Confusion reigns over meth rules: landlords
Landlords say they are in limbo due to confusion about what is an acceptable level of methamphetamine contamination for housing.
The Tenancy Tribunal has confirmed it will follow the Government’s Gluckman report and generally accept 15 micrograms per 100cm2 as the minimum standard for concern about meth contamination in rental properties, if the testing was done after the report was published on May 28.
That report turned the methtesting industry on its head, suggesting that much of the worry about decontamination of rental properties had been unwarranted.
Housing New Zealand has now also opted to follow the Gluckman report’s standard, which principal adjudicator Melissa Poole indicated had forced the Tenancy Tribunal’s hand.
The tribunal could still opt for the stricter 1.5 micrograms limit per 100cm2 if there was evidence of meth manufacturing. This is because, in those circumstances, methamphetamine is taken as a proxy for other harmful chemicals that could be present.
But Tim Grafton, chief executive of the Insurance Council, said that was not in line with the approach of insurers.
‘‘Most insurers refer to Ministry of Health guidelines ... These guidelines reference the current standard, NZS8510, which specifies 1.5 micrograms per 100cm2 for highuse areas and 3.8 micrograms per 100cm2 for limited-use areas.
‘‘An insured is entitled to claim for any damage incurred which is covered by their insurance policy.
‘‘It’s feasible that will mean a landlord could claim for damage
‘‘The Tenancy Tribunal appears to be saying they will not consider any claim against the tenant unless there is evidence of [methamphetamine] manufacture.’’ Property investor Nick Gentle
done by meth which is below the level the Tenancy Tribunal is currently enforcing.’’
Andrew King, executive officer of the New Zealand Property Investors Federation, said the New Zealand standard needed to be updated to provide consistent.
But he said that while insurers were at a lower level than the tribunal, investors would not be left out of pocket.
Property investor Nick Gentle said the confusion was difficult to navigate.
‘‘What happens with a level of 10, for example? [Let’s] say I detect a level of 10 at the end of a tenancy, when at the start it was confirmed at zero?’’ he said.
‘‘The Tenancy Tribunal appears to be saying they will not consider any claim against the tenant unless there is evidence of manufacture, which implies that the tribunal would be happy with that property manager re-renting without saying anything about the meth traces.’’
The official standard could be reviewed once the regulations under the Residential Tenancy Act had been made, a Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment spokeswoman said.