Elderly couple’s kitset nightmare
An elderly couple fear the stress of a kitset build gone wrong could ‘‘kill’’ them as they face a $200,000 fine amid red-tape wrangling between builders and officials.
Tim and Linda Brandon expected their kitset home to be a cheap downgrade to prolong their Marton retirement but their dreams were quickly shattered when the project ran $40,000 over budget and did not receive a code of compliance.
Tim, 84, said mounting stress had affected his health so badly he wasn’t eating and sleeping well, and had prompted him to visit a doctor.
‘‘The stress will kill us,’’ Linda said. ‘‘It’s horrible.
‘‘There seems to be this fight going on between [the kitset company and the council] and we are stuck in the middle.’’
The couple entered into a contract with Quickbuild and two Marton builders to assemble their home but constant delays receiving parts, including wrong ones, slowed construction and the project took two months longer than forecasted.
When the Rangitı¯kei District Council examined the home, inspectors found Quickbuild had supplied bearers which weren’t in the pre-approved plans.
Bearers are the steel that attaches directly to the foundations, which support the floor.
The building report said one bearer had holes, and wasn’t galvanised to protect from rust.
It said the bearers must be replaced and coated to last 50 years.
Tim said the delays had drained their retirement savings, and they didn’t have the thousands of dollars needed to replace the bearers. Without a code of compliance their home couldn’t be insured, which left them feeling insecure and vulnerable.
The council’s findings are part of an independent review, and chief executive Ross Mcneil refused to answer questions.
Writing to the Brandons, council building and compliance officer Andrew Walker warned the couple they could face a $200,000 fine if they refused to fix the problem before March 4, which they haven’t.
Quickbuild chief Neil Colliver hired an independent engineer to assess the bearers and has applied to the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) for a determination.
He disputed that the bearers needed coating, and the engineer’s report said the bearers were ‘‘essentially interchangeable’’ with those in the approved plans.
‘‘Our engineer’s calculations prove the bearers are the same strength. But the council are not accepting this, despite often employing the same engineer for their own jobs.’’
Registered Master Builders Association chief executive David Kelly said replacing bearers was a ‘‘significant undertaking’’ and would involve lifting the building off its foundations. ‘‘It’s quite distressing
‘‘We don’t have any money. It’s quickly drying up and the stress and uncertainty isn’t good for us.’’ Linda Brandon
for people in that situation.’’
Kelly said the council could accept the independent engineer’s report but he believed Quickbuild had a duty to fix the problem. ‘‘They’ve [Quickbuild] got a contract and they need to deliver on that contract.’’
An MBIE spokesperson said home owners could lay a complaint with the council that denied the code of compliance.
If unresolved, they could seek a determination from the ministry to see whether the Building Code was correctly applied.
The spokesperson said Quickbuild was liable under the Consumer Guarantees Act for supplying the items in its initial plans. If a trader breached that obligation, the case could be taken to the Disputes Tribunal.
The Brandons hope a resolution will be reached out of court.
‘‘We don’t have any money,’’ Linda said. ‘‘It’s quickly drying up and the stress and uncertainty isn’t good for us ... It wouldn’t be for any elderly couple.’’