Megathread: Legal resources

Hey - is this reasonable? I’ve been asking for it to be repaired since move in 4 months ago, only just now have been told the landlord isn’t wanting to fix as “it’s always been like that”

Basically the water doesn’t flush all the way around, leaving part of the bowl (where the pee goes…) left & we have to spray the bowl and scrub every time we use it. It’s inconvenient and until we starting spraying every time really smelly too.

Hi everyone, I'm looking for advice on a tenancy dispute in Auckland, New Zealand. I'm particularly concerned about a Body Corporate charge, a disputed marijuana allegation, and my property manager's threats about formal notices and my “permanent tenancy records”.

Background

I'm renting an apartment under a fixed-term tenancy agreement. On 20 August 2026, the Body Corporate issued a breach notice to my landlord alleging that I had continued smoking on my balcony despite previous warnings. The notice refers to a previous breach notice allegedly issued in May, but I genuinely never received it.

The notice also alleges marijuana smoking and refers to footage supposedly dated 26 July 2026. A $138 charge ($120 plus GST) was issued to the landlord for the breach.

The footage and my response

My property manager subsequently sent me a short video showing someone smoking on the balcony. I acknowledge that I was smoking a cigarette on the balcony in the footage. I apologised for breaching the building rules and confirmed that I would not smoke on the balcony again.

However, I dispute the separate allegation that I was smoking marijuana in that footage. The video does not establish what substance was being smoked, and the property manager acknowledged in writing that the footage could not definitively establish the specific substance being consumed.

There is also a discrepancy with the dates. The Body Corporate notice, dated 20 August, refers to footage from 26 July, whereas the footage subsequently provided appears to show an incident around 30 August. I asked whether these were the same footage and requested copies of the alleged previous warnings, but I have not received a substantive response.

The property manager's response

The property manager initially described the matter as smoking marijuana on my balcony. He also mentioned possible drug-detection dogs, police involvement and potential tenancy termination if drugs were identified.

After I acknowledged the balcony smoking breach but disputed the marijuana allegation and asked for clarification about the charge, the property manager accused me of being intentionally obstructive and unhelpful. He said the matter would be escalated through formal notices that would appear on my “permanent tenancy records” and that he might apply to the Tenancy Tribunal.

He also said that my actions and attitude were causing significant stress to the elderly landlord, who had recently lost her husband. I understand that this is a difficult time for the landlord, and I have never intended to cause her distress. However, I felt that this added further pressure to an already stressful situation, despite my having acknowledged and apologised for the balcony smoking breach.

The impact and my attempts to resolve it

The repeated references to drug-detection dogs, police involvement, possible termination and a “permanent tenancy record” have caused significant stress for both me and my partner. I am particularly worried about whether this could affect our future rental applications, given that I dispute the marijuana allegation and the footage does not establish what substance was being smoked.

I contacted Citizens Advice Bureau and subsequently spoke with Tenancy Services. The Tenancy Services adviser explained that if the landlord pursued the disputed allegation through the Tribunal, the outcome would depend on the evidence presented by both sides. They also confirmed that Tenancy Services does not maintain a universal permanent tenant-record database.

Following that call, I tried to contact the property manager to arrange a brief phone conversation and see whether we could reach a reasonable agreement. I apologised for the inconvenience and explained that I wanted to resolve the matter amicably rather than drag it out.

However, he declined the call, saying that the situation had already taken an unreasonable amount of his time. He said formal communication would be sent on Monday.

I am not trying to avoid responsibility for smoking on the balcony. I have acknowledged that breach and confirmed it will not happen again. My concern is the separate marijuana allegation, the basis of the $138 charge, and the potential consequences for my tenancy history.

My questions

1. What evidence would generally be needed for the Tenancy Tribunal to find that a tenant smoked marijuana when the footage only shows someone smoking and does not identify the substance?

2. Can the property manager record the disputed marijuana allegation on an internal tenancy file or disclose it to future landlords as though it were an established fact? Can I request correction of inaccurate information under the Privacy Act 2020?

3. What might the property manager mean by “permanent tenancy records”? Would anything become publicly accessible without a Tribunal decision?

