Are kiwi homes rotten?

Thousands of New Zealand homes could be unsafe and non-compliant with the Building Code due to poor consent processes by councils, says a homeowners' advocate after a damning report highlights the inadequacies of approvals in the Queenstown area.

A Government review of homes, buildings and alterations approved over the past 10 years by a private company on behalf of the Queenstown Lakes District Council found they were not subject to thorough safety tests, including weather tightness and earthquake risk.

In addition the company, CivicCorp, relied on supplier guarantees that lifts, mechanical ventilation and alternative solution fire systems met Building Code standards and were correctly installed.

The 2007 technical review from the Department of Building and Housing on the building control operations of the Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC) found a number of glaring oversights by CivicCorp from 1998 to 2007, affecting some 11,000 consents.

CivicCorp was a joint venture established in 1997 by QLDC to process building consents. The period includes the 2001 to 2006 housing boom when Queenstown Lakes District was the fastest growing area in New Zealand. Its population increased by 30% over this period and the number of occupied homes in the district grew by the same amount.

CivicCorp was taken over by council-owned Lakes Environmental (LE) in April 2007.

Leaky homes campaigner John Gray from the Home Owners & Buyers Association of New Zealand (HOBANZ) said he was ''aghast'' at the findings of the report released recently.

''There are about 5000 homes in the Lakes District without code compliance certificates.''

LE chief executive Hamish Dobbie said Gray's quote of 5000 non-compliant homes in Queenstown was way out of proportion.

''The number that he's talking about is incredible  unbelievable in fact.

''Over the last 10 years about 4500 homes were built in the district.

''He's taking the view that every home in the district is a leaky home.''

Dobbie admits LE is still the sole shareholder of CivicCorp which could put it at potential risk of liability from any future homeowner claims.

Gray claims Queenstown's poor level of compliance was just the tip of the iceberg when it came to inadequate consent processes throughout the country.

DBH deputy chief executive sector capability Nigel Bickle said the practice of councils relying on producer statements in lieu of an independent peer review was one carried out by many councils.

Producer statements are a professional's opinion about a product or design's compliance with the Building Code.  They do not have any standing in law under the Building Act 2004.

''Our advice to councils has been if you use [producer statements] in a proper risk-based way they've got a role to play but they shouldn't be relied on in and of themselves for establishing compliance with the code.

''For high-risk, complex building projects this is where we would expect councils to have and use independent peer review of design.''

HOBANZ is sending out Official Information Act requests to all councils to confirm the state of New Zealand's housing stock.

HOBANZ's research will be presented to an external reference group established by the Department of Building and Housing (DBH) into leaky homes.

In addition to DBH and HOBANZ, the group includes Treasury, Ministry of Economic Development, Department of Internal Affairs, Local Government New Zealand, Wellington City Council, Auckland City Council and the New Zealand Institute of Building Surveyors.

Gray said the councils had never tried to ascertain the extent of the problem because they were scared of potential liability.

''Because of the vested interest no-one is actually prepared to do that work ... We don't know if it's 8000, 80,000 or 800,000 [homes].

''Queenstown is just a microdot compared to bigger cities."

- © Fairfax NZ News