I had a friend a long time ago who was arrested for shoplifting and was unable to post bail due to this being like a second or third charge. He was evicted from his apartment while he was in. He released his key to me from jail, and another friend and I went and moved out as much of his important stuff as we could, and the apartment complex threw away the rest. If we hadn’t been there to help him, he would’ve lost literally everything, computer, passport, guitar, you name it.
The Auckland-based owner of BeanNGone, Steve Wood, told Stuff that he’d originally contracted Parking Services Ltd, because he was having issues on the land with people parking in front of the truck, or stopping to urinate.
“It seemed easier to hand it over to a local company. It’s not like I benefit from the fines. It’s become a headache and taking up my time as people keep contacting me.” […]
Owner of Parking Services, Jake Thomas, said he didn’t believe people’s reasons.
“They’re all liars. Give someone a parking ticket, and they will come up with no end of excuses.”[…]
Stuff relayed to Thomas the definition of parking, which involved leaving the vehicle or switching off the engine.
He disagreed.
“You must be stupid if you don’t know how parking works, if you put your wheels on private property, doesn’t matter how long or if you keep the engine on, you’re going to be fined. I have a business to run, and I’m here to make money.”
What a fucking parasite. The coffee shop owner thought they were taking normal steps to keep people from pissing in their parking lot, then they wound up with someone who’s so morally corrupt, they don’t realize they should be ashamed, or at least not incriminate themselves. I feel awful for Steve wood, who’s probably lost a LOT of business because he thought he was doing the right thing.
I’ve never been to New Zealand, but this is predatory and dishonest (and Jake Thomas clearly doesn’t know what parking is), so it’s got to be illegal, right? I assume they have a common law system, where this would either be fraud (depending on how much Thomas talks) or the parking fees would be waived.
Mr Prosser said: “You were quite entitled to make any suggestions or protests at the appropriate time you know.” “Appropriate time?” hooted Arthur. “Appropriate time? The first I knew about it was when a workman arrived at my home yesterday. I asked him if he’d come to clean the windows and he said no he’d come to demolish the house. He didn’t tell me straight away of course. Oh no. First he wiped a couple of windows and charged me a fiver. Then he told me.”
“But Mr Dent, the plans have been available in the local planning office for the last nine month.”
“Oh yes, well as soon as I heard I went straight round to see them, yesterday afternoon. You hadn’t exactly gone out of your way to call attention to them had you? I mean like actually telling anybody or anything.”
“But the plans were on display …”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a torch.”
“Ah, well the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying Beware of the Leopard.”
Wouldn’t it be nice if fines were based on the past/present/potential revenue (not profit) from the location where the offending took place?
Dig a trench on an archaeological site without permissin? Pay the full amount your business case said you might ever receive from the work you were making the trench for.
Drink drive? Instantly lose the vehicle you were driving.
Knowingly breaking the law should have extra penalties, I.e. corporate death penalties should be commonplace for those who knowingly break the law.
“congratulations, as the director of the company responsible you are now on the hook for the ongoing restoration and maintenance for the next 20 years”
Exactly! If it’s not already, breaking the law should be an examption to the whole concept of a limited-liability company - so you can’t just shut down the company and move on to another.
It’s not in the article but I believe on 1 Jul free public transport for kids 12 and under kicked in, and those aged 13-25 will continue to get half price fares indefinitely.
I’m a kiwi but hold a dual citizenship so have spent a fair amount of time overseas. End up coming back cause I miss NZ too much but as I’m getting older and need to pick somewhere to base myself for a while it feels hard to justify NZ, from a career perspective. That said, it’s also hard to imagine leaving again.
100% agree though, I find a lot of my peers who endlessly talk about how much they hate NZ haven’t really lived outside of the country. Not that that’s a reason not to criticize NZ but at the very least living somewhere else for a while gives good perspective.
I swear alcohol tax was like 50% of the price 10 or 15 years ago. But the article says has a quote saying that now it’s 50%. That means it was only 43.4% before!
