# Housing news: NZ's 'leaky homes'



## anski

John Gray: A rotten business 

*A new TV documentary about the leaky homes disaster reveals the carnage exacted on Kiwi owners. Barney McDonald talks to campaigner and host John Gray.*

Picture our parliament building: solid, imposing, stately. Now imagine it oozing filthy water through cracks and chips in the brick and mortar, with mould creating a patchwork of discolouration across its arcane surface. Now add to that mental - and altogether unlikely - image the crusading figure of Aucklander John Gray wrapping the tableau in police crime scene tape.

Wouldn't that make a compelling critique on the ridiculous and heart-wrenching reality of the leaky buildings syndrome currently blighting New Zealand, and the Government's role in the travesty?

Admittedly, Michael Moore beat Gray to the stunt by wrapping Wall Street headquarters, and a few brokers, in such tape at the conclusion of his contentious film about the recent American financial crisis, Capitalism: A Love Story.

Although Gray and the team behind new one-hour TV documentary A Rotten Shame did consider following in the entertaining footsteps of Moore, they chose simply to front up to politicians at Parliament to demand answers, eschewing show-pony tactics to make their point.

"Well, yeah, what you don't see in the doco is us being ordered off Parliament grounds, so that was a bit unfortunate," laughs a mildly indignant Gray.

"Our initial approach to the doco was to be a little like Michael Moore. I thought, 'Well, it could be a bit of fun while also telling the more serious story that needs to be aired'."

Like Moore, Gray is an Everyman citizen who decided to front a documentary because of his own experiences dealing with the subject. In Gray's case, he discovered his Auckland townhouse leaked after trying to install a vent in a wall. He was confronted by a building that was rotting insidiously from the outside in, just seven years after being built.

It was 2002 and what followed was a protracted legal battle, which Gray won, but also an epiphany that he had to do everything within his power to help and support other Kiwis in the same leaky boat.

He has since set up the Home Owners and Buyers Association (Hobanz) to fight the good fight, along the way amassing a skyscraper of facts, figures and first-hand accounts of the extent of the carnage on health and wealth thanks to shoddy building regulations, practices and materials.

"The fact that John had a leaky home makes him instantly credible. Plus, when you listen to him on screen you believe and trust him," insists A Rotten Shame director John Hagen. "The film is a journey of discovery. John knows a lot about leaky homes but we were all discovering new things along the way, like we must be on to a big story if we're getting threatening letters from lawyers before the programme is even fully edited."

Gray credits his fulltime job as an airline pilot for instilling in him a sense of the responsibilities organisations need to take on behalf of the consumer, a philosophical and practical understanding designed to ensure the best outcome for all involved, from company to staff and the public.

As a commercial pilot for more than 30 years and an employee of Air New Zealand for 22 years, he has embraced the industry's commitment to safety and service as an ideal benchmark to which the building industry should aspire.

"I guess why I'm so passionate about this cause is that my daily job is about delivering people safely from A to B," explains Gray. "Our commitment to safety and their welfare is huge. We spend a great deal of money making sure we don't get that wrong. I love my flying job because it's in an environment where standards are paramount."

As a result of his job, Gray's time is stretched as thin as the patience of many of the individuals, couples and families desperately awaiting judgments or pay-outs on their leaky home. Gray is now devoted to short-haul international flights to spend more time at Hobanz and a modicum of down time with wife Lorraine and sons Taylor, 8, and Marcus, 6.

In fact, with shooting completed before Christchurch's September earthquake, surely Gray has settled back into a normal family life? Not so, insists producer Rachel Stace.

"I think it's taken a huge personal toll on him," she says. "He doesn't really have a life he can call his own. The man deserves a knighthood. He's already been nominated for New Zealander of the Year."

Hagen concurs. "John is a bloody good guy. It's impossible not to admire him. His passion and sincerity are real. He's a genuine Kiwi hero."

Gray is a little more circumspect about the dilemma he continues to face trying to juggle work, family and his crusade. His approach to the problem mirrors his respect for the airline industry, though he does concede that his family has missed out the most.

"It is an issue," he admits. "This is a hobby gone crazy. And I only do it because I care about the housing futures of all New Zealanders, and the health of our children to come. This is a really important issue. That's what keeps me going because otherwise I would have given up a very long time ago since it's had a huge impact on me and my family."

Gray's grasp of the multitude of complex issues surrounding leaky houses, plus his sensitivity to the painful experiences of those whose houses are no longer their castles, marks him as perfect fodder for a political career (minus the sensitivity).

At an advance screening of A Rotten Shame attended by crew, Hobanz folk and a number of victims, he shakes hands and exchanges pleasantries like a United Nations envoy and introduces the documentary to the audience with the ease of a seasoned speaker in Parliament (plus the sensitivity).

But politics is not on Gray's agenda. He knows his happy place, preferring to agitate for progress through Hobanz rather than dance with the devil.

"I'm not wanting to get into the political arena because we think we can create political movement that empowers our citizens to make change," he says. "Not political change, but change around standards and empowering consumers to make good choices because they have a responsibility to themselves to do so. Then they can drive standards back into the building industry and demand more of it.

"We're saying we'll leave it to the legislators and lawmakers to make laws and regulations but it's a waste of effort trying to change the way they think."

This doesn't mean Gray hasn't rubbed shoulders with politicians. One of the defining moments in the documentary is an on-the-fly interview Gray wrenched from PM John Key that concludes with an ill-conceived comment from the Prime Minister about solving some leaky homes claims by getting people off benefits.

It caused ripples of mirth and incredulity from the special screening, in large part because it shows even the country's leader is struggling to grasp the enormity of the problem.