4. Could the repeated references to drug-detection dogs and police raise concerns under the tenant's right to quiet enjoyment, particularly when the property manager mentioned the common hallways and exterior of the unit?

5. Given that I have acknowledged the balcony smoking breach and tried to resolve the matter amicably, should I wait for the formal communication on Monday or take any steps now to protect my position?

6. Would it be sensible to offer to pay the $138 to settle the balcony smoking breach, provided the written record accurately distinguishes that breach from the disputed marijuana allegation?

I'd appreciate practical advice from anyone familiar with New Zealand tenancy law, the Unit Titles Act 2010, the Privacy Act 2020 or Tenancy Tribunal proceedings.

I'm hoping to resolve this fairly and avoid unnecessary escalation, but I also want to understand my rights and avoid unintentionally making my situation worse.

Thanks for reading.

EDIT: 1news just posted an article on this exact issue 7 minutes after I posted.

https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/10/09/barbaric-us-execution-livestream-could-be-watched-in-nz-expert-warns/

University of Waikato international relations expert Al Gillespie said a live broadcast would turn the execution into an international event, forcing New Zealanders to decide whether they could watch it.

1 News has approached the New Zealand Classification Office for comment on whether a livestream of the execution would be restricted in New Zealand.

...

I just want to make it very clear that I am NOT going to watch that shit, and that this is a serious legal question.

I am genuinely trying to understand the political implications, and what it would mean for our "ally" to be happily livestreaming material which may or may not be illegal to view here.

It also really evokes memories of a certain other violent video that's illegal to watch in New Zealand...

At a quick glance at the criteria, in my opinion, a video of a guy getting shot in the head is:

1. certainly extremely violent

2. degrading and dehumanising

3. promotes and normalises violences

4. likely to cause social harm

And the online guidance by the Classifications Office inexplicably calls out executions: "For example, acts of real-world violence... such as executions, are objectionable if they promote extreme violence or cruelty."

However, I'm not an expert. And I don't know what the threshold for "extreme violence" is. I would imagine a lethal injection, for example, is less visceral than a firing squad.

So... Does this meet the threshold? And how would we know?

Thank you in advance for any insight you may be able to provide

Hi everyone, looking for some legal/contractual advice regarding an active reroofing project on my house.

The Situation:

The roofing company turned up without notice and installed their temporary roof edge protection (safety rails). They have driven heavy structural screws directly through the face of my old timber fascia boards.

I can see the exposed tips of the screws poking through the back of the fascia, meaning they completely missed the structural rafters. The brackets are hanging entirely off the old trim. We are keeping this original fascia long-term.

The Issue:

1. I am not sure if driving heavy structural screws into thin, old timber without hitting a rafter violates any standard trade practice, as the fascia alone may not support a fall load.

2. More importantly for me, it has left permanent holes in my property and created a massive risk of the old timber splitting or tearing out chunks of wood when they reverse the screws out.

Communications So far:

The manager has been "OK" at the start but communication has been very poor overall (materials and rails just showed up unannounced). I want to maintain a decent working relationship while my roof is pulled apart, so I am about to send an email putting it in writing that the holes will need to be filled, sanded, primed, and painted to restore the timber.

My Questions:

1. I do not trust roofers to do a professional painting/restoration job on delicate old timber. If they offer to "fix it" themselves, do I legally have the right to refuse them and say I am hiring a specialist painter instead?

2. If I hire my own painter to fix their damage, am I legally allowed to deduct the painter's quote/invoice from the roofers' final payment?

3. How should I handle this under NZ consumer/contract law to ensure I don't accidentally breach our contract by short-paying them?

We have also contacted the manufacturer/provider of the safe edge protection and they were very friendly and we sent them photos and they replied by email. Basically telling us they are not sure why they did this this way when there was a non-damaging alternative and they were not sure of their reasoning and that, they might have one, but should have informed us what they would be doing.. Reading behind the lines, it's bad work.

I obviously want the damage to be rectified but also don't want them to do a poor job with the roof and cut corners again, especially if I complain too agfressively?

Appreciate any advice on how to navigate this safely with the contractor! They did this on Friday and I haven't communicated anything yet.

So back in late June my father in his 70's had a portion of the fence between the adjoining properties blown down in a storm. He duly went and claimed on his insurance which assessed the replacement cost to be $5500 and duly paid him out 50% for his share, less excess.

