Follow by Email

Thursday, 29 December 2011


Due to a recent encounter with a VCAT adjudicator and his determination based on the claimant providing incorrect information about the conditions under which I was providing accommodation to the claimant and because VCAT found against me due to the use of 'a faulty old law' with a financial penalty and due to other recent events whereby social workers continue to refer serious and dangerously mentally ill patients to us without providing warnings, I have decided not to to continue to increase the number of places for the homeless sector of the community. I shall continue to house those which I already provide accommodation for and who continue to abide by my House Rules and who pay an appropriate rental including the increasing costs of utilities, however I through my delegates will no longer accept just anyone without first receiving more verifiable information about applicants mental and personality status.

I believe that as the laws currently stand and without any positive feedback from the DHS Inquiry into Rooming Houses and without seeing any light at the end of the draconian tunnel, I intend to cease all projects which would have expanded the provision of the 'defined homeless sector' of the community.   

The treatment I received at the hands of the VCAT Hearing system was totally unjust and inexcusable from persons of such assumed legal standing. Accordingly, if the system cannot respect the role I have been playing in the provision of accommodation for the Homeless; then I do not wish to be in it any more.

The government and the powers that be can attend to those increasing tasks in the future using their tax money and taking the inherent risks using their personal organisational skills.   I no longer intend to fall prey to persons claiming to be cold and needing a warm safe place [for him & his dog] because they were living in their freezing car during winter as the claimant claimed as [nobody wanted them] and then went on to make a claim for compensation against me with the assistance of the Tenants Union. I have no intention to allowing myself to become a legal punching bag as the Late Frank Cassar endured at the hands of lying thieving tenants and unions.

I shall instead intend to expand into providing accommodation for the Tourist Sector of the market if the opportunity arises and the Planning system does not make it too onerous for me also. 

Sunday, 11 December 2011


Not much has changed since I got into the rental business and just this early Saturday morning un der cover of darkness a tenant named Pascal of Maurintian nationality  decided to leave and take some of my whitegoods namely a Fridge and Washining Machine to the value of $650 approx. Then once I discovered the theft he decided I should sell it to him for $300 because he felt he needed those items more than I would.

I was further astonished to get txt messages quoting the bible as a reason why I should let him keep items for the theifs offer price of $300, saying I was greedy and should not pursue him. Is this what churches now teach people in those countries to do? I advised him several times that I wished the items to  be returned otherwise I would advise the police who woul;d explain what the law is in Australia. Taking what is not yours is regarded as theft and could endanger his job prospects in the future if he is charged with theft and a record put against his name. He claims to be a student if he where an accountancy student and he later applied to get a job as an accountant, his police record may result in him NOT getting responsible positions and affect his income possibilities. This risk is often taken by overseas students when they fail to buy public transport tickets resulting a criminal conviction being recorded against their names.

This guy Pascal is still in the mistaken belief that the police are not going to be interested in his theft of my belongings and his refusal to return the items emediately got responses quoting the bible about people like me chasing I'm still flabagasted in his response and belief that he should be able to negotiate a price for the purchase at his This is not an article of fiction and this Pascal guy really seems to believe his point of view.

If he does not return the items, the police will be notified as will some of the local churches and the immigration department who seem to let these people into country without some basic legal studies. I was fairly sure Theft is stealing others possessions without the owners knowledge or permission? Am I so wrong to demand my goods be returned. Saga to continue  later today...zzzzz