"It was most unfortunate that we had to resort to standing him up in that way," concedes Gray. "And in fairness to him it's a complex subject and as a Prime Minister he's not expected to know the minutiae of every topic that the Government is dealing with. But it probably was a low point for me in terms of how the Government is trying to sell its financial assistance package and not really understanding the difficulties that poses."

Now picture Gray wrapping the Prime Minister in crime scene tape, bearing in mind it's hard to dance around the issues if he's bound by the truth.

A Rotten Shame plays on TV One, Wednesday at 9.30pm.


----------



## Song_Si

*Leaky homes package passed by Parliament*
5:22 PM Tuesday Jul 12, 2011

*The Government's rescue package for leaky home owners was enacted by Parliament today on a unanimous vote.*

Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson, who put it together, said it would allow thousands of homeowners to get out of the trap they had been caught in.

"I've spent the last two-and-a-half years looking into the eyes of hundreds, if not thousands, of people with leaky homes," he said during the third reading debate on the bill.

"It's one of the most ghastly blights on the landscape of this nation, you could not help but feel for people who, through no fault of their own and who had done nothing wrong, ended up with their biggest asset in life rotting before their eyes and no way out of it."

Under the $1 billion package, qualifying homeowners will receive a 25 per cent contribution from the Government and may receive 25 per cent from their local council. They can pay the rest through bank loans.

The leaky home problem emerged in the 1990s and Mr Williamson said no one thing was to blame.

"This was a systemic failure across the entire industry," he said.

"This was designers, this was builders, this was materials, this was construction methods, this was consenting, this was inspections, this was homeowners not doing relevant maintenance...monolithic cladding used with no cavities in the building design and non-treated timber was a recipe for disaster."

Mr Williamson said money would be paid when the work had been done.

"We're not going to be handing out large chunks of money to people who own leaky homes who could maybe take the money and run, and sell the leaky home to someone else."

Labour supported the bill but MPs said it didn't go far enough and many people would miss out.

Mr Williamson said Labour spent nine years in power saying leaky homes weren't a government problem.

Homeowners who don't want to take up the offer can still go to litigation but Mr Williamson said they could end up with settlements worth less than their legal bills


----------



## Song_Si

some background on the leaky buildings epidemic in NZ


What’s all the fuss about?
*You’ve probably heard about leaky buildings in the media, but unless you’ve been directly affected, you may be wondering what all the fuss is about.*

During the 1990s a considerable number of houses were built using methods that haven't withstood the weather conditions in New Zealand. Because of the problems involving design, and installation of materials, these houses leak when it rains. In some cases the materials themselves were used inappropriately.

Once water or moisture gets behind certain cladding types, if there is no cavity between the cladding and the framework, the water becomes trapped and cannot easily escape or evaporate.

In 1998, a change in the New Zealand standard for Timber Treatment (as referenced in Acceptable Solution B2/AS1) allowed the use of untreated kiln-dried timber in wall framing. If this untreated timber framing gets wet, the timber starts to rot. Likewise, steel framed buildings and treated timber can also be affected if they remain wet long enough. This causes, in some cases, extensive damage to the fabric and structure of the house.

A side effect of leaking buildings is the risk to human health. Some moulds that grow on damp timber and other materials can cause respiratory and skin problems.

more at: Consumer Build website including tips on what to look for if considering buying a house


----------



## anski

*Leaky-home owners warned to take care*

Leaky-home owners should get a second opinion from a building consultant before they sign up for the Government's compensation package, an expert says.

The deal becomes available from today after the Government said it had reached a loss-sharing agreement with the eight main retail banks on loans for repairs.

Homeowners and Buyers Association chief executive Roger Levie said the bailout would cover only the bare minimum of repairs and might not protect against further leaks.

He urged those who applied for the deal to get an independent quote on the repair cost.

"Homes will be repaired to a standard which is the minimum required to obtain a building consent," he said. "We also expect that the scope will be confined to weathertightness issues ... unfortunately these defective homes often have structural problems as well. We are concerned that homes repaired under the scheme could suffer from secondary failures and the process will not fully restore the value of these homes."

The Government was negotiating with banks over the loss-sharing arrangements. It initially proposed a 100 per cent guarantee for defaulted loans but wound it back.

It is expected the Government will now cover 15-20 per cent of the banks' shortfall if a homeowner defaults. The homeowner may then be required to pay back the Government.

Bankers Association chief executive Sarah Mehrtens said homeowners would have to meet lending criteria.

"Eligibility and affordability are key elements of the package," she said. "Customers will need to carefully consider which option best suits their needs."

Department of Building and Housing weathertight services group manager Jeff Montgomery said those who had already begun repairs and lodged a claim with the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service would be eligible for the package.

About 4000 applications were with the service.

A new homeowner, who bought a property with knowledge of leaks, could also apply, as long as the house was constructed within a 10-year limit, he said.

THE DEAL

The Government and local authority will each pay 25 per cent of the cost of leaky-home repairs, and the homeowner must get a loan from the bank to pay the rest.

Signing up to the deal means homeowners forgo the right to sue contributing councils and the Government.

It must be up to 10 years since construction or alterations that lead to the leaks.

Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch and Tauranga councils have all said they will participate and other affected councils are considering the deal.

Ad Feedback

Councils who did not sign off the building work will not contribute, meaning property owners will have to find 75 per cent.

The problem affects apartments, townhouses and stand-alone homes, mostly built between 1992 and 2005.

A PricewaterhouseCoopers report in 2009 estimated up to 89,000 homes were affected.

The Government says the package will cost $1 billion over five years and estimates 23,500 households are eligible for the deal.

