HARRINGTON”S 102 CONTINUES TO OFFEND GUESTS

This ‘accommodation facility’ seems to have suffered a dramatic fall in patronage following a wave of Complaints & Reviews to major travel Websites like Trip Advisor where it is ranks last of all reviewed accommodation in Hobart.

But some tourists continue to stay there many, it seems, reserving through the “Booking.com” site where it is wrongly described as a “bed & breakfast”. “Bed & breakfast” accommodation is within a home where the owner(s) use the majority of the residence. 

In just July & August this year “Booking.com” has received these complaints:-

ROOM SIZE

July 9^th-“very small rooms”

July 30^th-“cramped room”

August 15^th-“the room was barely big enough for 2 people to move in”

DEFECTS

July 28^th-“the electric cables needed hiding”

            -‘the shower door needed fixing”

-‘the vents needed fixing back in place”

LACK of BASICS

July 4^th-“when you run out of toilet paper that’s it,no more regardless of duration of stay”

            -“2 single beds pushed together, not a queen”

July 12^th-“no clean towels”

-“bed never made”

-“room wasn’t serviced for 5 days of my stay”

WHAT MR KHANI REPRESENTS-

On the “Harrington 102 website" - Modern & Immaculate Facilities”

On “Wotif”-“Ultra Modern”

On both the “Wotif” & “Hotel Club sites –

“Ideal & Inexpensive Accommodation”, &

“Suited to the Business person”.

Queen beds are listed.

PORKIES

On July 6^th Martin thought the explanation of ‘password issues’ might explain the absence of the advertised Wi Fi access.

But on August 4^th another Aussie traveller recorded that Wi Fi didn’t exist.

On July 12^th an attempt was made to placate Mark of Tweed Heads by saying  that a cleaner had just quit.

On July 9^th Paul from WA complained of the false claim outside of a “luxury hotel at bargain price” when it was “very basic”.

He could have added that is not an “Hotel” either.

BREAKFAST

On Aug 4^th an Aussie complained of the “breakfast” being just “sliced bread for toast, add hot water to instant coffee, etc”

She did better than Kerrie of Deloraine who reported on July 8^th - no breakfast (& no electric blanket & the need for ear plugs because of the noise).

WHAT MR KHANI REPRESENTS-

On the Hotel Club Website -“Restaurant. This property serves a delicious Continental breakfast every morning for you to make your day a tremendous one”

WARNINGS

On July 4^th a guest said I “strongly recommend not staying there”

On July 12^th Jan of Tweed Heads said “I’ll tell my friends not to stay there”

These were obviously not read by a guest who said-

On August 4^th “I don’t normally write reviews but after this hotel, I consider it only fair to other travellers that they be made aware of short comings of this establishment”

IS this Accommodation Facility accurate in claiming “Very Reasonable Rates” & “Inexpensive Accommodation”?

It’s compact rooms are advertised for $125 per night; currently available for $79.

It’s top room is advertised @ $195;currently available for $160.

The very highly rated Astor Hotel, Macquarie St starts from $57.

Other low price city area accommodation @ present includes:-

Cascade Hotel $56

Tower Motel $58

Marquis of Hastings $69

Shipwrights Arms $75

Blue Hills Motel $78

Central Bar & Café $85,&

Fountainside Hotel $89.

At a higher level The Macquarie Motor Inn starts at $83.70 and The Mercure at $99.

Nearer the top the Casino starts at $106, new Hotel Collins at $124 and the Grand Chancellor at $139.

Still who could forego the charms of being woken as Cheryl from Augusta, WA says she was on about July 10^th by another guest who was screaming out “CRAP MOTEL”?

33 Marlborough ST Tender Finally Called

Hobart City Council has finally called for tenders for 33 Marlborough St. The owner, Soheil Mehrab Khani refuses to restore the land to it's former condition after illegally devastating the land 5 years ago.This block of land along with 2 nearby blocks were given subdivisional approval only on the condition that they be kept in the natural condition except for a 600m2 building area.


This because they are an important part of the Hobart sky line. That requirement is recorded on the Certificate of Title.

