New Year brings with it splendid new opportunitiesJanuary 4, 2016 10:46
Rich People Problems
Nakheel locks the back doors of 10 apartment buildings, forcing tenants to use the entrance from the ‘clubhouse’ back doors instead.
January 23, 2012 4:27 by Eva Fernandes
Good Lord! Will the tiring spat between Nakheel, owners and tenants of the Shoreline Apartments on The Palm Jumeirah, ever, ever, EVER end?
Kipp’s quite tired of commenting on the unending saga—but because there isn’t quite anything else to talk of today, we shall focus on this, to use the catch-phrase of 2008, absolute ‘FAIL’ (oh yes, we are down and with it with the kids…of four years ago).
If for some reason, perhaps the sharp winds we’ve been enjoying, you happen to be living under a rock, Nakheel has recently banned residents who have unpaid service fees from access to the beach and the pool. In order to enforce the ban, Nakheel has locked the backdoors of 10 buildings that open to the pool and the beach.
And so, as The National, so dramatically put it: “beachgoers were forced to use the back doors of five “clubhouse” buildings connected to the apartment towers, where security guards have been posted to screen entrants.”
Of course, those residents that have verified ‘temporary access cards’ with their photos on it, are allowed in; the rest are left high and dry (dry, because they aren’t in the pool, get it, get it?). But before you wag an accusatory finger at those residents living in unpaid units, consider that some tenants are merely renting out the unit from an owner. In essence, this quarrel between the developer and the owner is long drawn out and effectively tedious—but it is also terribly unfair to a paying tenant who signed a contract with a particular understanding of the facilities available.
But you know that, of course. Everybody knows that. Which is why, Kipp facetiously decided to focus on a rather amusing aspect of the story. Reading the rightfully frustrated comments of some of the victims of the real estate struggle, Kipp couldn’t help but think they could easily feature on White People Problems (don’t mean to be racist, that is the name of the website) and Rich World Problems.
Consider the following:
“Hamish Harding, a British tenant with an access card, refused to produce it when entering the gym, claiming such passes should not be necessary. Mr Harding said the officers who arrived at the guards’ request regarded the event as too minor to pursue. “We’ve got to fight this.”
‘Got to fight this!” Kipp thinks budding revolutionary Harding is just one raging rant away from painting his face blue and white and yelling “They can take Away our Beach and Pool Access, but they Can’t Take Away Our Freedom.”
…All jokes aside (after some hardy laughter if you will), we’re sure RERA will somehow reign in all the parties involved and just end this issue. Clearly somebody’s got to step in because neither the tenants or the developer seem ready to back down any time soon.
If RERA says the developer has no rights to block entry, then the developer should be reprimanded for continue to do so. If RERA tells tenants to pay up, then there should be a similar course of action for non-payment. Simple as that. Doesn’t the A in RERA stand for Authority?
Somebody’s got to end this thing so we can move on to the numerous cases of people who’ve poured their savings into a off-plan project that will most likely never see the light of day.