Reno ‘nightmare’ goes to court
A ‘‘classic Kiwi renovation’’ turned into an expensive ‘‘nightmare’’ for a Christchurch man who failed to get consents for the building work done on his beach house in Abel Tasman National Park.
Semi-retired Christchurch businessman Volkmar Wollenweber appeared in the Nelson District Court on Wednesday on six charges of carrying out building work without a building consent, and three charges of carrying out restricted building work without a licence on his Awaroa Inlet property. He was fined $17,250.
Defence lawyer Marty Logan said Wollenweber never intended to breach building regulations, as he hadn’t anticipated doing such extensive work on the house. ‘‘What this has turned into is almost a classic Kiwi renovation nightmare.’’
Wollenweber purchased the property with his wife, with the plan to keep it as a bach, Logan said. ‘‘The intention was he would give it a lick of paint and repair the cracks in the stucco cladding, but the rest of it was to make it more comfortable, installing insulation in the walls, ceiling and under the floor, and double glazing for the windows.’’
Logan said Wollenweber started in one room, where there was a terrible smell due to a rat infestation in the walls and the floor ‘‘bounced like a trampoline’’ due to rotten piles. He then discovered the cladding was not watertight and needed to be replaced, and things ‘‘steamrolled’’ from there.
The first time the Wollenwebers used the fireplace revealed structural problems with the chimney, Logan said. The wetback disintegrated and flooded the house. Daylight was visible through rusted-out parts of the roof, which needed to be replaced.
‘‘It wasn’t a pre-planned complete rebuild, it was just one thing after another.’’
Given that Wollenweber was replacing ‘‘like with like’’, he didn’t think consent was needed, Logan said. In hindsight, he wished he had demolished the bach and started again.
Last November, a Tasman District Council investigator visited the property following reports of unauthorised building work. The bach had been reclad, the roof was at a different angle, a kitchen had been built outside, an outdoor shower had been plumbed in, there were new piles, and a new log burner had been installed.
No building consents had been applied for or issued.
Wollenweber told the council he had personally done the building work, that the entire roof – including trusses – had been replaced, and no advice had been sought from the council.
Council lawyer Nathan Batts said Wollenweber ‘‘genuinely believed he did not have to obtain a building consent’’, which the council found difficult to accept.
‘‘Mr Wollenweber comes from a family of builders, and when he started working in New Zealand, it was in the trades – tiling, painting and renovation.’’
Batts said Wollenweber was clearly familiar with the Building Act and its requirements, as he sought to rely on the statutory exemption of maintenance and repair. But the work done on the Awaroa house amounted to a ‘‘complete rebuild’’ of the existing dwelling, along with significant new additions.
Judge David Ruth said the court’s view was that Wollenweber knew ‘‘full well’’ what his obligations were and chose to ignore them.
He said it was concerning that Wollenweber had admitted that some of the work, particularly in relation to load-bearing piles, had not been to standard.
He agreed that Wollenweber had taken some responsibility for the problems with the build. In accordance with the Building Act, 90 per cent of the fine would be paid to the council and the remaining amount to the Crown.
‘‘It was just one thing after another.’’ Defence lawyer Marty Logan