But soon after purchase in February 2007,Mr Khani bulldozed a large area,excavated part of the slope & imported a large amount of fill which rose menacingly above neighbouring homes & substantially remains there today.
Tribunal orders to restore it  some years ago have also been ignored.

Now it seems that enough is enough &  after many neighbourhood protests the Council has moved to carry out the requirements of the Resource Management & Planning Appeal Tribunal Order of July 2009 to restore the land to what it was & has called for tenders to do so. 

The Tender was advertised in the Mercury 2 June 2012:

Pitt and Sherry assessed the condition of the land and submitted a report on what needs to be done which is the basis of the tender.

I notice that Peter Ray of Pitt and Sherry is not involved in this. It seems a shame because he had prior experience working with Khani on the Bathurst St developments and kept on telling me and my wife that Khani was  just a little "bullish" every time we made a complaint that he was breaking Tribunal conditions in building too close to us, constructing illegal windows and breaking other planning conditions.

Well it seems Khani has been a little "bullish" at Marlborough street too because reading the report shows that it will take major work to rectify this condition and this will all be billed to Khani.

I don't need a crystal ball to forecast an entertaining Court battle looming on the horizon as HCC try to claim costs against Khani!

Most of the applicable parts of the report below:

Lord Mayor Vows Quick Action Against “Uncooperative” Khani

Answering a series of questions at a Council Meeting earlier this month about Khani’s land at 33 Marlborough St, Sandy Bay, new Hobart Lord Mayor Damon Thomas said the Council had “expended considerable resources…and intends to expend further resources to bring about compliance with the Order which it sought from the Resource Management and Planning Appeals Tribunal”.

He labelled Khani “an uncooperative property owner”, said that the scope of works had been finalised and that tender documents for what is a “complex compliance action” were currently subject to legal review. 

He expected that review to be complete this month when tenders will be called.

He went on to promise that “works will commence as soon as possible after the awarding of the tender”. 


This saga and the stress, property damage and inconvenience for neighbours has been a long one. 

Khani bought this large block of land at the top of the Sandy Bay subdivisions in Feb 2007. 

It is 8,565 sq m but, like 2 nearby blocks, has a condition on the Title that apart from a building envelope (of about 600 sq m) “that no vegetation or ground disturbance is to occur”.

The land had natural bushland and adjoins a Council bushland reserve.

Soon after purchase Khani bulldozed the whole block shoving the trees and plants into the Council reserve. He cut away some of the slope and had a large quantity of fill dumped on it all, raising the level considerably.

The several neighbours below then had a huge gravel mound close to their back fences and feared that any collapse would engulf their homes. 

They were and are justified in their fears. Dr J.P.Cummings an geo technical expert engaged by Khani at the insistence of The Planning Tribunal reported that “the site fill poses a medium risk to life and property in its present state”.

Subsequently after any heavy rains neighbouring garages and basements were flooded. He also illegally constructed an access ramp.

Khani told one complaining neighbour that it was all the fault of the man he’d engaged to put the fill there. Khani boasted to other neighbours of tennis courts and a swimming pool to be built.

He once applied for a permit for a 12 car garage and parking area.

The Council made an application to the Resource Management and Planning Appeal Tribunal in respect of the illegal activity. Khani then made an application for retrospective approval.

 The Council approved some of the work but not most of it and imposed conditions. Khani then appealed to the Tribunal.

In their decision of 1.7.2009 in respect of Khani’s Appeal, the Tribunal described “a protracted and tortuous process” (presumably what we’ve seen from Khani in other Courts and Tribunals-failing to appear, requests for adjournments, feigned illnesses,etc).

The Tribunal noted that Khani filed no evidence or any material at all.

The Tribunal upheld the Council decision with a couple of minor amendments. On 16.7.2009 the Tribunal dealt with the adjourned Council application in respect of the illegal work. It Ordered that within 6 months, Khani was to:-

-remove the fill,

-reinstate any excavation works,

-submit a revegetation plan and carry it out when approved by the Council.

The Tribunal held that the Council was right to be concerned about soil instability and right to be concerned about the management of weeds on the site. For most of the 3 years since the property has been a source of weeds, especially Scotch Thistles blown over a large part of Sandy Bay.

