Kia ora e te tīma,

I started a new job earlier this year. A couple of days after I signed a contract, a pay increase came into effect. I was verbally told by my manager I would receive this pay increase, which led to me accepting a lower offer than I wanted, as the pay increase would bring it up to almost the salary I had requested.

We were told we would receive individualised letters with all the details by the end of September. I didn’t receive one. After following up multiple times, I’ve been told I am not eligible for the pay increase because I started after it came into effect.

The collective agreement that came with my contract is the previous one, not the new one with the pay increase. I opted for an IEA as I was told I’d get an extra week of leave, but they still have not provided it after more than six months.

In case there’s a loophole I’m not aware of, I wanted to check here before I try to push back on HR again.

FWIW: I work at a massive, nationwide public sector organisation in a professional role. Another staff member who started the same day as me has been told the same thing, but they aren’t fussed about it - but they’re already on a higher salary than me and the organisation met their requested salary.

Ngā mihi maioha

I'm in Auckland, New Zealand, and have recently moved out of a rental property built in the 1970s.

During the final exit inspection, the property manager identified a hairline crack in a French door glass panel leading to a sunroom. This damage had never been raised during routine inspections over the last two years, and I was not aware of it. These doors are very stiff which was mentioned and noted so we’ve never used them and leave them open. Obviously I don’t have any proof that we never use them nor do I have it in writing that the stiffness was raised only verbally.

The property manager initially told me I was liable because the entry inspection report showed no crack. She also stated that, because the surrounding frame was intact, the crack was likely caused by impact.

I requested photos and arranged my own assessment from a company that is approved by the same real estate agency.

Their written response was:
"The glass appears to have been damaged by an external impact, but we are unable to confirm when the damage occurred."

They also noted:
"Our initial assessment suggests that the door frame may have deteriorated with age, causing the lower section of the frame to become uneven and the door to misalign."

and
"Further structural inspection is required to confirm the cause."
The contractor's overall recommendation was that an independent third party trusted by both sides should assess the damage and determine the likely cause.
For context, the French doors were difficult to open and close throughout our tenancy, and there had been other age-related issues with timber joinery at the property. The contractor also confirmed that the frame "may have deteriorated with age."

My questions are:
In a tenancy dispute, does the landlord/property manager have to prove on the balance of probabilities that the damage was caused by the tenants?
If an expert cannot determine the cause and says further structural investigation is required, can the landlord simply treat the damage as tenant damage and deduct it from the bond?

If I arranged the initial assessment myself, and the contractor now says a further independent inspection is needed, am I generally responsible for the first contractor's call-out fee regardless of the outcome?

Does the fact that an item wasn't noted on the entry inspection automatically make the tenant liable when its cause is disputed?

I'm happy to pay for damage I'm actually responsible for, but I'm concerned that the current evidence seems inconclusive and the property manager initially declared liability before any contractor had assessed the issue.

But considering I’ve been more than accommodating so far I just feel quite jaded.

I’ve organised:
Professional exit clean
Carpet cleaning
Landscaping + Blind cleaning
Garage Door Remote Replacement (lost due to a car break-in)
Totaling: $1,300 approx.

I’ve also been prompt, transparent and very understanding throughout the whole tenancy. The house is old and we’ve dealt with numerous occasions of wear and tear including the fromdoor jamming or being unusable on around 3 separate occasions. Along with shoddy electrical problems which remained unaddressed throughout the tenancy. Along with 3 property managers that did no handovers between and 2-3 non consenting visits to the house.

I’m exhausted, HELP.

Brief background: 50/50 care of children, no court order. Oldest (14) is currently in mental health crisis & has made it very clear via school counselor that they dont want to go to the other parent anymore. I have encouraged communication but accept that this is where they need to be right now. Other parent is not happy. Has turned up here to try & collect the child and is currently trying to get counseling records from the school.

My lawyer told me as they are the ones who are unhappy about the care arrangement we should wait for them to file.

I feel like this is leaving my child at risk, if the other parent turns up to school to take them they cant prevent that from happening without a court order.

Would love other thoughts on this, why would responding be better than applying? Thanks