What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object - everything and nothing.

Remember the old vaudville act where the villian says "pay the rent" ... the maiden say "I can't pay the rent" ... the villan says "you must pay the rent" .. the maiden says "but I can't pay the rent" ... then a handsome guy says "I'll pay the rent" .. and the maiden says "my hero !!" ???? Remember that ??? ... that's kinda of what's going on now ...

After settling 4 of the 5 outstanding issues on the Palm house ... the only remaining issue is an alarm system.  Company says ... "you must have an alarm" ... owner says "it has an alarm" ... company says "you must upgrade the alarm to my standards" ... owner says "then you pay for it" ... company says "owner must pay for it as part of the lease" ... owner says "but my friends tell me company has always paid for the alarm system .. therefore, I refuse to pay" ... company says "you must have an upgraded alarm" .... and I just to say ... " I'll pay for the blasted alarm ... I just want a house !!! "

So here we sit ... immovable object .. irresistible force ... the company is setting leasing standards under the new housing program that (a) is not being communicated in advance, and (b) owners cannot and will not meet after the deal has already been negotiated.  And, even if the standards were known in advance ... the allowance and costs are such that you would end up living in a bungalow with gold plated security and electricity.

So, where do we sit? Not sure if we are at a temporary red signal light ... or a dead end.  If a dead end ... we (and every other expat coming in) will be faced with this same issue over and over and over again.  That's dumb.

Hopefully, we are at a temporary red signal light ... as the company decides to either "pay up" or "shut up" ... if the security requirements are that critical, then the company has two choices (a) either pay directly for the installation, or (b) increase the rental rate to include the security system.

This is a bit of a dilemma for the company ... as it really wants to get out of the housing business ... and if it provides the security system ... then it will be responsible for paying and maintaining it.  On the other hand, if you hand that responsibility to the owner ... there is no assurance it will be installed and maintained according to standards; thus, compromising security.

Based on the fact that the company is directly contracting for the security guards to guarantee appropriate 24/7 coverage ... I bet they elect to take responsibility for the security system ... rather than trusting the owner ... but that is just a bet ... in the meantime ....

... waiting ... waiting .... waiting .... waiting ....

ciao ciao