter is issued and not
at the end of the 10-day period. They have made it easier to
track down absconding tenants by allowing some government
departments to share address information with the Department
of Courts. In July they are going to introduce Tribunal
applications on line, which will greatly help landlords select
good tenants and act as a deterrent to bad tenants.
These
are good measures and appear to be working well. However a
reduction in depreciation allowances plus talk of increasing
notice periods landlords must give tenants (We have actually
asked for them to be decreased), tenant advocates, building
warrant of fitness’s and capital gains taxes for investment
property are certainly not going to encourage people into the
industry.
At
a time when more people are choosing to rent, the state cannot
keep up with their self induced demand, rental returns are at
historical lows and the property cycle is at a peak, I would
have thought this was the time to encourage people to provide
more rental property, not discourage it.
Your comments and contributions are welcome. Send your comments here
>>>.
Opinions expressed are those of the contributors, and do not
necessarily reflect those of the editorial staff.
The NZCPR does not receive
any government funding or support from any political party and has no
party affiliations.