Deathbed
Reporter: Kevin Milne
An extraordinary development involving an injustice we tried to
sort out years ago but got nowhere.
Fair Go presenter, Kevin Milne, was contacted by a Christchurch social worker caring for notorious talent agent, Neil Foord. Kevin had done several stories in the late nineties about Foord's Wellington talent agency, Real Kiwis.
Foord had already made headlines when he was convicted of the rape of his housekeeper in 1991, then later as a controversial journalist and writer, and after his brush with Fair Go in 1998, director of a much publicised video film featuring Chloe of Wainuiomata.
But now Foord was desperately ill in hospital and urgently wanted to contact Kevin. He said he had a cheque for those owed money by his Real Kiwis agency.
Kevin flew immediately to Christchurch to find Foord desperately ill with cancer in Christchurch Hospital. While he conceded he might not ever leave the hospital, he said it was possible he might live another year, or five years.
In a remarkable interview, the notorious talent agent presented Kevin with a $1,000 cheque to pass on to children who had worked in extras in films through the agency but never been paid.
Foord said, if necessary, more money would be coming either through his lawyer or, should he die first, "through some other way."
When asked whether this was some sort of "soul cleansing" Foord said it wasn't "guilt money" nor was the interview "a deathbed confession." He just wanted the money to go to his clients who were never paid, starting with the children.
Neil Foord died the following day.
Fair Go isn't quite sure how it will distribute the funds. But those who featured on Fair Go having played extras in movies but not paid by Foord are asked to contact the programme, with any evidence they have.
Moved to Tears
Reporter: Simon Mercep
Rotorua couple Daron and Collette Dodge came to Fair Go at their
wits' end. They had bought a house in rural Waikato and employed
Whangamata company Beach Demolition Removals Limited to shift it to
a new site at Mamaku, near Rotorua.
Daron and Collette paid a 70% deposit, of $15,750.
They said the project evolved into an emotional and financial
disaster. They said after some delays, Beach Demolition Removals
prepared the house for moving. This involved removing the roof and
splitting the house in two. Tarpaulins were put across the roof,
but the house suffered water damage after a heavy rain.
The house was moved two months later, and then suffered more water
damage after another heavy downpour at its new home in
Mamaku.
Collette and Daron said Rik Taikato of Beach Demolition Removals
promised to arrange repairs and pay for them, but they said he
stopped paying the builder.
They said their overall losses - including labour, materials and
other costs such as paying extended rent while they waited for the
house to be repaired - amounted to around $50,000. They said their
attempts to get Rik Taikato to pay for their losses had proved
fruitless.
Rik Taikato told Fair Go this was a rare complaint. He accepted he
should pay for some water damage, but he said that once he
delivered the house to Mamaku, Collette and Daron were required to
finish making payments to him under their contract. He said when
they didn't, he was entitled to stop paying the builder who was
making repairs.
He also said he had arranged for materials to be supplied for the
repairs.
And Rik Taikato said he had been blamed for leaks which had
occurred when Collette and Daron put tarpaulins on the roof at
Mamaku.
Collette and Daron disagreed with those points - they said it was
tarpaulins put up by Beach Demolition Removals that leaked.
They said they had arranged and paid for materials, and they said
they did not pay the rest of the contract to Rick Taikato because
he did not complete the job, and they employed another firm to
finish the work.
As a result of our intervention, both sides agreed to meet to
discuss a resolution.
Poisoned Paddock
Reporter: Hannah Wallis
Peter and Cathy Bjarnesen unknowingly bought a poisoned rural property just out of Rotorua. A neighbour told them their proposed house site was where sheep dipping had been done for surrounding farms. Chemical sprays used to kill parasites on the sheep had drained off into the soil - and stayed there. Once alerted to the problem, the Rotorua District Council slapped a hazard notice on the property. The Bjarnesens couldn't build on the land, or live on it, until the soil was dug out, removed, and replaced with clean soil. Cost estimate - $98,000.
That was back in 2002. As a result of what happened to the
Bjarnesens, local councils nationwide were alerted to the risks of
sheepdips. They realised how crucial it was to put hazard warnings
on their property files - so that unsuspecting buyers wouldn't get
caught unawares.
And the costs of the clean-up have gone down - the
Bjarnesen's job can be done for $25-30,000. Because they are the
landowners - even though they're the innocent party - the
Bjarnesen will have to fork out about 40% of that. The rest will be
covered by the Ministry for the Environment which has a clean-up
fund.
So the work's finally started now and will take around two weeks,
and the Bjarnesens will be left with an A grade clean property.
Our advice:
If you have a rural property, or are thinking of buying one, first
have a really good search of the Council files on the property. Ask
what the owner, or developer, knows about the use of the land.
Other signs which might indicate the presence of old sheepdips are
woolsheds or barns, sheep or cattle yards, and loading bays. The
sheepdips themselves may be long gone - you may be left with a
circular or rectangular concrete pad, or sump holes or sink holes.
And talk to the longer-term neighbours - that's how the Bjarnesens
found out their property had been the regional sheep dip site.
However, the presence of a sheep dip doesn't mean you'll have the same problem as the Bjarnesens - it may only have been used for that farm alone - therefore much much less chemicals involved. And if you don't actually want to build, or grow veges etc on the site of the actual sheep-dip or the surrounding land, you might not have a problem at all.
Further information:
If you want a site tested or cleaned up or you have any concerns,
first contact your local regional Council, who can provide names of
experienced contaminated sites investigators to do testing and
remedial work. That work might involve anything from fencing off
the sheep dip and surrounding contaminated area, to a full
excavation like the Bjarnesens. Landowners are generally
responsible and liable for cleaning up, even if the contamination
was caused by a previous owner.
The Ministry for the Environment has a contaminated sites fund which may be available to land owners, accessed through your local regional Council. The Ministry for the Environment website www.mfe.govt.nz < http://www.mfe.govt.nz>/publications/hazardous/ has access to an excellent guideline on "identifying, investigating and managing risks associated with former sheep dip sites".
The environmental scientist employed by the Bjarnesens is Rob Gwilym at email: gwil.es@xtra.co.nz
WaiPAC is a voluntary group which has done a lot of research
into identifying and managing contaminated sites. Contact Graham
McBride 07 8297726. Their report is at:
www.wasteminz.org.nz/sectorgroups/contaminated/Contaminated_conf98.pdf