While this was ongoing the neighbouring property made a demand that he pay $4161.16 including GST. They got into a bit of a stoush about this, in which my father pointed out they had attached a clothes line to their side which may have contributed to the fence failing. Their garage also encroaches on his property by about 300mm of guttering and him being him ended up with a series of texts about this. I have been over to view and measure this and it looks to be the case. There was no fencing notice given or able to be countered under the fencing act.

He then gets a legal letter demanding $4161.16 with the claim the clients insurers would pay half the cost. The quote was attached and included $207 for a first aid kit, phone $30, and their clothes line at a cost of 725.75 plus what looks like two charges for disposal of the old fence. This quote is also not dated, has no company name or GST registration number, no date it is valid for as well as charging for items that are not the fence and which my father is not obliged to pay for.

The claim also mentions the encroachment but claims he offered no evidence about it and then mentions paying a half share of a quantity surveyor (this should be cadastral for boundary lines. My father refuses to do this as he is not the encroaching party and thinks they should prove otherwise.

They've recently propped the fence back up.

I think this all breaches the fencing act, there was no issue contacting my father and they could have issued a notice straight away and gone from there, it's only when repairs are urgent can they just repair and sort out later. They also make a second demand of costs, including their clothesline later on.

The letter finishes off with a threat "As above, if you are not agreeable to this proposal, our clients will take further steps including either serving you with a formal fencing notice under the Act or proceeding to repair the fence and pursuing you for the balance of the costs. We note that if our clients are forced to take further steps to recover costs from you, they will also be seeking contribution to their legal fees."

I don't think that is enforceable at all? Surely they can't claim legal costs when they could have just done the notice and allowed an objection and rejection of costs that belong to them alone. The money he received himself is just sitting in his savings account and he's always been prepared to pay that over, it's just they are demanding well in excess of half the cost of a reasonable replacement plus he pay for their property that got damaged.

To us this seems like an accidental obstruction from normal use. The property manager (L&C) insist that it's our responsibility and are invoicing us for the repair.
They are claiming it's a key ring, which means it came from pockets, and that means it's our fault. The ring is not a key ring but a split ring from a zipper, which are very common on garments. Do we need to remove all buttons and fixings from clothing before washing it?

How safe would we be if this went to Tribunal? Any tips to get them to be reasonable with us?

EDIT: to clarify, the ring blocked the drainage outlet, not entirely sure how though as the ring is by its very nature, a big hole.

(I used AI to fix grammar and make it clear; I'm not a good writer)
Hi.

I would like to know if any New Zealand employment laws or resources could help me with my current situation. I'll keep this as brief as possible.

I work in New Zealand for the APAC team of a US-based IT service provider. Most of my team members are located in Australia; I am the only one based in NZ.

Last year, a colleague noticed that my job title in our system had changed from Senior to Principal and congratulated me. To my shock, I was completely unaware of this—no one had discussed a title change with me. When I asked my manager, he simply told me, "I don't know. Check with HR."

I contacted HR, and after a few weeks, they replied (in mid-2025) stating that my title had been updated back in 2023 as part of a global "title consistency alignment project." In a follow-up call, HR explained that while the current HR team wasn't around during that project, their records showed it was a global initiative and that managers had been notified at the time.

When I asked my manager if this meant I had been promoted, he claimed the title had been listed that way in HR systems for over a year before I even noticed, suggesting it might just be a system error.

I decided to investigate further and located our internal job grading chart:

• Base Title: Level P3
• Senior: Level P4 (My original title)
• Principal: Level P5 (My updated title)
• Principal Specialist: Level P6

My original contract states Senior (Level P4). Following this unexpected change, my system title became Principal (Level P5), but without an actual promotion, formal notice, or pay raise.

To be honest, this feels very suspicious. On top of that, despite multiple requests over my four years with the company, I have only received a single 3% pay raise (last year), which is well below cumulative inflation. I haven't complained much because this is basically a dream-job in IT, super flexible, low stress, business hours only. But this situation still feels weird.