Leaky-home owners warned to take care | Stuff.co.nz

- Stuff


----------



## anski

Song_Si said:


> *Leaky homes package passed by Parliament*
> 5:22 PM Tuesday Jul 12, 2011
> 
> *The Government's rescue package for leaky home owners was enacted by Parliament today on a unanimous vote.*
> 
> Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson, who put it together, said it would allow thousands of homeowners to get out of the trap they had been caught in.
> 
> "I've spent the last two-and-a-half years looking into the eyes of hundreds, if not thousands, of people with leaky homes," he said during the third reading debate on the bill.
> 
> "It's one of the most ghastly blights on the landscape of this nation, you could not help but feel for people who, through no fault of their own and who had done nothing wrong, ended up with their biggest asset in life rotting before their eyes and no way out of it."
> 
> Under the $1 billion package, qualifying homeowners will receive a 25 per cent contribution from the Government and may receive 25 per cent from their local council. They can pay the rest through bank loans.
> 
> The leaky home problem emerged in the 1990s and Mr Williamson said no one thing was to blame.
> 
> "This was a systemic failure across the entire industry," he said.
> 
> "This was designers, this was builders, this was materials, this was construction methods, this was consenting, this was inspections, this was homeowners not doing relevant maintenance...monolithic cladding used with no cavities in the building design and non-treated timber was a recipe for disaster."
> 
> Mr Williamson said money would be paid when the work had been done.
> 
> "We're not going to be handing out large chunks of money to people who own leaky homes who could maybe take the money and run, and sell the leaky home to someone else."
> 
> Labour supported the bill but MPs said it didn't go far enough and many people would miss out.
> 
> Mr Williamson said Labour spent nine years in power saying leaky homes weren't a government problem.
> 
> Homeowners who don't want to take up the offer can still go to litigation but Mr Williamson said they could end up with settlements worth less than their legal bills


I am afraid that in the past many of the home owners collected compensation, then sold the houses on without either doing repairs or advising buyers they were leaky.
Once a claim has been paid out no further claims can be made.
I have a friend who works for a major real estate company, that sold a leaky home in the belief it was not, (on the basis of what the seller told him) however he was found to be in the wrong & had to pay out a substantial amount in compensation because the sellers had fled to Australia !!


----------



## Song_Si

My last house (Wellington) was built, along with 27 others, in a new subdivision at Owhiro Bay 1999-2000. 
Houses had mainly been owner-built, some built by the subdivision developer (the dodgy ones). 
At the time we bought, 2003, some houses already showing signs of 'leaky building' all ones with the monolithic cladding and being stripped/rebuilt/repaired. By 2008 about 12 either had, or needed, remedial work. What a nightmare, of course the development company had been dissolved the owners had no comeback on the builders.
We'd looked at many houses before buying, and steered away from anything with that cladding and the 'style' they tended to have - no eaves was common. As I used to run alot in the area I'd see many houses in the early stages - first external giveaway was being able to see the outline of the framing inside the wall - on the outside, as dampness worked through the paintwork.
Place we bought was one of two built by an English couple who built two - one for their son on next section, and they had cut no corners, architect-designed and built well above building standard minimums. They sold one when the realised a three-level house on a hill section was not ideal for people in their 70s. We still paid for an independent building report; as they'd bought the property and started from scratch they had kept every document relating to the section excavation (on a hillside), all the periodic building inspection reports, and details of all materials used incl the timber treatment schedule. 
Made it easier to sell when we could pass all this info, plus a new valuation and building report, to potential buyers.
I'd be very wary of buying any house built in the l-h era; secondly, I'd never trust any NZ real estate agent. Independent valuations and thorough building inspections are money well spent.


----------



## Song_Si

anski said:


> John Gray: A rotten business
> 
> *A new TV documentary about the leaky homes disaster reveals the carnage exacted on Kiwi owners. Barney McDonald talks to campaigner and host John Gray.*


This show now available online (in five parts), part one with links to 2-5, at:










John Green, Director of the Building Disputes Tribunal appears in and provides commentary on the leaky building crisis in _'A Rotten Shame'_. John Gray (of HOBANZ) presents this compelling and shocking documentary, investigating the leaky building disaster in New Zealand.

A Rotten Shame on Vimeo


----------



## anski

*Experts pick holes in leaky building deal*

Specialists in leaky-building litigation have raised difficulties with the Government's $1 billion financial assistance package announced last week.

Paul Grimshaw, founding partner at Grimshaw & Co, is sceptical about whether victims will get much help from the 50:25:25 scheme where homeowners, the state and councils fund repairs.

"It remains to be seen as to how many owners will qualify for the package. Apartment owners are unlikely to because in most bodies corporate at least 75 per cent agreement is required and it will be difficult to get that kind of agreement to the Government package.

"It is also disappointing that those owners who are outside the 10-year period will not qualify for government assistance.

"I suspect most owners will continue through the courts to recover 100 per cent," Grimshaw said.

But Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson says now that all parties have agreed to the package, more leaky homes will be fixed instead of homeowners spending thousands in costly litigation.


"I am proud that this Government has been able to deliver owners of leaky homes a positive, alternative way of getting their home fixed so they can move on with their lives," he said last week.

Tim Rainey of Rainey Law welcomed the package, which he said was good but not quite in the way the Government intended.

"It is certainly good news for the many homeowners who have kept their eyes firmly closed to the possibility that they may own a leaky home. The fear of being left totally on your own with no options is now gone.

"Affected homeowners are guaranteed some help as long as they bring their claim within the 10 years."

He said any homeowner or body corporate built after July 29, 2001 - 10 years before this scheme - should apply for an assessor's report, whether they think their home is leaky or not.

