The Dunedin City Council will consider signing up to a $1 billion package requiring it to pay a share of leaky home claim settlements in future, a council manager says.
Council chief building control officer Neil McLeod said yesterday the council had already indicated it agreed "in principle" with the Weathertight Homes Resolution Services (Financial Assistance Package) Bill.
The Bill, which passed its third reading in Parliament on Tuesday, offered homeowners a 25% contribution towards the actual cost of leaky home repairs from the Government.
Depending upon which local authorities opted in or out of the scheme, homeowners might also receive another 25% from their council, leaving them with 50% of the bill.
The voluntary package was in addition to the disputes and litigation process already available to homeowners, but was also conditional on homeowners forgoing the right to sue local authorities or the Crown, information on the Department of Building and Housing website said.
Mr McLeod said he was yet to see details of the finalised package, but it was "definitely" of interest to the council.
"We would agree in principle, but of course that's subject to knowing the details of how the scheme was meant to work.
"We'll look at whatever was passed and make a decision."
That was despite the council having made just two payments, totalling $182,000, to owners of leaky homes in Dunedin.
A third Dunedin property, owned by Michael Beazley and Deborah Wai Kapohe, had been declared a leaky home by the department, but work on a possible settlement was continuing.
Building and construction Minister Maurice Williamson said, in a statement, the new package offered a "fair solution" but urged homeowners to act quickly.
Claims could only be lodged up until 10 years after building work was completed, meaning owners close to the limit should lodge their claims with the department to "stop the clock", he said.
However, Reconstruct managing director David Holloway, whose company had dealt with 500 leaky homes in Auckland, in February warned it was likely many other leaky homes across Dunedin and Otago were yet to be detected.
Climatic conditions in the south meant problems were slower to emerge than in Auckland, meaning the 10-year deadline could be missed by homeowners, he said.
Asked to respond, a spokeswoman for Mr Williamson said all building work was subject to the same 10-year limitation, but buildings that were not weathertight showed signs of water ingress "well within 10 years".
There were practical difficulties gathering and hearing evidence, and trying to determine liability, after 10 years, and extending the limit was "not ultimately in the best interests" of those who owned leaky homes.
"Even if they could claim after 10 years it might be difficult to get compensation ... Statutory limits such as this were introduced to provide clarity for all parties involved and are best applied with no exceptions."
Mr McLeod said he had no evidence leaky homes in Dunedin were "flying under the radar".
