ISS-HK subvents slums with inadequate evidence of ownership
Apr 15th, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
Prompted by a high level police visit to a notorious refugee slum in Nai Wai, Vision First led the media to document the site and examine the ISS-HK contracts that drew the suspicion of the authorities. Could there be fraudulent elements associating ISS-HK case workers to this slum?
Vision First exposed this slum in August 2013 emphasizing that since 2006 ISS-HK had channeled rent from the government purse to this slum lord. Eight months later over a dozen refugees still reside in these illegal structures with tenancy agreements and ISS-HK contracts bearing questionable data.
Generally speaking, it is our understanding that if the Building Department does not approve premises for residential use, owner are not allowed to rent such locations to anyone – citizen or refugee alike. The fact that literally thousands of ISS-HK contracts show inappropriate home addresses raises suspicion.
It is noteworthy that ISS-HK sponsored and subvented this particular slum since September 2006 and for over seven years arranged monthly payments to a farmer who undoubtedly was not licensed to rent pig sheds for human habitation.
Either due diligence was neglected, or it was expressly decided to avoid carrying it out.
ISS-HK frequently offers the excuse that “99% of service recipients choose their own accommodation”. While this claim is arguable – as certain slum lords claimed to have established ghettos on the suggestion of ISS-HK staff – in the event it were true, such a claim is far from satisfactory.
The case of Madam Lama, reported in previous weeks, demonstrated that most refugees are not helped to find accommodation when they request such assistance. Many case workers refuse to flat-hunt, even for sick, pregnant mothers. Other case workers dispatch refugees to ghettos, the only choices available for such low rent assistance (currently 1500$ a month).
Vision First has formed a reasonable suspicion that the documentation relating to slum dwellings contain fraudulent elements. It is simply impossible for slum lords to provide genuine proof of ownership for tenantable premises in abandoned fish, chicken and pig farms. For reasons that are hard to fathom, ISS-HK turned a blind eye to a crucial contractual element.
The attached document shows ISS-HK housing procedures requiring landlords to provide:
- Landlord’s HKID copy / Company Business Registration copy
- Landlord’s bank book copy
- Completed Landlord Notification Letter
- Tenancy Agreement between landlord and service user
- Evidence of ownership: Rates paper/ Solicitors letter/ Land Register …
A cursory look of any one of the 65 slums exposed by Vision First casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of such requirements and, equally, on the SWD’s oversight of ISS-HK and SWD’s scheduled and unscheduled inspections of refugee accommodation.
Vision First is extremely concern that ISS-HK case workers – who applied their signature on thousands of ISS-HK contracts bearing false information – might be responsible for misleading the government at best, and breaking the law at worst. Could the chickens be coming home to roost?
Over the months we have accompanied lawyers, journalists, lawmakers and academics to uninhabitable refugee ghettos where nobody but coerced individuals, without money or right to work, would reasonably “choose to live” as discredited by ISS-HK justification.
From the evidence collected and the testimony of hundreds of refugees, it appears that ISS-HK, its management and case workers are treading on dangerous ground. Since August 2013 both international and local media have paid considerable attention to a scandal that is expected to deepen this year.
Hong Kong demo shines spotlight on refugee suffering
Apr 10th, 2014 | Media | Comment
Refugee Union hopes to gain a bigger voice
Apr 8th, 2014 | Media | Comment
Death the only choice? Asylum Seeker in Hong Kong Questions the State
Apr 8th, 2014 | Media | Comment
Transgender refugee goes through ‘hell’ in Hong Kong to be recognised as a woman
Apr 3rd, 2014 | Media | Comment
ISS-HK obstructs Madam Lama’s attempt to secure a home
Apr 2nd, 2014 | Advocacy | Comment
As 2nd Defendant in Ms. Lama Inu’s High Court case for damages and cruel inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment (CIDTP), the Social Welfare Department (“SWD”) submitted a sworn affirmation that includes these three statements:
SWD claim 1: “There is no monetary-equivalent ceiling on humanitarian assistance, including rental allowance”
VF comment: This is a big lie. Thousands of refugees can testify that 1200$ was an absolute ceiling for more than 99% of refugees for years. Only a tiny number with serious medical problems received 1500$ after struggling with their case workers. To dispel doubts, ISS-HK must produce tables showing how many refugees received 1200$ and 1500$ between 2010 and 2014.