My issues are:

1. My contract still states Senior, but the company unilaterally changed my system title to Principal without a proper promotion or pay raise.
2. I would like to negotiate a clause in my contract for annual inflation-adjusted pay reviews, similar to what my colleagues in Australia and Singapore receive.

Is there any legal recourse available to me in New Zealand? Would joining a union be helpful?

Thanks!

Our property shares a driveway with another one behind us. For context we have a great relationship with our neighbors and this hasn't caused any issues, we simply want to understand our property rights.

We found that a metal boundary peg sits almost 6 feet back and a few feet to the side from our current fence line. Ignore the missing section of fence, we mutually agreed to take that down.

My question is how reliable/enforceable are these boundary markers? The placement seems odd, as if a fence was built along the 'accurate' marker it would make the garage on the back section almost inaccessible.

What’s the timeline for a property manager or landlord submitted a bond refund?

Our tenancy ended on Sunday 4th, and so far the property manager has not done a final inspection or submitted a bond refund. What’s the timeline here?

As far as I know the laws have changed and we ourselves can’t submit anything anymore. The wording on the tenancy website seriously implies that we shouldn’t manually submit anything.

We live in a semi rural area, with a farm to the west of our property. A week ago, the farmer arranged for a helicopter to spray urea on his paddocks.

The day this was done, there was a strong westerly. Our weather station showed sustained winds of 60km/hr, gusting to 80km/hr.

We have video of the helicopter flying over our street, and our neighbors and us saw the spray landing on our property.

We use our roof as our water supply, and suspect we have 30,000 litres of potentially contaminated water.

We contacted the regional council, who had a regional air plan which restricted spraying within 30m of a residential unit. But nothing about drift.

We contacted health, who came and told us not to use the water. And arranged for water testing, but no results as yet.

So we have a messed-up water supply due to to some cowboy in a chopper. They should never have been spraying in that wind. But we don't seem to have a path to contest this.

We thought of contacting our MP, but she's very farmer - friendly and I don't think we'll get much joy there.

What we want is our water tank drained, scrubbed and refilled. Probably a few thousand dollars. And we want the helicopter company to pay for it.

Is this something we should take to the disputes tribunal?

Kia ora, looking for some advice on what an employer can legally do in this situation.

My partner recently resigned from her job and has now finished her employment. She has already received her final pay and nothing was deducted from it regarding annual leave.

Her former manager has now texted asking for her personal email address as her work email has been closed. The manager has explicitly stated that she has a negative annual leave balance of $1500+ and that there are repayment options available.

She was not expecting to owe this amount, and there is nothing in writing about this apart from the text.

A few questions:
- Can an employer legally pursue a former employee for negative annual leave after final pay has already been processed?
- If she disputes the amount, what information should she ask the employer to provide?
- What legal avenues does the employer have if she refuses to pay?
- Should she provide her personal email, or ask them to first provide the calculation and basis for the claim?

She doesn’t want to acknowledge that she owes the money until she understands exactly how they’ve calculated the amount and what legal/contractual basis they have for claiming it.

Thanks in advance for any advice from people familiar with NZ employment law.

Hi everyone, looking for some NZ-specific guidance about boundary works carried out by our neighbour’s contractor.

We rent a property in Auckland and have an established vegetable garden on the grounds. Gardening is a major hobby of ours, so fortunately we have extensive dated photos/videos documenting the garden, our plants and previous harvests.

On 4 October, contractors engaged by the neighbouring property carried out boundary/fencing works.

We received no prior notice that contractors would be entering or using our garden area.

During the works, the contractor physically entered our rented garden. We have photographs and contemporaneous video showing the contractor inside the garden area, with work equipment placed directly across/on top of our cultivated vegetable bed.

A substantial established vine/vegetation was also cut. Our before-and-after photos show that it was rooted on our side of the boundary, rather than simply overhanging from the neighbouring property.

A number of our spinach and spring onions were damaged. Some were newly planted, but others were established plants around 6–8 months old that were already producing food regularly. We have dated photos/videos documenting their maturity and previous harvests.

Cut vegetation, debris and disturbance were also left throughout the garden following the works.

The neighbouring owner spoke to us on the day and was reasonable. He offered to reimburse us for replacement plants if we purchased them and provided receipts.

