Stuff Digital Edition

When remedial work fails

Work on leaky homes is continuing around the country, but botched repair jobs are causing problems, writes

Miriam Bell.

When Aucklander Phil Crisp and his partner bought a house with monolithic cladding five years ago, he did not know much about leaky homes.

These days he does. The house the couple bought was built in 2001. It had a peaked roof and brick walls on its bottom half and cladding on the top half.

The only obvious problem was a damaged carpet, but they assumed it was sun damage and replaced it.

Crisp says they thought that only particular types of houses were leaky homes, not ones like theirs, but they were wrong.

After several years they became concerned the deck was sagging, and a water blaster told them the joins were failing, and the house would leak.

The couple got weathertight remediation experts Sound Homes NZ to take a look, and the company found the deck was rotten, and the wall was defective.

‘‘It emerged someone had tried to fix a leak in the deck and wall connections and cover it up, but the work was done terribly. It was a huge shock to find out our house was affected by leaky home issues.’’

Sound Homes NZ fixed the house, but it cost $135,000, and as the problems dated back to the previous owners, Crisp decided to contact them to see if they would split the costs.

‘‘During their time of ownership, they did a quick job to patch things up. But it was fixed badly, so the problem was not addressed, and then they sold it to us without disclosing it, which is wrong.

‘‘Likewise, the real estate agent did not disclose anything to us, and says the vendors did not tell them about it, so they have no liability.’’

He says the previous owners have not responded to messages, and he last heard from them about a year ago. He is unsure how to proceed, but the costs were significant, and the situation has been incredibly stressful, he says.

‘‘We got legal advice, and want to file a claim. But it is difficult because we have to prove the sales and purchase agreement was breached. And it is past the government claims point, so there is no recourse there. It is frustrating.’’

The leaky homes crisis may be fading from public consciousness, but Crisp’s situation is not unusual. In the 20 years since problems began to emerge, thousands of people have been affected, and many continue to be.

Home Owners and Buyers Association president John Gray says there is still plenty of remedial work going on, and his organisation is often approached about substandard repair work, which he calls ‘‘lipstick on a pig’’ jobs.

The problem is many defective homes do not show signs of leaks or damage, and when owners find out their home is defective they are desperate to find the cheapest repair option, he says.

‘‘They can also be misled by builders, or so-called experts, into believing they don’t require a building consent, or that they can choose to do the work without a consent to ‘avoid all the hassle with council’.

‘‘Many owners are desperate to find the quickest, cheapest and most hassle-free option because they are usually fiscally challenged and, even if there is a viable legal claim, they cannot afford to get justice.’’

This can lead to problems down the track. He has seen a number of homes where remedial work has been undertaken without a building consent and is therefore illegal.

‘‘Worse still, that work failed to remedy the underlying problems and decayed timber had been left in situ, leading to further failure and expensive remedial work having to be undertaken.

‘‘Some required full reclads, and in some cases, the homes were beyond economic repair.’’

Sound Homes NZ managing director Danny Wright estimates about 50% of the homes his company works on have had some kind of leaky home repairs done in the past, and about 10% of that work has been done in the past year.

Lack of knowledge means homeowners continue to get sucked in by so-called professionals, who charge a fortune to fix a problem, squirt on some silicon and new paint, take the money and run, he says.

‘‘By the time they find out

years later that the ‘lipstick’ did not fix the problem, it has exacerbated, and the repair requirements have increased dramatically. ‘‘Often it is not until they are selling the home and a buyer gets a building inspection report that they discover the hidden issues, and with the banks tightening their loan eligibility they cannot afford to fix the home.’’ Homeowners in such situations often ended up selling way under value, but in other cases a ‘‘jimmy repair’’ which has been done is not disclosed on sale, and the new owner does not discover it until later, Wright says.

‘‘It leaves owners in a scary position. If the repair fails, the company that did it is usually gone, or will not fix it and the owner has to pay someone else to repair again, or follow an exhaustive legal process to make these unscrupulous operators accountable.’’

He feels particularly sorry for new homeowners who have mortgaged themselves to the hilt, and then discover a problem with their house six months later when they have limited funds and few options to address it.

‘‘To avoid botched remedial work, homeowners have to use reputable remediation companies to assess the problems and fix the damage properly when it is first discovered.’’

Under-estimation of how much leaky home problems actually cost to fix contributes to the broader issue, Getin2 Property director Cameron Stewart says.

His company buys properties that have seen better days, then renovates, remediates or redevelops them to resell. He says the problems are far worse than people think.

‘‘Many homeowners have their heads in the clouds about the condition of their houses, and think a small amount of remedial work will fix it, or that the market will be strong enough to sell it anyway.

‘‘But their house is still crap regardless of how strong the market is, and after 15 years of doing this work, I know that if there is a problem it is usually worse than you expect it to be.’’

Often the extent of the damage is such that the house is not worth fixing, particularly if it is not in a higher capital value suburb, and it is best to tear it down and start again, he says.

But many owners get advice from builders who do not specialise in leaky homes, or even real estate agents who have no knowledge of construction issues and costs.

It means an owner will be told their house could be reclad for $300,000, but in reality it will cost closer to $1 million, Stewart says.

‘‘The only way for an owner, or for a buyer looking at a potentially leaky house, to understand what might be involved is to get a proper consultant’s report, not just a moisture test.

‘‘And the report has to provide a full breakdown of all costs, based on current market figures, with a comprehensive repair schedule.’’

There have been issues with remedial work not being done properly, but councils have become more pedantic about their requirements, and it has become harder for people to get away with it, he says.

‘‘Someone had tried to fix a leak in the deck and wall connections and cover it up, but the work was done terribly.’’

Phil Crisp, above

HOMED

en-nz

2022-11-27T08:00:00.0000000Z

2022-11-27T08:00:00.0000000Z

https://fairfaxmedia.pressreader.com/article/282819310222776

Stuff Limited