What are my rights?

March 27, 2008

Dear Sir,

Do tenants have any rights?

I rent a basement apartment for $1,750 a month in Smiths, and have a problematic landlord.

The reason I am writing this letter, is that I hope it will give other expats food for thought and the initiative to take the appropriate action that I (as a single woman) failed to take. In short, I have a landlord who totally disregards the normal landlord/tenant relationship that one would expect.

At the heart of my problem is that he enters my apartment when I am at work, without notification and without any consent. As a single girl living alone, this behaviour is (at best) unnerving and (at worst) very worrying. I have all sorts of images going through my mind as to what he is doing in there.

When I challenge him, he tells me lies such as the water pump was running – which it wasn't. He tells me that fans are on – when they are not.

Up until recently, I had no problem with him coming in to the apartment while I was there. Lately, however, that has changed with his recent attempt at groping me. I should have called the police, but where is the evidence?

When caught out, he throws his hands in the air and shouts at me. He intimidates my friends who visit, telling them to move their car as he cannot get out. When we move the car, he then drives around the block and returns. A journey of some 50 seconds in total.

Most recently, I have left my webcam running in an attempt to prove that he is in my apartment during the day. He was incredibly annoyed at being caught out. He has threatened me with "Magistrates' Court" and – as a last straw – is now refusing to refund my deposit as (in his opinion) the apartment is not what it was four years ago when I first took it. The loss of the deposit is a small price to pay to get away from this man.

I leave Bermuda this weekend – sadly – but, nonetheless, so happy to be away from this bully. Expats – beware; and beware of basement apartments in Smiths.

CONCERNED EXPAT

Smith's

It is past time

March 29, 2008

Dear Sir,

I wonder why it took three reporters, Tim Smith, Tari Trott and Matthew Taylor to write the front page article in your paper today entitled "Premier: Learn to live with that".

The writers state "for the past two days, The Royal Gazette has been trying to find out exactly how Cabinet came to the conclusion that it is "not cost effective or penetrative enough to rely heavily on print advertising in an electronically advanced community."

As I see it the Premier was quite correct by not informing Messrs Smith, Trott and Taylor as to how Cabinet came to a decision. I have never known of any Premier, past or present, UBP or PLP, informing the public as to how Cabinet reached a decision. As a matter of interest, does the Board of Directors of the Bermuda Press Holdings Ltd. inform members of staff why they make certain decisions?

Your reporters go on to inform us, the public, that the Government is said to have spent $800,000 on subscriptions and advertising in the print media during the last fiscal year. As there is little if any Government advertising in your sister newspaper, The Mid-Ocean News, and as the Bermuda Sun publishes only twice a week, the public should assume that the bulk of that $800,000 has helped to sustain The Royal Gazette. I can therefore understand your dismay with the Premier and the Cabinet at this time.

Your reporters have further revealed that $42,000 of the $800,000 paid to The Royal Gazette has been for subscriptions. This I find extremely disturbing, the Bermudian taxpayer has been paying for civil servants to read The Royal Gazette. Certainly this must have been one of those policies that was carried over from the old government, i.e. the UBP. I could not see the PLP Government encouraging civil servants to read The Royal Gazette, especially in light of the many negative editorials and other articles that have been written about both the civil servants and the PLP Members of Parliament.

Messrs. Smith, Trott and Taylor further advise us, the reading public, that "the move has led critics to question whether it is the beginning of a drive to muzzle the freedom of the press by draining (the) newspaper's finances".

If we the Bermuda public are to assume that the move by the government to "axe its Royal Gazette deals" is a way in which the government can muzzle the freedom of the press and drain the finances of The Royal Gazette, we the public must also assume that when the UBP government refused to either advertise or subscribe to the Bermuda Times in bulk, it was that government's intention to muzzle the freedom of the press and "drain the finances" of that newspaper. I can assure the public that if the UBP government had spent only five percent of $800,000 with the Bermuda Times, that newspaper, like The Royal Gazette would still be around for Bermudians to read.

Your reporters go on (once again) to report that "Government has stepped up its hostility to the media in recent months, particular with this newspaper, with Works Minister Derrick Burgess vowing to urge young people to rise up and force Royal Gazette Sports Editor Adrian Robson out of the country... "

That is another example of biased reporting by your newspaper. Why did your reporters not make reference to the comments made by UBP Member of Parliament, Darius Tucker on this subject. In fact, it was Mr. Tucker who was the first Member of Parliament to take the media to task for their absence from the airport during the arrival of the youth cricket team. Not long after that Mr. Tucker was the first Member of Parliament to take Mr. Robson to task for his comments in his weekly column. Yet, your reporters have completely ignored his comments and the comments of other UBP MPs, as they continue to refer to Mr. Burgess' comments.

According to your report, Shadow Finance Minister Bob Richards has likened the $42,000 saved by dropping newspaper subscriptions out of a $1 billion Budget to a drop in the bucket. Certainly the Finance Minister and the Premier will find some more drops to add to that bucket so that the taxpayer's burden is lessened. Hopefully, the Government will look at the many outside vendors that are contracted to perform services for them, so that the bucket that Mr. Richards is referring to can in fact run over.

As I see it, it is really past time for you the editor, and your reporters to take a real look at your reporting and editorializing and admit that The Royal Gazette has been very unfair and biased in its reporting when it comes to the PLP Government. While you continue to plead innocence in this matter, there are many of us in the community who see The Royal Gazette for what it really is – a free public relations vehicle for the United Bermuda Party.

LAVERNE FURBERT

Hamilton Parish

P.s. If your newspaper was so fair, why is it necessary for your Assistant Editor, Jeremy Deacon, to continue to solicit comments from contributors to Bermuda Sucks, a blog that by its very title is anti-Bermudian anything. Is he in the habit of asking other bloggers for their comments?

Editor's Note: This newspaper is not so arrogant as to believe that Government or anyone else has an obligation to buy it, or buy advertising. However, we disagree with the Government's belief that it will be better able to get its message out via electronic forms of media alone and have asked to see the reasoning for this so that we can make our case. We do believe that as the custodians of public money – as opposed to a private company – that the Government has an obligation to explain how it came to that conclusion.

With regard to civil servants, Ms Furbert seems to believe that they work for the PLP. They do not. They work for the Government of Bermuda and are required to be non-partisan in executing their duties. One would imagine that when civil servants are being criticised, they should know about it.

With regard to the Bermuda Times, Ms Furbert should perhaps compare the relative circulations of that publication with The Royal Gazette's when it was in operation to determine which had the greater reach. Further, If she believes that $40,000 in annual advertising revenue from Government would have kept The Bermuda Times afloat, then her understanding of newspaper economics is different from the economic realities this newspaper faces.

The reason that Mr. Burgess has been cited is that as a Cabinet Minister, he called for Mr. Robson's work permit to be revoked for simply expressing an opinion. Mr. Tucker, Sports Minister Elvin James, Wayne Furbert and Glenn Blakeney criticised Mr. Robson and his column, as they are perfectly entitled. But threatening a person's livelihood is another matter entirely.