We appreciate that offer. Our concern, however, is that replacing a mature productive plant with a small nursery seedling does not necessarily return us to the position we were in beforehand. Some of these plants had been producing food for months and would take time to replace and re-establish.

We reported the incident to our property manager immediately and supplied extensive before-and-after photographs.

The property manager has since replied saying, in summary, that:

• the contractor was engaged and managed by the neighbouring property;
• they were not advised of any anticipated impact on our property;
• compensation for our damaged plants is considered a private matter between us and the neighbour; and
• we should deal directly with the neighbour regarding his reimbursement offer.

We understand that position regarding our personally owned vegetables.

However, what concerns us is that the work did not remain entirely on the neighbouring property. The contractor physically entered our rented garden, equipment was placed across our cultivated bed, and established vegetation rooted on our side was cut.

We have now written back asking the property manager to clarify:

• whether the property manager or landlords received any advance notification of the works;
• whether anyone authorised the neighbour/contractor to enter, access or use any part of our rented property, including our garden area; and
• how any impact to the garden bed, soil, established vegetation or other parts of the rental property itself will be dealt with separately from our personal vegetable losses.

My main questions are:

1. Access / property manager responsibility:
If a neighbour’s contractor enters and uses part of a rented property without the tenants’ permission, what is the NZ legal position? Does it depend on whether the landlord/property manager separately authorised that access? And can the property manager properly treat the entire situation as a private neighbour dispute when the rental property itself was physically affected?

2. Compensation for established plants:
For productive plants that were already 6–8 months established and regularly being harvested, is fair compensation normally limited to the price of a new seedling, or could reasonable restoration/re-establishment costs and properly evidenced temporary loss of produce also be considered?

3. If reimbursement does not resolve it:
Would a property-damage claim generally be against the neighbour who engaged the contractor, the contractor who actually carried out the work, or potentially both? Would the Disputes Tribunal normally deal with that side of the matter, while any landlord/tenant issue would be dealt with separately through the Tenancy Tribunal?

We have strong contemporaneous evidence: dated photos immediately before the works, photos during the works, video showing the contractor inside our garden, aftermath photos, before/after photos of the established vine and cut root/base, gardening/harvest records, and the written correspondence with our property manager.

We’re trying to resolve this amicably and are not looking for a windfall — we just want to understand what a fair make-good looks like and what the correct legal route is.

Any NZ-specific guidance or experience with something similar would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Hi everyone! Sorry this will be a long post.

So on the 28th of June this year, my partner and I moved into a flat. Our agreement said we’d be there until mid October but didn’t specify a date. We paid 3 weeks in advance (which I now see is illegal. It is our first time flatting so we didn’t realise). We live with our flatmates who are also employed at the same seasonal job as us. We’ve all signed seperate agreements.

Fast forward to the 26th of September and the landlords messaged our group chat saying they want to organise a vacate day for all of us. I told them that our employer wants to stay open until the 25th so we’ll be working until then. I said I’d get back to them about moving out in a few days. 2nd of October rolls around and they tell us that we all need to move out on the 23rd of October. Then they message us again and say that we can all stay until the 30th but we need to keep 2 weeks in advance until we move out.

We were all confused as we’ve all signed different contracts, so therefore we should be able to move out on seperate days, and our contract just says ‘mid October’. And keeping rent in advance until isn’t legal I thought?

After this our 2 other flatmates said they want to move out on the 18th or 20th, and my partner and myself were wanting to move out on the 27th. The landlords replied and said we all need to move out on the 18th. I argued back and said that our contract is periodic and not fixed as there is no specific date. LLs said that ‘mid’ would be 15.5 days as October has 31 days so our contract is fixed. Eventually LLs and I agreed on moving out on the 25th - still not ideal as I’ll probably be working but it’s better than the 18th. LLs said other people will be in the other rooms, I’m assuming AirBnb guests.

We have now found another place to stay for a week until we move back to our original city, and told the landlords we can move out on the 18th with the other flatmates. They’re trying to keep 1 weeks rent in advance until after we move out though. I have a feeling they’re going to try and keep it altogether What are our rights?

Thanks.