Yeah it's crazy, they also kicked out the chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), David Nutt because he used data to show that the UK ranked the harm of drugs incorrectly, and showed that using MDMA was less harmful than horseback riding.
He was asked to go because he cannot be both a government adviser and a campaigner against government policy.
Ah, but you can then show that less people are on benefits and say you’ve done well. Just don’t look at what experts say about poverty. In fact, best to fire the experts if you can!
It seems Pharmac are current;y close to subsidising CGM’s and pumps for all Type 1 Diabetics. That should prevent the need to bypass the system to get the meds/devices needed.
I wait until it really happens on 1 July 2024 to be sure though. Wouldn’t surprise me if Diabetics who have good control over their condition might be excluded due to costs.
Intermed’s sales and marketing manager Robert Cooper told Bennett that New Zealand and Australia had “different healthcare and government funding mechanisms”, and said the sensors were subsidised by the Australian government.
That’s the meat and potatoes, right there. Is this assertion true? Are these things subsided in Australia and not New Zealand? If that’s the case, by how much? And what would the cost be if they were subsided the same amount in New Zealand?
I don’t really understand exactly what they even are, let alone how to Google whether they are subsided in Australia. As a general rule, products subsidised at the pharmacy usually can’t be bought online. You need either a prescription from a doctor or Medicare card.
This seems in respect to continuous glucose monitors (CGM’s), a device used by diabetics to continuous monitor their blood glucose levels rather than finger pricking and testing blood samples. A CGM requires sensors which need replacing regularly.
First off there are 2 types of diabetes. Type 1 where the body no longer produces its own insulin, and Type 2 where the bodies insulin levels produced are reduced. Type 1 requires insulin to be introduced via injections or pump. Type 2 typically is controlled by oral medications.
For a lot of diabetic patients a CGM massively improves their control of glucose levels which in turn greatly reduces the chances of developing diabetes related complications.
Pharmac were in the process of evaluating CGM’s such that the very high ongoing costs would be removed, or at least reduced, for all NZ Type 1 diabetics. They were already specially funded for some really unwell youngsters, but I saw recently that the new government seems to have withdrawn that. IDK the stated reasoning though, I guess to save money.
I’m a T1 diabetic, it is a VERY serious lifelong condition, typically appearing in youngsters, I was 9 when it appeared, but sometimes it occurs in older patients.
My uncle earning almost $400k per year, with multiple investment properties, etc qualifies for a pension… How about we means test the bloody thing and we’d be able to make life a little easier for those who have it as their only source of income?
I can see the case for this, but my view is means testing super itself is the wrong way to go about addressing this.
You create a whole bureaucracy around applying means testing and a cottage industry of wealthy people avoiding it through trusts and so on.
Then when it becomes means tested it becomes a target to slash and burn politicians, just like all the other benefits. The fact it’s universal is the only reason it’s survived in the relatively good shape it’s in, because so many have a stake in it.
Imo it’d be far better to claw it back by taxing wealth, property and high incomes.
Thats not even taking into account the economic cost of wasting people’s time and energy forcing them to attend “work seeking” seminars etc. When some people are forced to forgo doing some part time work they might be able to do instead, or avoid doing some small amount of work they might be able to manage only on a temporary basis for fear they might loose thier benefit.
It’s actually a huge amount of staff effort to means test benefits, and it’s definitely not without issue.
It would probably involve a substantial increase to the number of WINZ employees needed. Add to this that pensioners are less computer literate on average, and you probably need to double the size of the contact centre.
I’m not saying we can’t, I’m just saying I think it’s a bad idea that undermines the scheme as a whole. Better to address the issue through the tax system.
Our means tested benefits are dogshit compared to super.
We (rather the government) seem to spend an incredible amount on making sure “solo mum of three” doesn’t get a dollar more than she’s owed just in case she might be scamming us or worse spending it on something I disapprove of while cheerfully firing superannuation at old people with reckless abandon.
There’s a particularly disgusting (IMHO) double standard here that no politician dares touch.
If super is no longer enough money then perhaps the recipients need budgeting help, like we condescendingly tell “solo mum of three”.
stuff.co.nz
Hot