"Scumlord"

[king1]

The two months without consistent hot water is somewhat suggestive...

What does "consistent" mean? Stuff doesn't tell us.
To what extent did it not work? Off once a month, once a week or once a day? Stuff doesn't tell us.
What did the landlord do when the problem was reported? Contact a tradesman? Did the tradesman come in a timely fashion or was the landlord also a victim of being messed about?
And so on.

My main point at the outset is about taking articles like these with a huge grain of salt. Did Stuff make any attempt to provide the other side of the story? Did Stuff seek out the evidence to ensure that what they were printing was factual? This forum has had a lot of discussion about critical analysis of what can be read online. The concepts don't just apply to CTs on the fringe. People need to learn to be critical and check whatever they read if they are going to give credence to it.

---

Perhaps we should simply address the issue with a few new laws to prevent exploitation.

There are some excellent landlords out there  doing the best they can in difficult times & any new measures needn't affect them - just the absolute ratbag landlords.

The last thing we need is new laws. So much of today's problems have come about because there were too many new laws that have caused price hikes and rental shortages as owners have coped with the expenses that were thrown at them. Ratbag landlords are already taken care of through the Tenancy Tribunal.

The "woe is me" stories you see in the press always have another side. Look up the evidence on some and you may find a totally different perspective.

---

Lawmakers need to take into account the views of various different stakeholders and are legally required to make the best decisions for all, not just a single stakeholder...  The entitlement clearly comes from not wanting to accept the decisions and policies of aforementioned lawmakers, basically thinking they know better.  But as I alluded to, the big picture is where the lawmakers work.  I know though, it is difficult to accept if they don't take on board your perspective.

Yes, the lawmakers are required to make the best decisions for all, and that is where they fail so woefully. The vocal idiocy get listened to, the professionals who put forward quality best practice evidence and technical detail get ignored so legislation gets passed that ends up costing everyone unnecessarily.

Look the bloke has had judgements against him in the tenancy tribunal and is subject to an investigation by MBIE.

you can call it a conspiracy against landlords if you like, but I think everyone else can see these particular circumstances are well past the point where Stuff needs to provide evidence and everyone else needs to do some critical analysis about perceived bias in the article. 
 
Enough red flags have obviously been raised to warrant an investigation into his practices - the system is working as it should