Khani was later Ordered to pay the Council’s legal costs at 90% of the Supreme Court scale. (doubtless a princely sum) 

The 6 months leeway ran out in Jan 2010 so it is nearly 2 ½ years since the time Ordered and about 5 years since this illegal work was done. Now, finally the Lord Mayor is promising finality.

Khani has since tried to sell the land and it’s currently listed with Falls Real Estate. It’s most probably not worth the “offers over $750,000” being asked but it’s value on top of his other real estate holdings would bring a sizeable annual Land Tax bill.

That’s on top of the interest to ANZ which has a mortgage over it so his holding costs would be high.

Land Tax is levied on total property ownership.Mr Khani’s Land Tax bills rose a couple of years ago when the authorities became aware that the person owning some properties under the name “Khani” and the person owning some properties under the name “Mehrab-Khani” were one and the same, and combined the two. 

So Lara Giddings our Treasurer has something to be happy about.

One would assume that:-

-we’ll soon see the Tender requests in the Mercury,

-fairly soon see the work done,and

-then see a Writ issued in the Supreme Court  by the Council against Khani for the costs of rectification and legal expenses.


Below are the photos by Lucy Handsjuk tendered by the Council at the Resource Planning Appeal Tribunal to show the devastation wrought on this land required to be maintained in native vegetation.

Khani Creates Another Excavation Victim.

Following the death last year of Mrs Rita Thurley her property at 165 Bathurst St is empty and has passed to her Trustees with plans  in hand to sell it.

Her land has the considerable slope where Melville St moves to Bathurst. That slope is easily seen in Barrack St. Mr Khani has now excavated very close to her Eastern boundary at the rear of her property.

The result is that part of her fence is likely to soon collapse and with heavy rains some of her rear garden is likely to follow.

Mr Khani made a similar, albeit deeper, excavation near his nearby rear boundary about 2 years ago. That had the result of collapsing the rear of the land of Melville St residents A & J Home and they did fear for their residence.

That led to a Council prosecution on 2 charges under the Building Act (see below) for it's unlawful to take away such natural support. Mr Khani pleaded Guilty. Both he and his Engineer Mr Potter told Magistrate Rheinberger that he was not aware of this law.


Hobart Council have been advised of his recent actions. If prosecuted we'll see if he claims ignorance again.

The Council are not responsible for the repairs. The Insurers of the Melville St property are currently repairing that damage at a cost of over $100,000. They are expected to sue Khani for that sum, the law of Nuisance making it quite clear that he is responsible.

Rita Thurley's Estate will have to take their own action. In each case speed could be important considering Khani's many claims that he is planning to leave Hobart and his recent unsuccessful attempts to sell at least 5 properties.

The excavated area is seen in the photo below. Part of the work on the Melville St retaining wall can be seen at the right.

Another Travel Site Posts Damning Harrington 102 Reviews

AGODA a large Asian site has 3 recent reviews.

A Finnish couple complained on March 25th 2012 that they booked on line and duly arrived with their baby only to be told that the establishment had not been informed, that they didn't accommodate babies and that the Khani's wanted them to leave without refunding their money.
Fancy Mr  Khani not wanting to give someones money back to them, or to not pay money due to someone!!!

The Finns point out that there is nowhere on line on the "hotel's" site to list the baby. They add that it was "cold, noisy and unfriendly" ,that it made them "unhappy" and that it "ruined our stay in Hobart".

Aren't there laws in this country about discrimination against mothers?

Another disappointed International tourist Mr J.Srdjan complained on April 9th this year that it was "the worst hotel that I have ever been in" and added that it was "very, very disappointing" and "must be closed".

Of course these reviews should not surprise considering what is on Trip Advisor and that Harringtons 102's own web site somehow has 3 reviews attached to it which respectively say:-

- We were charged credit card fees without being warned.The room was very small.
- We got no help from the staff. Avoid it at all costs.
- WARNING-The bathroom supplies are below the standards of an outback truckies rest stop. Try first the Police Cells. If you have no other choice in Hobart-go to another city or Overseas.


Repeat-these 3 reviews are annexures to Harrington 102's own web site.

We hear so much about the problems of the Tasmanian tourist industry. How much harm is done to us all when visitors to our city suffer these experiences?