"It is also good news for anyone who has an existing claim which has not been settled or adjudicated. The scheme allows those homeowners and councils to tap into a significant source of money which should make it easier to negotiate a settlement of claims.

"I do not think that in most instances the scheme will be used as an alternative to litigation because it leaves too much for the homeowners to pay to have their leaky home repaired.

"But it does not have to be used as an alternative because you can, if it is done carefully, pursue both litigation and the scheme at the same time."

The scheme would result in more potentially leaky homes being identified and repaired.

"That will probably see more legal claims in the short term because it makes sense to at least see if a better deal than 25 per cent or 50 per cent can be obtained by negotiation," Rainey said.

Gareth Lewis, a partner at Grimshaw & Co, criticised the new scheme for being too complicated. "A significant amount of work is required to identify whether any particular homeowner is eligible. It requires that homeowners sign lengthy contracts with the Government in which they give up significant rights.

"We advise homeowners not to sign these agreements without taking legal advice. ... There are many fish hooks in the scheme for homeowners.

"The option of claiming through the courts is a lot simpler. It allows the homeowner to claim for the full cost of repairs together with consequential losses and general damages for distress. The option of claiming through court also provides more flexibility to the homeowner in that they have a choice as to what they do with the money recovered.

"Unfortunately, the new package is not available to homeowners who cannot obtain bank funding for their 50 per cent contribution," Lewis said.

Structural engineer John Scarry said: "The Government, and hence taxpayer, should be paying for the repairs, and then the Government should sue liable materials suppliers and others for billions.

"Much mention has been made of the $1 billion cost to the Government of this aid package, but there is no cost. Getting off with only 25 per cent of repair costs for just some of the affected houses, by the time GST at 15 per cent is considered, plus the PAYE tax on the workers, and supplier and contractor taxes on profits are paid, the Government will be showing a profit."




Experts pick holes in leaky building deal - National - NZ Herald News


----------



## Song_Si

just my opinion, but I think any of these places that are 'officially' leaky should not be allowed to be sold.

*It's cheap - but leaky*
By Celeste Gorrell Anstiss
5:30 AM Sunday Aug 7, 2011









*With an asking price of just $50,000, this New Lynn apartment could be Auckland's cheapest property.*

The one-bedroom residence comes with a car park, shared outdoor pool, bbq area, gym and sauna. It is close to public transport and schools, and has happy tenants who are happy to stay on and keep paying rent.

But if you think it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

The advertisement bluntly describes the property as an "opportunity for the brave".

Ray White estate agent Damian Piggin confirms No 10 Crown Place is a leaky building - and a lengthy court battle lies ahead. The body corporate wants to sue Auckland Council for the full cost of repairs. Piggin estimates the case could drag on for three years.

Property lawyer Tony Steindle said prospective buyers should not count on court settlements, because council sometimes were not bound to pay people who knowingly bought a problem property.

"A conservative investor wouldn't factor in a windfall," he said.

Steindle added prospective buyers should get their hands on builders' reports, quotes and the minutes from body corporate meetings and watch for red flags such as disputes between the owners and questions over the cost of the repairs.

Best case scenario, the repairs could be completed quickly and the apartment could be sell at a profit in a few years, Steindle said. "I've seen people do it, but it's not for the faint hearted."

Piggin said identical apartments in the block were selling for around $180,000 before the structural issues were discovered.

A few weeks ago, one sold for just $50,000 after nine months of the market.

He said there was a huge potential for a risk-savvy buyer to profit in the long run.

"It's highly probably the council will lose," Piggin said. "It's always a hard one, though - these buildings end up with a bit of stigma."


----------



## anski

*The Leaky Home Debacle continues*

I was saved from buying a potentially leaky home after the New Zealand Herald published an article back in May 2001, at the time I was visiting New Zealand with the intention of buying a home in Auckland.

I am so grateful I was made aware of the situation & it saved me from making the most expensive mistake of my life.

Prior to reading the article I had intended buying a modern Mediterranean style plaster clad home. Fortunately I was sensible & purchased a brick home built in 1931.

However all those poor souls that bought new homes during these years found to their dismay at a later date that their houses had watertight issues, not all homes were effected buy many were.
Nowadays buyers avoid them like the plague unless they can buy them at a significantly discounted price & have deep pockets & no fear of the unknown.

This article appeared in the NZ Herald today just highlighting the government has set aside $11 billion (let us not for a moment forget that this money is coming from all of us paying housing rates & income tax) 
The irony is that if you & I have houses that are not leaky but requiring repairs we have to foot the bill ourselves.



> The Government has paid more than $2.2 million to consultants to set up its leaky homes financial assistance package - a scheme that has paid out only twice in its first seven months.


Anyway I will let you read the article yourselves & feel free to discuss it


$2.2m paid to consultants to settle two leaky home claims - National - NZ Herald News

As is Where is! | Trade Me Property

ATTENTION BUILDERS, RENOVATORS, BARG ... | Trade Me Property


----------



## topcat83

A subject that is so worth telling new immigrants about. 
Bottom line - do your homework and read up on NZ housing before you buy.

My cousin is in the situation where he is on a housing estate of 24 leaky buildings. In order to get them all put right they all (a) had to agree to the government's deal of 50/50 financing then (b) all had to agree on a builder. It's been a nightmare.
Meanwhile all his pension fund has gone in trying to sort it out, and at 73 he's still working.

I think the main problem is that we all have to do building maintenance, but for those with leaky buildings the scale of the cost of the maintenance is so much larger. And often it's not maintenance - it's re-build...