SWD claim 2: “There is no monetary-equivalent ceiling on how much an individual service user in genuine need may receive”
VF comment: Another big lie. First, all refugees are in desperate need no matter whether healthy or sick because nobody has savings or can work. Second, employing ‘genuine’ in this context is vastly misleading. SWD is not the Immigration Department and as such cannot distinguish genuine from non-genuine cases. Third, thousands of refugees can testify to the 1200$ rent assistance ceiling prior to the February 2014 enhanced welfare package.
SWD claim 3: “Assistance recipients who are in need of rental allowance higher than the amount in the grid …” could apply for and receive it.
VF comment: Thousands of refugees can produce evidence proving that demands for rent assistance were systematically refused. We invite SWD to hold a press conference and publicly state these affirmations to 5704 clients currently mishandled by ISS-HK.
Noting that perjury is a criminal offense, the SWD is invited to reconcile the above three sworn affirmations with the facts contained in this email sent by Vision First to SWD Assistant Director Mr. Fung Man-Chung and Deputy Director Mr. Lam Ka-tai on 1 April 2014.
Dear Mr. Fung –
The High Court injunction was lifted because the judge trusted that the SWD contractor ISS-HK would performs its duties towards and stop discriminating against the plaintiff family. That might have been the SWD’s intention and understanding as 2nd Defendant.
Mr. Justice Au would be unpleased to learn that this is not the case. While it is unlikely that he will hear the damage and CIDTP claim that Mrs. Lama Inu and family will bring against your department, the following developments will be brought to the Court’s attention in due course.
Prior to the injunctive hearing, ISS case worker Ms. Helen Lee misled the plaintiffs, and in some measure the court, by offering Ms. Lama a 6000$ monthly rent budget and a two-bedroom flat in Cheung Sha Wan that was to be viewed on Monday, 31 March 2014.
Once the hearing was over, Ms. Lee reverted to her old ways and ceased being proactive, helpful and supportive of Ms. Lama. It is noteworthy that such an about-face was entirely predictable.
Most observers would agree this is spiteful and vengeful behavior from a woman who fails to understand her role in the upcoming damage and CIDTP claim, in which her attentive care would be a mitigating factor.
At this stage, we draw your attention to these facts:
– Ms. Lee failed to show a two-bedroom flat to Ms. Lama on Monday, or today;
– Ms. Lee withdrew the 6000$ rent assistance budget, reducing it to the 4500$ that led to the original injunction;
– Ms. Lee made no effort to identify a suitable flat for the family;
– Ms. Lee told the family to find a new home themselves when they have no resource or connections or to do so;
– Ms. Lee advised Ms. Lama to seek further rent assistance (above 4500$) from NGOs, in contravention of the Court of Final Appeal “Madam Kung” judgment;
– Ms. Lee refused to support Ms. Lama with two months security deposit, stating there are no rules on the matter, in contravention to the SWD letter to ISS on the Enhanced Welfare Package;
– Ms. Lee advised Ms. Lama to seek further deposit assistance (above the first month) from NGOs, in contravention of the Court of Final Appeal “Madam Kung” judgment.
It appears that after the High Court injunction was lifted, Ms. Lee reverted to harmful, discriminating tactics to further humiliate and torment a fragile lady for whom she never had any sympathy.
Ms. Lama may be reached at 54074415
We would be grateful for your urgent attention to this matter repeating our advice to change Ms. Lama’s ISS case worker in view of the upcoming damage and CIDTP claim.
Sincerely yours,
Cosmo Beatson
Vision First