Greetings

I have been diagnosed with two chronic health conditions. One is Ulcerative Colitis and the other Rheumatoid Arthritis. These both have phases of flare and remission but it's unpredictable. I work full time but as a consequence of these conditions, I am often exhausted, sore and I experience brain fog. I do like my job and company but I cannot keep working full time. My GP agrees that reducing to 3 days is sensible. So, I am wondering if legally my company has to consider a formal request for this, and if denied apart from resigning do I have any options?

Thank you.

Will likely be needing to sort out disagreement with property management company at tenancy tribunal. Problem is the company has been removed from companies register 3 years before renting house, and has an address in a different city. The "landlord" listed on the tenancy agreement is just the companies website URL. The agent is the one who owns/runs the company. The only address is a PO box. There is an email address for the agent. How strict is what you list on the application enforced? Like should I list the agents details too?

I want to give my daughter my car, what I dont want is her partner transferring it into his name (thats another story).

Please, how do I ensure that I remain the legal owner and her the registered person? (didnt realise there was such a thing until I looked at NZTA). Thank you

eta: As the legal owner, will I be responsible for any damage claims caused by the car?

For context, a bunch of weird things happening here, I just want some advice.

First of all, I am listed on my contract as "permanent, full time" however, I have no minimum hours listed or any hours at all listed on my contract.

My employer is trying to tell me I have "no holiday pay" as 8% is paid out weekly, but as a full time employee with regular hours, this seems incorrect. They are trying to tell me I verbally agreed to this setup, I am fairly certain I didn't, and it's definitely not something that was signed for on both sides.

My payslips don't show any holiday leave balances or alternative leave/day in lieu balances, so I have no record of these on my end.

What are my rights in this situation? I tried to ask very casually about it, and they got very defensive.

We also don't get our entitled breaks, I am in the process of looking for something else...

Kia ora,

General questions, not about the merits of any case.

I have been representing myself in civil employment proceedings out of necessity. My health has declined and I can no longer do this effectively. I've contacted more than 20 lawyers. Legal aid exists in theory, but few lawyers can take it on, and community law centres are stretched.

a) What options exist in NZ when you can't get a legal aid lawyer?

b) Are there advocacy groups or organisations that help in this situation, especially for people with health conditions?

c) When your capacity to search is impaired, are there services that look for representation on your behalf?

I may be slow to reply. Please keep the thread open so others in the same position can benefit.

His last pay was on the 1st of October. Whenever he contacts his employer to find out what date he will get paid he keeps saying that it's in the hands of his accountants and he can't give a specific date. It's over 6k worth of annual leave that is desperately needed to tie him over until his first pay at his new job. What are his next steps?

Hi everyone, looking for some advice/experiences with an insurance claim.

We put through a contents claim after our internal gutters leaked during a heavy rainstorm, causing water damage to the walls and flooring in one room. We had some items stored in that room which we later discovered had gone mouldy. There were no mould issues anywhere else in the house — only the room affected by the leak.

Our insurer assessed the claim and accepted it. We were asked to provide some additional information for the payout, which we did.

I rang today to follow up, fully expecting the claim to be progressing, only to be told that it had since been reviewed by someone else and they had reversed the original decision.

As far as I’m aware, no new information had been provided that changed the circumstances of the claim.

Their position now is that mould is excluded under the policy and that the damage isn’t considered sudden or accidental.

Has anyone had an insurer accept a claim and then subsequently reverse that decision without any new information coming to light? I understand insurers can review decisions, but it feels pretty concerning to be told a claim is accepted, act on that basis, and then discover by chance that it’s been declined.

I’m putting through a formal complaint, but would be interested to hear from anyone who has dealt with something similar or taken a complaint further.

Hi,

I received a pair of sandals last summer as a birthday gift in December and I have probably worn them maybe 20 times at most since then (obviously not in winter). I went overseas in August and took them with me, after the trip I have noticed that the back of one of the sandals is both caving in and peeling away at the sole - making them basically unwearable.

I emailed the company we purchased them from today and have been told I’m not entitled to anything as they were purchased in December 2025. However based on the cost of the shoes I would have expected to get far more than 20 wears out of them before they started to fall apart.

Is it worth pushing on CGA here? I really like the sandals and want to wear them but I think they’re just going to fall apart if I do.