----------



## anski

topcat83 said:


> A subject that is so worth telling new immigrants about.
> Bottom line - do your homework and read up on NZ housing before you buy.
> 
> My cousin is in the situation where he is on a housing estate of 24 leaky buildings. In order to get them all put right they all (a) had to agree to the government's deal of 50/50 financing then (b) all had to agree on a builder. It's been a nightmare.
> Meanwhile all his pension fund has gone in trying to sort it out, and at 73 he's still working.
> 
> I think the main problem is that we all have to do building maintenance, but for those with leaky buildings the scale of the cost of the maintenance is so much larger. And often it's not maintenance - it's re-build...



I think it is our duty to warn new home buyers about this problem, I wish we could reach every new comer to New Zealand but unfortunately we cannot, so all we can do is try to inform all forum members of the potential hazards of buying certain types of houses.

My girl friend works for a very large real estate company & tells me buyers will not look at Plaster clad , monolithic homes.

Just recently we went to Hawkes Bay to house hunt & we viewed a stunning home 9 years old however it was plaster clad (we had nor realised this before arranging to view if we had known this we would not have wasted our time) We told the agent that we would definitely not be interested in purchasing it because of the construction. She was surprised going on to tell us it was not leaky & followed that up by saying there were only 2 leaky homes for sale in the whole of the Hawkes Bay that she knew of! 
I was amazed that she was so naive or a very bad liar, after that I completely lost confidence in her as a real estate agent.


----------



## relocatella

Would a house inspector be the right option for a straight advise on a leaky house?


----------



## anski

relocatella said:


> Would a house inspector be the right option for a straight advise on a leaky house?


I know of one case where the test that was done to test if home was leaky was unreliable & buyer discovered home was leaky after a short period of living in house. Company denied any responsibility.

Steer clear of any plaster clad & monolithic homes, plenty of others to choose from.


----------



## relocatella

Thanks :thumb:


----------



## anski

For anyone considering buying a house that has problems with leaking or could have problems in the future I am posting a link that will provide more information on the subject and provide answers to your FAQ

Leaky building syndrome and leaking homes FAQs | Resolution Architecture


----------



## anski

*Next generation to pay for today's leaky homes*

The leaky house problem is a nightmare & I will continue to beat the drum if only to warn unsavvy migrants to avoid buying housing that could prove to be their biggest disaster when moving to New Zealand.

Some real estate agents will gloss over it as one RE agent told me recently "there are only 2 houses in Hawkes Bay that have water tightness issues" Really wonder where she got that information!!!!!

You may think you can pick up a bargain & fix it yourself if you are into DIY!
But the problems are horrendous & the mediation process takes years, some of the developers/builders have closed shop & reopened under different company trading names or fled to Australia to escape the court proceedings.

These houses also are extremely unhealthy to live in especially for young & the elderly. There was a retirement complex built which later had serious defects & the retired owners having sunk their nest eggs into them did not have the funds to rectify them. more info here Why homes leak : Health risks



> Auckland Councillor Cameron Brewer says Mayor Len Brown needs to address the $487m bill to fix Auckland's leaky houses, not pass the buck onto future generations of ratepayers.
> 
> Auckland Council's draft Long Term Plan proposes that the forecast expenditure gets debt funded and paid off by future ratepayers over the next 30 years. Submissions on the Council's draft 10-year plan and budget close 4pm today.
> 
> "Sadly it's the future ratepayers of Auckland that will have to stump up the cash over the next 30 years to right the wrongs of a 1991 Building Act which reduced building controls and standards, developers, builders and architects who cut corners, and former local authorities that failed in their inspection duties. All mistakes that are sadly set to be paid for by the next generation of Auckland home owners. It's an outrage.


to read the full story click here Next generation to pay for today's leaky homes - Yahoo! New Zealand News

The government provides this information on their website

Weathertightness - Department of Building and Housing

Just read up & buyer beware, no matter what other people tell you.


----------



## Song_Si

one more from the archives, know a bit about this one as a friend's parents were involved, their dream retirement apartment in central Wellington was almost the death of them.

Lots on Google if anyone wants to look, the story or EBERT Construction and their various 'shell companies', especially TREBE Construction whose motto may have been _build 'em, sell 'em then liquidate
_ - they appear to have been set up to defraud right from the start.



> Developers of leaky buildings are under attack for hiding behind shelf companies that protect them from angry homeowners and creditors. The Building Subcontractors Federation claimed yesterday that Trebe NZ, the builder of Wellington's leaking and toxic mould-infected Marion Square apartments, was apparently set up to avoid liability.
> 
> Trebe went into voluntary liquidation last week
> 
> Federation chief executive Peter Degerholm said the company, which used to be known as Ebert NZ and traded as Ebert Construction, had become embroiled in contractual disputes. It changed its name to Trebe NZ (Ebert spelled backwards) and continued to defend the claims, while forming a new company called Ebert Construction.
> 
> All three companies had used the same trading name in letters to creditors. Trebe's voluntary liquidation meant subcontractors had wasted thousands of dollars in legal action chasing uncollectable debts, he said. The company's total debts were unknown, but would be measured in hundreds of thousands of dollars.
> source





> Trebe was the main contractor on the “leak plagued Marion Square apartments in inner Wellington”
> reported in the Dominion Post on 21 September 2002.
> One subcontractor has been pursuing arbitration over a $200K dispute for about four years, and apartment owners seeking remedial work have swelled the ranks of unsecured creditors to a reported $13.5 million.
> Whatever the reason for the company name change, the clear effect has been to leave creditors with the shell of the former company, while its ‘phoenix’ version continues to thrive, the good name of Ebert unsullied by the failure of an unknown entity called ‘Trebe’.
> source


----------



## anski

*Waterproofing tower apartments to cost $15m*

Just discovered this news today so it never ends



> A leaky Auckland high-rise apartment complex under repair is wearing a giant white protective sheath to guard against further water damage.
> 
> Hobson Gardens, the two-tower 97-unit block at 205-215 Hobson St near Spaghetti Junction, is undergoing repairs costing about $15 million, although initial estimates to fix it were closer to $20 million.


to read the whole story click here

Waterproofing tower apartments to cost $15m - Building & Construction - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

*Occupants back after $10m leaky fix-up*

And another so you can see the fixing up is not cheap & hugely traumatic for occupants.



> About $10 million has been soaked up fixing a rotten Parnell townhouse block developed over an old textile warehouse.
> 
> Farnham Terraces was developed by various Symphony companies of former rich-lister and ex-Chase boss Colin Reynolds.
> 
> A big portion of the money come from Auckland Council ratepayers, although neither the council nor the owners will say how much.
> 
> Owners have been moving back into their places since the start of last month, after being forced out for a year while it was torn apart.
> 
> Townhouse owner Robyn Horsfall said owners had settled with the council at mediation in October 2010.



You read the story in full here

Occupants back after $10m leaky fix-up - Leaky Buildings - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

*Leaky luxury flats getting multimillion makeover*

Another story & this building went up in the late 80's!!! it really is one big enormous problem & sadly Auckland is very effected.



> A prominent luxury Herne Bay apartment block is undergoing a multimillion dollar repair after suffering leaks for years.
> 
> Work has been done at Shangri La at 97 Jervois Rd for some months and residents say they are delighted with the building's transformation, with new windows, cladding renewal and a new exterior colour scheme.
> 
> Contractor Haydn and Rollett is working on the building, which went up in the late 1980s.
> 
> "The building has experienced waterproofing issues over its life to the southwest face and the separate fire-stair tower. Haydn and Rollett has been contracted to install a curtain wall over the southwest face and replace the cladding on the stair tower.


To read the rest of the story click here

Leaky luxury flats getting multimillion makeover - Leaky Buildings - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

Another article on Leaky Homes & a warning to new comers to New Zealand to avoid buying into potential problems in the future. Although not all Plaster clad homes are likely to be leaking buyers are avoiding them because it's a gamble whether they are sound or not. However none of these homes will last in the long term without cladding, currently most homes cost $200,000 plus to re-clad & that amount will only increase over time.




> House-seller Terri Cumiskey is cynical about spiralling Auckland prices after not getting a single offer for her place in two months.
> 
> She is blaming the rotting homes crisis for lack of interest in the Meadowbank house she rents out, having reluctantly bought it some years ago with an ex-partner, but says her place does not leak because it was was built after rules were tightened.
> 
> "My house is constructed from plaster. It was built in 2004 under the new building standards and has a cavity system which means it should not suffer from the problems that leaky homes had. However, because of the problems with leaky homes, all plaster homes have been tarred with the same brush," she said.
> 
> Last week, QV found Auckland values had soared 2.2 per cent beyond the 2007 peak and this week the Real Estate Institute recorded a new Auckland median of $495,200, up 5.4 per cent on last March.
> 
> Terri Cumiskey's three-bedroom, two-bathroom house at 52A Fancourt St has a capital value of $640,000, dropped from $680,000 in 2007 by Auckland Council when it revalued the property.


You can read the full story here
Leaky homes syndrome blames for lack of interest - Property - NZ Herald News


----------



## Song_Si

> all plaster homes have been tarred with the same brush


this will remain for many years, will always be a factor when it comes to resale, regardless of whether it was not affected or re-clad. Houses where claims are made under the weathertight laws have this noted on their property title - similar to a car being crashed/written off and rebuilt - that will stay with them forever.


----------



## anski

*Realtor fined over sale of leaky apartment*

Another Leaky Home story I am afraid they just keep coming.



> An Auckland realtor who sold a leaky apartment fell foul of new real estate rules just two days after they came into force.
> 
> The Real Estate Agents Authority has fined Linda Peacocke $500 for unsatisfactory conduct relating to the sale of the $820,000 apartment on November 19, 2009.
> 
> It also fined Bayleys North Shore $3000 for unsatisfactory conduct.
> 
> The sale came just two days after new rules came into force under the Real Estate Agents Act, which set up the authority and imposed stricter conditions on realtors.


You can read the full story here

Realtor fined over sale of leaky apartment - National - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

*Leaky buildings settlement budget blown*

Just goes to prove not only Auckland has leaky house problems, other parts of the country are effected also.



> Leaky building settlements cost Hamilton City Council $590,000 last year and early indications show the 2012/13 bill could be much larger.
> 
> Councillors were warned at a confidential meeting earlier this year to brace themselves for a further blowout of next year's modest $250,000 budget.
> 
> The information, released to the Herald under the Official Information Act, revealed that settling its four claims last year cost an average of $147,500 a home.
> 
> The total cost for 2011/12 was more than double the $236,000 the council had budgeted for.
> 
> As well as the 15 active claims the council is processing, the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service showed there were 24 active claims for the city, although some of these might not meet the criteria.


The article continues Leaky buildings settlement budget blown - National - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

*Two weeks to fix leaky home or out you go*

This leaky home story is from Tauranga, so do not be fooled it is only an Auckland problem.



> What was once a dream home has become a nightmare for a Tauranga couple who have been given just two weeks to fix their leaky dwelling or get out.
> 
> Martin Roberts and Christine Radford, who have two teenage children, are now calling on others stuck in the leaky-homes quagmire to band together and lobby the Government for what they consider justice.
> 
> Ms Radford, a primary school teacher, and Mr Roberts, a physiotherapist, spent years saving towards the home they helped to design in the suburb of Ohauiti.
> 
> Ms Radford described the design - using untreated timber nailed on to harditex sprayed with a stucco finish, and no eaves overhanging some walls - as "classic".
> 
> She was told many times during its construction in 2001 that it would last a lifetime.


To read the story in full & protect yourselves from falling into the same trap read on
Two weeks to fix leaky home or out you go - National - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

*Bill aims to cut risks of cowboys in building*

This latest step by council is nothing short of shutting the door after the horse has bolted & but so tragically it has come too late for so many householders caught up in the Leaky Homes Mess.

Councils failed these people, so did architects & builders & the Greenies who pushed that untreated timber was used in the first place.



> Cowboys in the construction industry are being targeted by a bill that will introduce fines of up to $200,000 for jobs done without the proper paperwork.
> 
> The Government is aiming to make building contractors more accountable for their work by making companies or individuals provide upfront evidence of their skills and track record, and insisting that they fix any faults quickly and efficiently with no questions asked.
> 
> The changes would also affect do-it-yourself renovators.
> 
> The Building Amendment Bill (No 4) is part of a review of the Building Act prompted by the $22 billion leaky building crisis. It passed its first reading in Parliament on Tuesday, but several MPs expressed concern that the amendments left the building industry to police itself.
> 
> At the bill's first reading Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson said the proposals gave consumers more protection when building or renovating their homes.
> 
> If it was brought into law, builders would have to provide a comprehensive document that informed a client about the people who would be doing the work, the company's profile, and proof that it could cover the costs of fixing any faults.
> 
> 
> If a builder made an error, the principal contractor would have to fix it within a year.


I wonder if this is before or after they have either set up a new company or fled to Australia?
The statement "Bill aims to cut risks of cowboys in building" is a joke

To read the entire story Bill aims to cut risks of cowboys in building - Business - NZ Herald News


----------



## Scoojez

Hi Anski, it seems these leaky houses were built through the 90s and early 2000's? Is it not compulsory in NZ to obtain a pre-purchase building inspection and providing this report to your mortgage provider? Thanks


----------



## topcat83

Scoojez said:


> Hi Anski, it seems these leaky houses were built through the 90s and early 2000's? Is it not compulsory in NZ to obtain a pre-purchase building inspection and providing this report to your mortgage provider? Thanks


The mortgage provider will probably insist on one - but even with a building inspection it's worth taking extra care. Some of the monolithic clad buildings have a stigma attached to them now - even if they aren't leaky buildings. 

Best advice - if it seems too cheap there's probably a reason for it.


----------



## anski

*Pat Langley's experience on Target tonight*

Just watched tonight's episode on Target which featured ex Englishman Pat Langley's horror story regarding his Leaky house experience & a (CCC) the abbreviated form of "code compliance certificate" & this link will explain the topic .

Code compliance certificate

You can view Pat Langley's experience by following this link

Target - Season 14, Ep 6 - news/current affairs - On Demand - TV3


----------



## Scoojez

topcat83 said:


> The mortgage provider will probably insist on one - but even with a building inspection it's worth taking extra care. Some of the monolithic clad buildings have a stigma attached to them now - even if they aren't leaky buildings.
> 
> Best advice - if it seems too cheap there's probably a reason for it.


Thanks Topcat....when you say monolithic clad...would this be similar to a 'rendered' house here in Aussie? I'll go and google it but it sounds like the 'cladding' is added to the exterior of the house whereas a rendered house in Aussie is usually one that was built of bricks and then the brickwork covered with rendering paint.


----------



## Song_Si

from Consumer Build website



> *Monolithic cladding*
> 
> Some homes with monolithic cladding types are at risk of being leaky buildings, so you need to be specially vigilant in your maintenance checks.
> 
> Monolithic cladding is made of sheets that are coated to give the seamless appearance of concrete, masonry or plaster.
> 
> read more


and from Leaky Home Forum


> A cladding of sheet material forming a continuous mass, with an applied coating to give the appearance of a seamless cladding"
> 
> This style is popular for its clean, modern lines and the flexibility it allows designers. Unfortunately though, deregulation and a lack of skill in the building industry led to tens of thousands of sub-standard homes being built in the mid-to-late 90'.
> 
> The main problem was that these predominantly plaster coated monolithic clad homes were letting water in to the wall cavity, but not out again. Whereby a traditional weatherboard home has an airspace behind and below the weatherboards to allow moisture to drain or dry out, the monolithic clad homes had none. Moisture would simply become trapped within the wall. One of many common water entry points was through poorly sealed window aperatures, where there was poor or no flashing to prevent it.
> 
> more


----------



## anski

Song_Si said:


> from Consumer Build website
> 
> 
> 
> and from Leaky Home Forum


thanks for the websites & I just discovered this, the Blog makes interesting reading 

Grimshaw Blog (an account of legal battles & determinations.

You just feel sorry for these poor Leaky Home Owners caught up in the mess & all the ensuing legal action & ducking & weaving & legal loopholes.

Just easier to buy an old house or closely supervise a new home build. Every day I see the progress on a house a few doors away from mine. It previously had a Council Valuation for $1,150,000 in 2008 but the latest valuation released a few months ago has downgraded it to $600,000. It sold a few months ago for $625,000 & since October the scaffolding has been up & they have slowly removed & replaced all the cladding, frame etc & still working on it with weekly skips coming & going!


----------



## Scoojez

Thanks for the info! Appalling situation. And it appears even new builds are at risk of the same shoddy work? Hmmmm - I'm starting to favour an older home and retro-fitting it with all the heating appliances we can afford. Been living in the tropics far too long to return to dampness


----------



## anski

Scoojez said:


> Thanks for the info! Appalling situation. And it appears even new builds are at risk of the same shoddy work? Hmmmm - I'm starting to favour an older home and retro-fitting it with all the heating appliances we can afford. Been living in the tropics far too long to return to dampness


That's exactly what we did, bought a solid brick home built in 1931, added insulation to ceiling & below floors, fitted gas fired central heating throughout, renovated kitchen & bathrooms.

Just removed the bay window replacing it with French Doors, which revealed the house construction -solid double brick with lead flashings in cavity, all internal walls are brick. We took photos so we can show prospective buyers when we put it on the market later this year. The beauty of buying old houses is the lovely old floorboards that look amazing, when the carpets are removed, no modern floors have the same appearance. These old houses are often are in good locations where no vacant land is available.
Never had a problem in the 11 years we have lived in the home & I doubt if the 2 previous owners did either, the first being the English Master Builder who built the home for himself & lived in it for 34 years.

Some new homes are ok hopefully they are not repeating past mistakes, but really hard to get quality unless paying top $$$.

We are currently looking into building an all concrete house for it's thermal qualities in Hawkes Bay. Had a look at the new display homes but came away unimpressed. Friends bough a new brick & linea board home but it feels like living inside a plastic bag.


----------



## topcat83

Scoojez said:


> Thanks for the info! Appalling situation. And it appears even new builds are at risk of the same shoddy work? Hmmmm - I'm starting to favour an older home and retro-fitting it with all the heating appliances we can afford. Been living in the tropics far too long to return to dampness


We bought a 2 year old 'Golden Homes' home. We're in a high wind zone and can only praise the build. It's fully double glazed & insulated with one of those ventilation systems and a heat pump, and is as cosy as! 

So don't wipe out new builds completely - the houses built to the latest building regulations seem pretty good!


----------



## Scoojez

Thanks for the feedback about Golden Homes. I'll go check them out


----------



## topcat83

Scoojez said:


> Thanks for the feedback about Golden Homes. I'll go check them out


If you're using Golden Homes from scratch (as opposed to buying a previously built one) make sure you check out the 'extras'. When we did our investigations (we were going to build from scratch until this one came up) Golden Homes were notoriously bad at this. We were going to go with Platinum Homes : Builders, Building Companies - much more included in the 'basic package'.


----------



## aileendee

If you're buying new in NZ, just make sure you find a trusted builder to look over the house. Talk to everyone you know until they can recommend a builder to help you. Getting a random building inspection from someone you don't know isn't always worth it


----------



## anski

Just thought I would post the latest news on the Leaky Houses in case newcomers are not aware of the situation. Hopefully by reading this article they can avoid the pitfalls & save themselves a lot of heartache & expense.



> Only 12 victims of the $11 billion leaky homes catastrophe have received final payments from a $1 billion Government and local council scheme, raising the ire of experts trying to help homeowners.


You can read the full article here 

Leaky homes fiasco continues - Property - NZ Herald News

Currently there is a home for sale in Mission Bay that is a mortgagee sale, they refer to it as a "Problem Property" & I suspect it is Leaky.

This same house was for sale in 2001 when I was in the market for a house & I inspected it & thought at the time the house was very damp, had lots of black mould outside and decided against it. My 81 year old brick home has never caused me a sleepless night, unfortunately lots of innocent people as the article illustrates must be living a nightmare with their Leaky Homes.


----------



## anski

Another article on Leaky Homes I thought I would share with you as new arrivals may not be aware of the situation and just want to keep reminding house hunters of potential problems.



> It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the Government's leaky homes rescue package is nothing more than a sideshow designed to distract attention away from the severity of the problem we face.
> 
> Although the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) report, commissioned by the Government to quantify the size of the leaky home problem, had a consensus forecast of 42,000 homes likely to fail, the fact is that all plaster-clad homes built between 1992 and 2005 have now lost value, whether they are leaking or not.


You can read the full article here

Roger Levie: Leaky home rescue plan barely scratches surface - Property - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

Finally a self-styled "Erin Brockovich" has emerged to take on the leaky homes scandal, forming a website to rally victims to fight for their rights.


To read the article follow this link.

Leaky-home battle goes Hollywood - Building & Construction - NZ Herald News

This is the link to the web site for anyone to register if they have a leaky home. http://leakyclassaction.co.nz/


----------



## anski

*Leaky home risk may shift*

Now they are trying to move the goal posts to minimise Councils exposure to the Leaky Home Bail Out

Leaky home risk may shift - Building & Construction - NZ Herald News


----------



## anski

Well it's been awhile since I commented on Leaky buildings. But be warned the problem is still out there. 
At the moment there is a property in my local area which I considered buying in 2001, the asking price then was $630,000 It has a current CV of $1,210,000 it has been up for sale for some time & since then it has been to a mortgagee auction prior to Christmas & failed to sell & now it's up for offers. 

The place definitely has water tightness issues and the listing states it.

There have been several similar properties for sale with major problems. Currently a block of luxury units on Tamaki Drive is being rectified, they were up for sale just a few years ago in excess of $2,500,000!

Now it seems not only private property owners are victims, but Hawkes Bay regional Council's building is requiring a $2,000, 000 spend to rectify it water tightness issues. Whats more they actually gave it a CCC!



> The cost of fixing Hawke's Bay Regional Council's leaky building in Napier has more than doubled to nearly $2m because of complications over who should repair the failing windows which have left the structure open to water penetration


 And furthermore the council issued a CCC after inspecting it on completion, now it has proved it was not correct.
What a joke you can read all about it here.

Regional Council's leaky building costs double | Hawke's Bay Today


----------

