8 June 2022
Media: Rotorua Daily Post
Topic: Woman seeking Code Compliance Certificate
Enquiry
Hi again
I’ve now received some information from the builder of 43 Carroll Pl, Graham Griffin, and have some statements from him to put to the council for right of reply as well as some additional questions, marked below. We have decided to hold this story now to allow you time to respond to the below. Can you please respond by no later than Wednesday June 8 at midday.
Thank you.
Statements from Graham Griffin for right of reply
- We were not aware of any ground issues prior to receiving a building consent, or at any time during the build. You would have to ask council why they never did their due diligence prior to signing off the subdivision and releasing it to the public. We applied for a building consent and a LIM report as we always did, to ascertain if there were any issues with the site. The LIM report stated that there were no issues, and council just required a test to make sure the water table was more than 1500mm below existing ground level, which it was and that the ground complied for a standard 3604 slab to be built on that site, the ground was confirmed by our engineer, and the engineers report was given to council prior to council issuing a consent to build, and the foundation was signed off passed by council, allowing us to proceed with the build.
- Council employed the services of an engineering company to do tests when we were told they wouldn’t issue a COC because the land was showing signs of subsidence. They informed council that because it was also built beside a stream, there was a chance of lateral subsidence also, meaning the land could go sideways towards the stream. Their (Tonkin & Taylor) recommendation was that council stabilise the bank with large poles driven into the bank, but council ignored that recommendation, saying it was just a recommendation, not a requirement.
- I quite believe that Jenny has been extremely stressed and not to downplay it, it has been extremely stressful for myself and not without cost financially. Council in the meantime have pushed Jenny and myself from pillar to post, while ignoring the fact that the house was built on this section on the advice of council and at no time during the construction were we advised of any potential issue. I believe I have done everything I possibly can to advance this, while the council just refuses to discuss it, not their problem they say. Wrong, if they had done their due diligence in the first place, none of us would be in this situation. We did our job by getting the information (LIM) from the council. Had we known there were issues with the land, we could’ve designed a foundation suitable, as we have done on numerous occasions, when having the correct information in front of us, at the beginning. Council’s engineer told us initially not to go for a determination through MBIE, then about 2 years later, the same engineer told us we should go for a determination. My understanding is that because of the ground issues, the determination would not have gone in our favour, and therefore absolving the council of responsibility. Council have said to you they will not discuss this through the media, yet any attempts by myself, Jenny or others trying to help resolve this issue have been met with the same response. Council has never wanted to discuss it.
- Rotorua Lakes Council is totally to blame and they should admit they got it wrong and sit down with Jenny, and find an acceptable solution, to ease the stress that their incompetence has caused her. It might also consider reimbursing myself for the unnecessary costs that I have incurred because of their incompetence.
Additional questions:
- What due diligence did the council do on the land before signing off on the subdivision?
- If an engineer report was done, has the council taken/considered action against any of those engineers?
- Why didn’t you take on board the recommendations in the Tonkin & Taylor report to stabilise the stream bank with large poles? If this was done, could the property then be given a CCC?
- What specifically needs to be done to the property to achieve it getting a CCC?
- Why specifically did the council buy the house at Kipling Cres? (This question wasn’t specifically answered in the last response).
- Why were all other properties given CCCs and Jenny Zhong’s house wasn’t (this wasn’t specifically answered in the last response – if there were issues with the land, why was Jenny Zhong’s house the only one not to get it? Why is her house worse?)
- I again ask you to clarify this sentence: “Council cannot legally issue a Code Compliance Certificate for this property due to a breach of the Building Code”. Does this mean there is a problem with the land? If so, why can’t the council help fix it or work with Jenny Zhong to come up with a plan to help get a CCC?
Response
From Manager Planning and Development Solutions Jason Ward:
We have invited Ms Zhong to meet with us to discuss her situation and options directly rather than trying to resolve these matters through the media.
Council cannot legally issue a Code Compliance Certificate for her property because settlement of the home exceeded the tolerances allowed for in the Building Code, constituting a breach of the Building Code.
Lateral spread which you’ve referred to was not a factor in Council’s decision regarding the Code Compliance Certificate.
Council relied on information known and provided at the time to assist in making decisions on subdivision consent, building consent and the Code Compliance Certificate application. With respect to the subdivision and building consents, this included reports from experts submitted with the applications by the applicants. Council became aware of potential issues with settlement in some parts of the subdivision after receiving Ms Zhong’s CCC application, following investigation of a site there by consultants.
There were a number of discussions with the then owners of GJ Gardner and Ms Zhong regarding her situation.