Study Shows Small Fines Encourage Bad Behaviour!!

This is something Hobart Council really needs to look at. They think small fines such as the $750 ***whoppers*** levied on Mehrab-Khani curb bad behaviour-- studies show the opposite. Small fines encourage bad behaviour!

Studies at an Israeli kindergarten showed that when a $3 fines was levied on late pick ups of children, this behaviour actually increased. Here is the graph:

Here is a link to read more about this (Hobart Council, take note!)

http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/05/31/fines/

I have been told this verbally by Mehrab-Khani in February this year, now it is confirmed with studies.

Building Notice Issued on Unit 1

Peter Ray of Pitt and Sherry has issued a Building Notice (again) for illegal building modifications on Unit 1. This has not stopped Mehrab-Khani in the least. It is full steam ahead with building. Speaking to Peter last week, he did concede that the Developer was a little "bullish"!!!

Legal Or Illegal?

Trying to determine what plans have been approved and what is now being applied for approval after being caught is not as easy as it seems. As I mentioned before, in my view this quaint concept of applying for approval after being caught illegally modifying a building is a bit like robbing a bank and offering to give the money back if you are caught.

I wrote an email to Ross Will of Hobart Council and Peter Ray of Pitt and Sherry last week:

 I sent an email about this already but I haven't heard from anyone yet.
As a layman, it appears to us the the second floor of Unit 1 has not been setback
an additional 500mm according to plans, is that correct?

Also, if this is true, has Council approved this already?
We haven't been told anything about this, and considering setback was an issue at Tribunal,
I would have thouight we would have been told something.

Finally, the windows on the ground floor that were added in need glass bricks because
they are so close to the boundary, we were told.

So the fact that the second floor is not setback a further 500mm,
in other words is still 400mm--does this mean that glass bricks are
going to be put in there too??

We can see in their bedroom, and they can see our bedroom doorways.
So does all this mean there will be glass bricks there too??

Do fire codes apply here--the windows are close together and a fire in one
property could easily affect the other, you would think?? Is ***window to window** distance
covered by the building code??

Any response by either of you gentlemen would be appreciated.
Many thanks.

Tom+Kerrie Berger
163 Bathurst St


Response from Peter Ray only:

Hi Thomas.

1.       The second floor unit 1 is as per plans that I understand have been lodged with Hobart City Council Planning and Building Authorities.
2.       The wall is where it should be. There is no setback because the lower level glassed roof section is not proposed for construction.
3.       Any glazing closer than 900mm to boundary will need to consider fire spread requirements of the BCA. This may not necessary be by installing Glass blocks.


 I still don't fully understand the response. The bulf of the top floor of Unit one should be back another 500mm according to the plans as I understand it.

No says Peter--he "understands plans have been lodged" and that it is built according to those plans. So are these new approvals we know nothing about that have been passed ignoring our input and knowing full well that this is an issue we went to Tribunal for?

Or am I not understanding the original plans? No idea. But I a narly positive that we have been bypassed for the very issues we fought for 4 years over, resulting in a Tribunal.

So the question is, what is the point of planning or a Tribunal if building plans can be broken at will and then apply for approval?

Khani Back in Court This Week...

For smashing the windscreen of Tony Jacob's in a public street. In all likelihood it will be adjourned with the prospect of a Launceston Magistrate hearing this next year. I am told that his Court Hearing for acquiring financial gain by deception is definitely still on in Oct.

I believe the dates are 14 and 15 Oct. I plan on being there if I can, it should be great entertainment value as well as affording Mehrab-Khani a very real prospect of a conviction.

Sensitive To Heritage

Architect Maria Gigney advertises herself as "sensitive to heritage". This is just as well, can you imagine what the development would look like if it were otherwise?

Our only source of light in the lounge room of our old 1847 heritage building is about to be bricked up, and the giant structures  in the backyard were going to be "hardly visible from the street" we were told in Tribunal.

The first pic is a view from the lounge door, the second is facing backyard.



The ground floor of Unit 1 is being built virtually on our boundary with 3 illegal windows that Mehrab-Khani decided to put in while he was going along. He is being prosecuted by Council over this, but it allows him to apply Tom's Third Law -- if you are caught with illegal building modifications, apply for approval afterwards!  It's based on the same principle that if you rob a bank and get caught, offer to give the money back.

