Why is this a story?

I am puzzled as to why this is a story:

A Horowhenua farming couple are outraged that is paying them a pittance to lease for a transmission tower.

Wendy and Mark Rolston say instead of the meagre $199.36 a year they are getting, they should be paid around $10,000.

Sites usually net landowners at least $5000 a year, telco experts say.

At first you do wonder about it.

The farm's previous owner struck the lease on January 12, 1988 for just $150.

That edged its way up with over the years to a princely $180.11 by late last year and the lease came up for renewal in January year for a further 21-year term.

Okay so they brought the farm knowing what the lease was worth up until 2009.

Via David Shaw of DTZ property consultants in , Telecom initially extended an offer to increase payments from $180.11 to $3000.

“My client Telecom is prepared to offer you a revised rental of $3000 plus GST per annum for the microwave site on your property at Arapaepae,” he offered the Rolstons on January 23.

The couple wrote back, rejecting that and seeking $10,000.

Shaw in turn wrote back last month withdrawing the $3000 offer because Telecom had decided to stick to the original $199.36.

Now here is what I don't get. The 21 year lease has expired. This means they can now kick the transmitter off the farm in the absence of a new agreement. So just do so if you don't think Telecom will pay you enough.

I can't see what Telecom has done wrong here.

Comments (27)

Login to comment or vote

Add a Comment