09-04-2023, 01:32 PM
If the headline implies that the landlord was scum he'd probably have a good case for defamation, but in fact in normal English it means that he is the lord of the scum - ie it's his tenants that are the scum.
Seriously, it does sound like he's a smartarse, but Stuff never let the truth get in the way of a good story so who knows? He has clearly had some awards against him, but the examples given are all small. Taking one example...
"Powell went without consistent hot water for more than two months, forcing her and her toddler to shower at her parent’s house... [snip]...Bennett tried to fix it himself by installing a replacement gas heater that provides hot water when needed. Texts from Bennett, supplied to the tribunal, said he had a background as a gas installer, but did not hold a current registration. Bennett, who did not attend the tribunal hearing, says he only “investigated” the issue and hired someone else to fix it."
Did he totally ignore the problem for two months? Or did he spend two months trying to sort out an intermittent problem without success? The kind that the electrician says "not electrical" and the plumber says "not plumbing" and the tenant and landlord are both stuck between a rock and a hard place. And by deciding to go for the gas option (which is better anyway) he might then have had to wait weeks for the gasfitter so tried to do what he could himself. That's a very likely scenario that Stuff would conveniently leave out. It does say that the Tribunal awarded against him, but that's always something to take with a grain of salt too. The bottom line is that the stories in the article create more questions than answers.
Seriously, it does sound like he's a smartarse, but Stuff never let the truth get in the way of a good story so who knows? He has clearly had some awards against him, but the examples given are all small. Taking one example...
"Powell went without consistent hot water for more than two months, forcing her and her toddler to shower at her parent’s house... [snip]...Bennett tried to fix it himself by installing a replacement gas heater that provides hot water when needed. Texts from Bennett, supplied to the tribunal, said he had a background as a gas installer, but did not hold a current registration. Bennett, who did not attend the tribunal hearing, says he only “investigated” the issue and hired someone else to fix it."
Did he totally ignore the problem for two months? Or did he spend two months trying to sort out an intermittent problem without success? The kind that the electrician says "not electrical" and the plumber says "not plumbing" and the tenant and landlord are both stuck between a rock and a hard place. And by deciding to go for the gas option (which is better anyway) he might then have had to wait weeks for the gasfitter so tried to do what he could himself. That's a very likely scenario that Stuff would conveniently leave out. It does say that the Tribunal awarded against him, but that's always something to take with a grain of salt too. The bottom line is that the stories in the article create more questions than answers.