Hi! I have discovered a lot of very helpful advice on this site over past weeks for which I'd like to express my gratitude. I haven't however been able to find an answer here or elsewhere for the following concern, and wonder if there is someone who can advise me on this.
When I purchased my apartment in 2003 after a marriage break-up, I had it checked by a building inspector and was told there would be no risk with the weathertightness issues that were just beginning to come to the public's attention. Although it did have cladding, the structure was mostly concrete. Early this year however it was discovered that the complex, like so many others in NZ, does have issues after all and as it is over 12 years old there are no ways of seeking any compensation. A reputable firm was employed to investigate and quotes given on the possible cost of recladding, repairs etc. There are two blocks of units which are not concrete construction and have considerable damage. There are two blocks of units similar to mine which are mostly concrete and have some damage on upper floor apartments, but less on the lower. My own apartment has no damage whatever.
I understand that we all have to pay an equal share for the repairs to general-use buidlings (gym etc.). Although alternatives were suggested by the Inspection Company i.e. that
levies could be based block by block, or upper floor by lower floor and block by block, or based on the proportional levies we already pay, I have the impression that the last suggestion will apply.
If I only have to pay based on my lower floor block - and then my share of the public use structures - the total would be upwards of about $30,000 (based on the lowest estimate - it could be much higher)
If it is based on the block but not the level, which I believe is the fairer option because the only reason the lower block is not damaged is because it was protected by an upper floor, it would be upwards of
about $50,000. But if my levy is based on my percentage of the entire complex, it will be upwards of $70,000. I will never recoup the value of this place after paying for even the lowest estimate of repairs as the building is relatively small, and I will have to use what little savings I have and find some way to raise the rest of the cost. As I am a superannuatant I am unable to raise it through employment.
But of course my circumstances have no bearing on what is the legal solution.
I know I'm only one of a large number of people whose lives have been devestated by this unexpected and wasteful expense caused by leaky buildings. Investigations I have made with the owners of
units in apartment complexes who have already been through this process indicate that the amount paid is generally based on the proportional levies system. I feel this is unfair because those of us
who ensured we purchased a concrete structure, have to pay for those who didn't take this precaution. However, it has been pointed out that although those owners didn't consider this factor, the amount they would have to pay would be so much higher if it wasn't distributed evenly amongst all owners. I have searched a number of sites and read through the rules that apply to Body Corps but cannot find any reference to levies with large cost issues such as this.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks
When I purchased my apartment in 2003 after a marriage break-up, I had it checked by a building inspector and was told there would be no risk with the weathertightness issues that were just beginning to come to the public's attention. Although it did have cladding, the structure was mostly concrete. Early this year however it was discovered that the complex, like so many others in NZ, does have issues after all and as it is over 12 years old there are no ways of seeking any compensation. A reputable firm was employed to investigate and quotes given on the possible cost of recladding, repairs etc. There are two blocks of units which are not concrete construction and have considerable damage. There are two blocks of units similar to mine which are mostly concrete and have some damage on upper floor apartments, but less on the lower. My own apartment has no damage whatever.
I understand that we all have to pay an equal share for the repairs to general-use buidlings (gym etc.). Although alternatives were suggested by the Inspection Company i.e. that
levies could be based block by block, or upper floor by lower floor and block by block, or based on the proportional levies we already pay, I have the impression that the last suggestion will apply.
If I only have to pay based on my lower floor block - and then my share of the public use structures - the total would be upwards of about $30,000 (based on the lowest estimate - it could be much higher)
If it is based on the block but not the level, which I believe is the fairer option because the only reason the lower block is not damaged is because it was protected by an upper floor, it would be upwards of
about $50,000. But if my levy is based on my percentage of the entire complex, it will be upwards of $70,000. I will never recoup the value of this place after paying for even the lowest estimate of repairs as the building is relatively small, and I will have to use what little savings I have and find some way to raise the rest of the cost. As I am a superannuatant I am unable to raise it through employment.
But of course my circumstances have no bearing on what is the legal solution.
I know I'm only one of a large number of people whose lives have been devestated by this unexpected and wasteful expense caused by leaky buildings. Investigations I have made with the owners of
units in apartment complexes who have already been through this process indicate that the amount paid is generally based on the proportional levies system. I feel this is unfair because those of us
who ensured we purchased a concrete structure, have to pay for those who didn't take this precaution. However, it has been pointed out that although those owners didn't consider this factor, the amount they would have to pay would be so much higher if it wasn't distributed evenly amongst all owners. I have searched a number of sites and read through the rules that apply to Body Corps but cannot find any reference to levies with large cost issues such as this.
Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks
Comment