Harrington 102 Review - "Smelt Like A Sewer.."

Mehrab-Khani's property Harrington 102 has picked up another bad review, and this one is a beauty. The reviewer mentioned that she is taking this to Consumer Affairs and the Ombudsman.

The accommodation facility seems to be taking a downward spiral with more bad reviews in a shorter time than ever before, coupled with increasingly angry people.

Here is the latest review, 3 March 2012 on Trip Advisor:

"Absolutely Disgusting Doesn't Even Deserve A Rating!!!!!!!
I booked 2 rooms via the net, 1 for 2 nights and 1 for 1 night, according to it there were only "compact" rooms available for the nights we wanted, apart from 1 balcony room which was something like $180 per night. 
WELL, compact is the understatement of the century.... couldn't open the door and get into the room if the bathroom door was open,unless you were super skinny, NO window only glass bricks where one should be, heat pump, thank god, which we put onto air con so that we had some air circulating.


Bathroom advertised as marble, woopy do, so tiny, no face washers or hairdryer, you could hardly move in the shower. IN our other room, it stank,it smelt like the sewer, to put it politely, even room deodoriser didnt help...


Back to the room itself, couldnt stretch out your arm when in bed because the wall was in the way, lucky to be 8 inches each side of the bed, so no bed side tables, the heat pump was plugged in by an extention cord, I had to unplug that to plug in the so called, bedside lamp, which was stuck on the wall and didnt even work.


It was dirty and mouldy in places,you could see where things had been taken off walls but hadnt been repaired or painted, the phone to get intouch with reception, didnt work in either room.


The tiny jug of milk in the fridge in one of the rooms, had a film on it, so no saying how long it had been in there for. We should have gone and complainedt, and I dont know why, but didnt...


Our biggest concern was that the was only 1 way in and out of the building, via the stairs, oh yes we had to drag ourselves and luggage up 4 flights of stairs, NO LIFT. With NO window in the room, and only the stairs, WHAT IF THERE WAS A FIRE???? How the hell do you get out ??????? IS THAT LEGAL???

The only concelation was that the mattress was comfy, there was certainly nothing else even remotely good about the Harrington. I wouldn't even let my dogs stay there, their bed is bigger than our whole room was. oh and cleaner......


We couldnt put up with it for the second night, So we decided to book into something better, being to polite and embarrassed to say the real reason that we werent staying the second night, god only knows why, I told the lady at reception, who is not professional at all, that I was sick and we had to leave. 


I had paid up front for the two nights, and knew that there was a cancellation fee, but apon asking for my money back, which was only for 1 room for the second night, i was told that you have to give 72 hours notice, um a bit hard when you have already been there 1 night.


I could have got into a real doozy of an argument, but the stupid impolite woman on the other side of the counter was getting very agro with me, so I kept my cool and told her that that is just not right, to put it in terms that I can put in print. Her excuse was that she wouldnt have time to readvertise the room on the net. 


This happened before checkout time and check in isnt before 2pm... It was supposed to be nearly booked out but we only saw 2 other people there and they were in the room next to ours.


When we got back to our room the first night at about 12.30am their door was chocked open with the rubbish bin. Very strange, were they too claustrophobic to sleep with their door shut???


No parking, on the street in front if your lucky, which means putting money in the meter all the time, or round the corner theres a small car park you can pay $9 for all day, but only once all the workers have left to go home so that theres space...


I could go on and on and its all BAD, I intend on taking this further with consumer affairs and the ombudsman if need be to try and get our money back for the second night, that stupid inpolite receptionist,cleaner,manager what ever she is meant to be, could do with getting intouch with a good PR company to learn how to run the place properly. 


AND if there is another owner of this disgusting establishment, you need to get rid of her... Anyway, we had REAL luxury accommodation the second night at The Wool Store, it was absolutly beautiful.

You could do with going there lady and having a look and learn what true luxury accommodation is and how to treat people.... MY ADVISE IS TO NEVER STEP FOOT OVER THEIR PRETENTIOUS MARBLE FRONT STEPS......."


http://www.tripadvisor.com.au/Hotel_Review-g255097-d300914-Reviews-Harrington_s_102-Hobart_Tasmania.html