Comments on: Leaky Homes In New Zealand May Have A Small Light Ahead http://deonswiggs.com/leaky-homes-in-new-zealand-may-have-a-small-light-ahead/ Healthy Homes for Healthy Kiwi's... Oh and of course Free Real Estate Advice Wed, 08 Sep 2010 23:11:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: swiggs http://deonswiggs.com/leaky-homes-in-new-zealand-may-have-a-small-light-ahead/#comment-3735 swiggs Sun, 18 Jul 2010 11:09:36 +0000 http://deonswiggs.com/?p=604#comment-3735 John, This is interesting that you say this. But it looks like the tax payer is going to be the ones who loose out in the end. John,

This is interesting that you say this. But it looks like the tax payer is going to be the ones who loose out in the end.

]]> By: topamax online http://deonswiggs.com/leaky-homes-in-new-zealand-may-have-a-small-light-ahead/#comment-918 topamax online Fri, 13 Nov 2009 03:00:20 +0000 http://deonswiggs.com/?p=604#comment-918 "That's the lot," she said, making a final tick on her list. --------------------------------------- signature: <a href="http://buy-nexium.bestespressoesmakers.info/" rel="nofollow">nexium</a> fe4444yz22s5etgg6ser5z22z1sdf “That’s the lot,” she said, making a final tick on her list.
—————————————
signature: nexium fe4444yz22s5etgg6ser5z22z1sdf

]]> By: John Cox http://deonswiggs.com/leaky-homes-in-new-zealand-may-have-a-small-light-ahead/#comment-839 John Cox Sat, 17 Oct 2009 20:29:43 +0000 http://deonswiggs.com/?p=604#comment-839 Paul Grimshaw notes that owners can potentially win 100% of the costs of repairs. True, though that is rare, and often the defendant's can't pay. More significantly, the lawyers will take probably half the awarded costs, so more often than not the "successful" owner remains out of pocket. Paul Grimshaw notes that owners can potentially win 100% of the costs of repairs. True, though that is rare, and often the defendant’s can’t pay. More significantly, the lawyers will take probably half the awarded costs, so more often than not the “successful” owner remains out of pocket.

]]> By: Steve Koerber http://deonswiggs.com/leaky-homes-in-new-zealand-may-have-a-small-light-ahead/#comment-675 Steve Koerber Sun, 23 Aug 2009 09:09:40 +0000 http://deonswiggs.com/?p=604#comment-675 Thanks for covering this important issue Deon. It's incredible that home buyers are still not adequately protected by NZ's laws nor properly informed about this financially and emotionally crippling issue. Since the problems were first discovered in the early 2000s the focus of the 'leaky home issue' has been on repairing homes and repairing lives. Whilst this has been a worthwhile focus, there has been little done to protect consumers (people like you and me) buying homes that currently leak/potentially leak. The new proposed Real Estate Agents Act (REEA) deals with consumer protection by making real estate salepeople responsible for informing buyers that a particular home has had/could have problems/is at risk. Whilst this is a step in the right direction it will not stop all buyers from buying a lemon. It may still be possible for sellers to hide issues from salespeople and buyers, plus some building inspectors will be more lenient than others and/or use different methods of assessment etc. Everything is too loose. Making real estate salespeople responsible for consumer protection is fraught with danger. Effectively the Government is passing the buck and not accepting liability for the leaky building issue. I believe the only way to really protect consumers is for the Government to legislate that a (roughly) 1991 to 2003 built (at risk) home can only be listed for sale after a Government controlled and directed building inspection report. This report should be attached to the listing initially, and then attached to the sale and purchase agreement. The report will be comprehensive and will contain moisture test results plus invasive test results if deemed necessary. The result of this legislation would be excellent consumer protection. Whenever a leaky home is sold it would sell for its actual value. Too many of them are selling at inflated prices to buyers who are then able to pass problems onto the next buyer, and on it goes. Under such a legislation New Zealand would also discover and fix leaky homes more rapidly than under any other scheme ever proposed. Fast forward to the year 2030. My proposed legislation is law. A plaster home built in 1998 is listed for sale for the first time ever. The required Government controlled and directed building inspection report details 40% moisture in many walls and an invasive test shows lots of rotten timber. The house, a pleasant home for the owners for the past 32 years, is virtually worthless. It sells for the value of the land. See more discussion and a full explanation of the reasons my proposed legislation should be seriously considered by the incumbent Government at my blog. Thanks for covering this important issue Deon.

It’s incredible that home buyers are still not adequately protected by NZ’s laws nor properly informed about this financially and emotionally crippling issue.

Since the problems were first discovered in the early 2000s the focus of the ‘leaky home issue’ has been on repairing homes and repairing lives. Whilst this has been a worthwhile focus, there has been little done to protect consumers (people like you and me) buying homes that currently leak/potentially leak.

The new proposed Real Estate Agents Act (REEA) deals with consumer protection by making real estate salepeople responsible for informing buyers that a particular home has had/could have problems/is at risk. Whilst this is a step in the right direction it will not stop all buyers from buying a lemon. It may still be possible for sellers to hide issues from salespeople and buyers, plus some building inspectors will be more lenient than others and/or use different methods of assessment etc. Everything is too loose.

Making real estate salespeople responsible for consumer protection is fraught with danger. Effectively the Government is passing the buck and not accepting liability for the leaky building issue.

I believe the only way to really protect consumers is for the Government to legislate that a (roughly) 1991 to 2003 built (at risk) home can only be listed for sale after a Government controlled and directed building inspection report. This report should be attached to the listing initially, and then attached to the sale and purchase agreement. The report will be comprehensive and will contain moisture test results plus invasive test results if deemed necessary.

The result of this legislation would be excellent consumer protection. Whenever a leaky home is sold it would sell for its actual value. Too many of them are selling at inflated prices to buyers who are then able to pass problems onto the next buyer, and on it goes. Under such a legislation New Zealand would also discover and fix leaky homes more rapidly than under any other scheme ever proposed.

Fast forward to the year 2030. My proposed legislation is law. A plaster home built in 1998 is listed for sale for the first time ever. The required Government controlled and directed building inspection report details 40% moisture in many walls and an invasive test shows lots of rotten timber. The house, a pleasant home for the owners for the past 32 years, is virtually worthless. It sells for the value of the land.

See more discussion and a full explanation of the reasons my proposed legislation should be seriously considered by the incumbent Government at my blog.

]]>