Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
3 posters
Page 1 of 1
Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
The women's names are Theresa and Ursula. The 'elderly mother', Ursula, is actually sitting in my kitchen as I write this.
Last night, their house burns down. I went to see it, this morning - there's literally a shell of it left, with half of the backyard exposed, and you can smell the charred remains of it from down the street.
Here is the first official report on the event.
They're been battling with the council for their house for over twenty years.
So, what do you think about it? What should be done?
Last night, their house burns down. I went to see it, this morning - there's literally a shell of it left, with half of the backyard exposed, and you can smell the charred remains of it from down the street.
Here is the first official report on the event.
They're been battling with the council for their house for over twenty years.
So, what do you think about it? What should be done?
Re: Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
Lol jack
V. v. valuable contribution
I'm going back to their house now, to see if I can be of any help.
V. v. valuable contribution
I'm going back to their house now, to see if I can be of any help.
Re: Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
Do they have any where to live now?
makoto kino.- Leading by Example
-
Number of posts : 1932
Age : 32
Location : Barely There and Boston Bound
Re: Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
We're trying to get Crisis Accommodation.
And we set up so we can try to get donations
And we set up so we can try to get donations
Re: Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
http://decisions.justice.wa.gov.au/SAT/SATdcsn.nsf/c87774355671a93c48256f64001012ef/39e950c5a63d5245c82574aa0017bf60?OpenDocument&Highlight=2,inglewood
Same people.
Same people.
Re: Sixth Avenue House, Inglewood WA
A HOUSE in Inglewood that has no electricity or gas, limited water, an unusable bathroom and no laundry facilities is set to be torn down.
The house on Sixth Avenue has been deemed unfit for human habitation and will be demolished by November 3 unless the mother and daughter who live at the house can prove that it is not a health or fire risk.
Last month, the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) made a preliminary decision to uphold a City of Stirling ruling that the house be torn down because it posed a serious health and fire danger to the occupants and their neighbours.
No one answered the door when Guardian Express visited the house last month. .
A SAT report showed that city officers issued two notices to the property’s owner, Ursula Dueschen, in September 2007 after trying for nearly 20 years to convince her to improve conditions at the house.
The first notice declared the premises and house unfit for human habitation due to health concerns and required that it be vacated, and the second notice directed that the house had to be demolished.
The city’s inspectors found 19 cats on the property and said it was unsanitary because of the cat faeces, urine and pet food.
They also found it to be a fire risk because of disused items and rubbish in and around the house and that it was in a state of disrepair and lacked essential services.
In the tribunal report, the owners rejected claims the house was uninhabitable, saying that while their lifestyle may not be acceptable to others, they did not put anyone at risk nor were they in any danger.
The owner has until Thursday to make her case to the tribunal that the house should not be demolished. The tribunal will hand down its final decision on September 22.
she lost.
The house on Sixth Avenue has been deemed unfit for human habitation and will be demolished by November 3 unless the mother and daughter who live at the house can prove that it is not a health or fire risk.
Last month, the State Administrative Tribunal (SAT) made a preliminary decision to uphold a City of Stirling ruling that the house be torn down because it posed a serious health and fire danger to the occupants and their neighbours.
No one answered the door when Guardian Express visited the house last month. .
A SAT report showed that city officers issued two notices to the property’s owner, Ursula Dueschen, in September 2007 after trying for nearly 20 years to convince her to improve conditions at the house.
The first notice declared the premises and house unfit for human habitation due to health concerns and required that it be vacated, and the second notice directed that the house had to be demolished.
The city’s inspectors found 19 cats on the property and said it was unsanitary because of the cat faeces, urine and pet food.
They also found it to be a fire risk because of disused items and rubbish in and around the house and that it was in a state of disrepair and lacked essential services.
In the tribunal report, the owners rejected claims the house was uninhabitable, saying that while their lifestyle may not be acceptable to others, they did not put anyone at risk nor were they in any danger.
The owner has until Thursday to make her case to the tribunal that the house should not be demolished. The tribunal will hand down its final decision on September 22.
she lost.
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum