 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||
|
Leader's LetterJune 2006
Leaky Homes A Sodden MessThe recent announcement of a $30.5 million package to speed up and streamline claims through the Weathertight Homes Resolution Service is welcomed, although it’s a case of too little too late for many owners of leaky homes. The package seeks to address many of the problems encountered by claimants, which have been daunting enough in many cases for them to withdraw their claims and walk away from the process. This is unfair when people build or buy houses in good faith and are then faced with the nightmare of leaky building syndrome. Under the new system, the time taken to process applications will be slashed by almost half to an average of eight months, and there will be less scope for lawyers and “experts” to draw out the process. The definition of damage has been extended to include future damage as well as damage that has already occurred, allowing for a more accurate assessment of the costs required to fix a house. Class action by apartment owners is also enabled. However, it is a concern that financial assistance is limited to those who are unable to borrow from private lending institutions, which disadvantages those who have to rely on private loans. It is also a concern that the shroud of secrecy surrounding individual settlements is to continue, with only councils being privy to this information. Transparency is important to ensure that future homebuyers are aware of the history of their potential purchase. Until possible future legislation is enacted, councils are not required to record claim and building consent information on the LIM report. It is therefore imperative that the consumer education campaign that is part of the package is effective at informing homebuyers what they need to know and what questions to ask. This whole episode is a reminder of what can go wrong when there is insufficient protection for unsuspecting homeowners from unscrupulous building industry players. It is imperative that the quality of buildings, payment of sub-contractors and completion of work be guaranteed, and that the regulatory system, including the building consents process, does what it is supposed to do, which is protect people from such disasters. Architects and building suppliers also need to accept their culpability in recommending designs and products that are obviously unsuitable for homes. This fiasco is also an example of the end result of rampant free market ideology, with its focus on deregulation and laissez faire theories. Unfortunately there are winners and losers on such an uneven playing field, and it’s often the opportunistic cowboys who laugh all the way to the bank, while the mums and dads are left with the headaches, and the bill. However, the important thing now is to settle the claims in a timely fashion so that people can get on with their lives, and to hold those responsible to account. This initiative, along with the new building practitioner licensing scheme, will go some way towards providing speedier claim resolution for those affected by leaky homes, and will hopefully prevent this disaster befalling future homebuyers. New Zealand First will be watching closely to make sure that the leaky buildings disaster does not recur in New Zealand. Pita Paraone MP
|
|
|||
|
|
||