Now the question is--will the second floor windows abide by the plans? We should know within the week.

12th Aug Court Proceedings

On the 12 of Aug, Mehrab-Khani's neighbour Tony Jacobs and myself appeared in the Hobart Magistrates Court to vigourously defend the Restraint Orders brought against us by Mehrab-Khani and his wife?? Jaklin Rahimi.

There were about 6 or 7 of Tony's friends as well as a representative from Sandy Bay to watch the spectacle. Tony had 9 pages of questions and cross examination as well as dozens of Police Reports and Intelligence acquired through the Freedom Of Information, now renamed to Right to Information. I turned up with even more--as well as dozens of pages of Police Reports I had a laptop with 2 video clips, and large presentation posters printed in A1 format from the Xerox shop.

In the end it wasn't heard because the Magistrate decided to dissolve both applications if we gave our word not to enter 44 Bay St where Mehrab-Khani was going to move in 2 weeks time (wink, wink, nudge, nudge), and the Harrington Hotel. All of this was reasonable, so the claims were dismissed.

However, something came out of this Court Proceeding that I am unable to elaborate on, but it was an incredible revelation concerning Mehrab-Khani and his wife. I have been advised to say no more about this at the moment but suffice to say, the revelation is sensational--and that's an understatement!

If it becomes appropriate, I will mention more about this.
Stay tuned.

Council Inspection on Friday 30th July -- More Illegal Changes

On Friday 30th July Hobart City Council  inspected the Development at 157-161 Bathurst Street and found "unapproved changes". Ross Willis, from Council Compliance just wrote to let me know...

"Council’s inspection confirmed a number of deviations from the approved plans.  The unapproved changes will be subject to enforcement proceedings.

The developer has indicated he intends to submit several amendments including changes to Unit 1.  All changes will be subject to the normal planning process."

Khani To Be Issued Summons Over Thumb In Eye Incident

As I reported  in the Thumb In Eye post on 26th June, when I was abused and intimidated and was given what I perceived to be a death threat whilst taking photo's from a public footpath, Police were called and I notice that they will be issuing a Summons against Mehrab-Khani over breach of Restraint Orders.

I requested and received all Police statements (28 pages) and reports from February onwards in preparation for a hearing where Khani's wife Jaklin Rahimi claims to be fearful of me, wants a Restraint Order covering the same incident where I have already been granted a Restraint Order in Feb, plus a new alleged incident. It would conveniently keep me away from the Development. Clause 5(7) in her application would also prevent me from living in my own house if she moved next door.

A time line here is illuminating:
May 3 -- Police called by Khani telling the Call Centre I am making it difficult for him to do "approved work" when what he really means is that he doesn't like the sign on my balcony saying "Trademen Beware. Some Haven't Been Paid. See developerkhani.com". Police tell me I am in my rights and that it is not a Police issue.

May 4 -- Police called because I am taking photo's of the Development from my balcony and a public footpath to send to the Council Re Compliance issues. Police tell me I am in my rights, and that it is not a Police issue.

May 11 -- I receive a lawyers letter telling me to stop taking photo's and to take the web site down. I ask the lawyer what parts of the web site are incorrect and get no response.

June 26 -- A major altercation on a public footpath in front of 6 Boral workers as Khani prepares to pour concrete and tries to prevent me taking photo's. Police arrive and take statements, summons to be issued against Khani.

June 27 -- The NEXT day....Jaklin Rahimi alleges she is fearful of me, wants a Restraint Order to keep me away from 102 Harrington and the Development!

Hearing on 12th August! Stay posted.

Khani Pleads Guilty

Heard from Tony Jacobs via Law Clerk from the Office of Public Prosecutions that...

"MEHRAB-KHANI pleaded Guilty on the 15/7/10 in respect of the following complaints

        Complaint no 92829/09- $750.00 Fine

        Complaint no 92830/09- $750.00 Fine

        Complaint no 92245-09- $750.00 Fine

On all complaints an order was made to pay costs on all matters 80% of Supreme Court scale, Council fees set at $200.00"

Tony says:

In respect of the 3 fines for Building breaches,the Order of costs at 80% of the Supreme Court scale would probably be a 4 figure sum & quite possibly several thousand dollars. Certainly they get paid for all the attendances at Court for adjournments.Council’s fee” really means legal “Counsel” fee of $200 for turning up that day."

Tony