3News » Home
Full Story

More protection sought from home-owners

4 comments | Post Comment email Email printer friendly Print    Text Size:
aA
aA
aA

video
Fri, 13 Aug 2010 12:40p.m.

By Chris Ormond of NZPA

Building Act changes announced yesterday are a move in the right direction but more is needed to ensure homeowners get the water-tight protection they deserve, says the Home Owners and Buyers Association (HOBA).

Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson said the changes to the Act would ensure builders were more accountable for their work.

Legislation to be introduced to Parliament this year would explicitly state builders and designers were accountable for meeting Building Code requirements.

The legislation will involve introducing mandatory written contracts for building work above $20,000 that sets out expectations, warranties and remedies, how any disputes will be resolved, and require those doing the work to explain what, if any, financial back-up or insurance they have to remedy any faults.

Minor work such as attached car-ports and verandas will no longer require a consent, and eventually consent processes in general will be streamlined.

HOBA chief executive John Gray told NZPA any moves giving homeowners more protection were welcome, but there was still a concern skill levels within the industry were not always up to scratch, and the legislation still left room for homeowners to be left out of pocket.

Tightening contracts was an "essential step" to ensuring matters relating to the performance of builders were adequately addressed, Mr Gray said.

"But it's all very well to have a paper with a warranty and disputes resolution scheme, but if the builder is dead or departed and living on the Gold Coast, you need a fall-back."

The association urged the Government to provide a last resort measure to ensure there was a proviso to address such situations, such as a fidelity fund.

There needed to be continued push in the building industry for improvements in skill levels and outcomes, Mr Gray said.

"We've been a bit disappointed by some of the sectors of the building industry that seem to be more focused on trying to evade liability than focusing on quality outcomes," he told NZPA.

"We just find that rather strange..."

Certified Builders Association (CBA) chairman Allan Shaw said the changes would force the less reputable players to lift the bar.

Costs would also be reduced for people doing smaller work, he said.

"It means builders can arrive on the job, complete the task and move on."

Streamlining the consents process was a case of trying to get everyone on the same page, he said.

"It will make it a lot easier for people to get permits, it will be a lot quicker and there will be savings in the industry right across the board."

Enforcing contracts was something already required by members by of the CBA, he said.

"For Joe public out there it is a great thing because now they know exactly what they are going to get, they know the course and if there is any problem they have the documentation to go back and resolve it."

Those who worked without contracts and created the "aggravations" would either "have to lift the bar or move out. And I think moving out will be the way to go".

NZPA

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Comments [4]

Trev
15 Aug 2010 12:38p.m.

Trying to figure out that comment lightseed.

so National created Trev.
Excellent English... lol OMG go back to school.

And no labour didnt fix it Lightseed... when has the country ever had a spare 11 Billion dollars to fix Nationals stuff up.

katrina
13 Aug 2010 5:27p.m.

Why is it the builder is always lumbered with the blame. The developer and the designers specify - The builder builds to the consented plans.
The Building authority at the time approved the products that didn't work.
Anyone can pick up a hammer and call themselves a builder.
Some council imspectors barely even get out of their cars sometimes.
We looked at doing a job for friend, rebuilding a deck and the architect had designed it so that a now water-tight house would then start to leak, the council approved those plans and then when we looked at them and tried to tell the architect that his plan would not work without creating a big problem, he didn't care and wouldn't do anything about it, he had his money.

lightseed
13 Aug 2010 3:03p.m.

so national created Trev, and what did labour do to stop it, ah nothing.

Trev
13 Aug 2010 1:35p.m.

How accountable has business ever been for its errors in All honesty.

This has the makings of the leaky homes saga part 2, with just as much time spent in courtrooms trying to figure out who exactly should be paying reperations.

National created the first Leaky homes saga with the deregulation of the building sector in the 1990's and have taken little to no responsibility for that.

Cheaper, nastier housing is all they were able to create.

Well done National for sad tired old policies from the 1990's... well done for your completely unoriginal thinking.

More responsibility.. lol thats the biggest joke I have heard in awhile.. yes someone may have to show more responsible behaviour... but who exactly? the architect? the contractors? the building inspectors?

Well that normally only takes a decade to sort out in a court room really.

Same tired old National party, no new ideas and the same sleaze running the side show.

Sigh.

Post a comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide here
Name:
Email: (Won't be published)
Comment:



3News Video 3News Audio