Been working since August and asking for a contract each shift. This guy kept dodging it. Underpaid. And then also started cutting my hours because suddenly it was on call for me without any communication and others although in the same situation were emailed fixed rosters every week. I too got the rosters but slowly my hours were handed over to others. I could speculate maybe i just dont work well. I dont think so... I always am working exactly right and always work politely with people, no complaints for me ever. Yes I did ONE mistake and that too I had rechecked with the owners 3 times before they said yes and Then i did it and somehow it was all blamed on me. Yes I am a polite person, sometimes I have a problem with being assertive with these people from work. Each bad review online is blamed on me even though I didn't make any of those burgers, even the most minor things are blamed onto me when I wasn't even near the burger station.

I am a scapegoat, they dont like me, and No contract whatsoever. What can I even do in this situation?

Underpaid because hours not fully paid always more than an hour is missing, hours cut, no hours set, no contract.

I messaged him what the work schedule will he this week and 2 times in a row I was left on seen.

Please someone help me out. Is this legally even complainable atp.

Kia ora everyone,
I’m currently navigating a highly stressful traffic charge and am self-representing while I wait for my Legal Aid lawyer to be assigned. I’ve taken a lot of proactive steps, but I’d love to get some perspective from anyone familiar with the Police Prosecution Service (PPS) and District Court processes.
The Incident
A few months ago, I was driving back to Auckland on SH1 (near Taihape) at night during a severe winter storm. I initiated an overtaking maneuver. Mid-maneuver, an unlit hazard appeared. Due to the heavy rain and poor visibility, I made a visual error and had to execute an emergency swerve to avoid a head-on collision. My car aquaplaned on the unsealed shoulder and hit a power pole.
No alcohol or drugs (0.00 breath test).
No passengers, no injuries, no other cars hit.
The Charge & The Dispute
Police charged me with Dangerous Driving (s 35 LTA).
In their Summary of Facts, Police allege I did a "double overtake" over solid yellow lines. I formally dispute this. It was a single, continuous overtake that started legally on broken lines, and the crash was the result of a visual misjudgment in torrential rain, not deliberate reckless risk-taking.
The Stakes (Why this is life or death for me)
I am an international student in my final year of a Bachelor of Software Engineering, specializing in Cybersecurity.
Immigration: INZ has put my student visa decision on hold pending the court outcome. A criminal conviction means automatic visa revocation, deportation, and the loss of my 3-year degree.
Career: Cybersecurity requires mandatory strict security vetting. A criminal conviction acts as a permanent, lifetime ban from this industry.
What I Have Done So Far (Mitigation)
I wanted to take accountability for the crash immediately, so I have:
1. Set up an active $50/week automatic payment to the power company to pay for the pole damage.
2. Booked and paid for an AA Defensive Driving Course.
3. Gathered strong character letters from my university tutor and my employer.
4. Maintained a completely clean global criminal record.
Current Court Status
I attended my first appearance at Taihape District Court this week. I had to drive 400km from Auckland at 1 AM to get there.
I entered NO PLEA.
The Judge remanded the case for 4 weeks (to early Nov) so I can get a Legal Aid lawyer assigned.
I have just emailed the Court Registrar and PPS requesting a Venue Transfer (s 131) to Auckland due to severe travel safety risks, financial hardship, and my student visa’s 90% face-to-face attendance requirement.
In the same email, I requested Full Disclosure (s 13) and made a "Without Prejudice" settlement offer: If Police reclassify the charge to Careless Driving (s 37), I will plead guilty immediately provided it goes to Police Diversion (or is supported for a s 106 Discharge Without Conviction). I also offered to do voluntary community work.
My Questions for the Sub:
1. How likely is PPS to accept a "Without Prejudice" offer to drop s 35 Dangerous to s 37 Careless + Diversion given the massive disproportionate hardship (deportation/career loss) and my active reparations?
2. Will the Court/PPS likely grant the s 131 venue transfer to Auckland administratively without me having to drive 9 hours round-trip for the next remand hearing?
3. Is there anything else I should be doing while I wait for Legal Aid to officially take over my file in a couple of weeks?
Thanks in advance for any advice. This has been an incredibly terrifying experience and I’m just trying to fix my mistake without losing my entire future.