Categories


Tags

Building Inspectorapartment inspectionsBuilders report WaikatoAuckland building inspectionsBuilding reportsHamilton house inspectionsFranklin buiders reportsBuilding inspection ChristchurchNorth Shore house inspectionsFranklin builders reportsbuilding surveyorhouse inspection West Aucklandbuilders report east AucklandBuilding inspectionspre purchase inspection ChristchurchBuilding Inspectionpre purchase inspection south AucklandAccredited Building SurveyorHouse inspection Taurangabuilding inspection north shorePre purchase inspection Waikatobuilders report west Aucklandbuilders report Palmerston Northhouse inspection AucklandPre purchase inspection HamiltonProperty inspection WellingtonNZIBS builders reportsHouse inspection CanterburySouth Auckland house inspectionsWest Auckland House InspectionsBuilders report Pukekohebuilding inspection Palmerston NorthOpus builders reportsbuilders report Wellingtonhouse inspection South AucklandBOINZ Accredited Building SurveyorBuilding inspection RotoruaRotorua house inspectionsAccredited Building Surveyor WellingtonAuckland house inspectionshouse inspection East Aucklandproperty inspectionsCanterbury property inspectionspre purchase inspection north shoreRotorua builders reportsPukekohe builders reportsbuilders report north shoreHouse inspection WaikatoHouse inspection Wellingtonhouse inspection ChristchurchEast Auckland house inspectionsconsumer magazine house inspectionspre purchase inspection east Aucklandhotel inspectionsChristchurch builders reportsbuilders report south AucklandNZIBI property inspectionsAuckland builders reporthouse inspectionsBuilding Inspection Wellingtonbuilding inspection Bay of PlentyHouse inspection Palmerston NorthTaupo house inspectionsNZIBI builders reportsSouth Auckland building inspectionsPre purchase inspection Pukekohehouse inspections WellingtonProperty inspection AucklandPre purchase inspection FranklinCommercial inspectionshouse inspection Bay of Plentymotel inspectionslight commercial inspectionspre purchase inspection TaupoSouth Auckland builders reportHouse inspection PukekoheCoromandel house inspectionsHouse inspections AucklandFranklin house inspectionsBuilders report HamiltonBuilders reportpre purchase inspection RotoruaBuilders report Franklinbuilding inspection AucklandBuildling inspection Pukekohehouse inspection FranklinBuilders report CanterburyPukekohe house inspectionsBuilding inspection HamiltonBOINZ builders reportshouse inspection north shorepre purchase inspection Aucklandhouse inspection Hamiltonbuilding inspection Tauranga


Archive

2017

2018

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

Leaky building class action against James Hardie gets go-ahead

October 18, 2016 at 11:12 AM

 Last updated 13:49, October 16 2016

Tracey Cridge and Mark Unwin outside their leaky Wellington home, which they believe is due to the use of HardieTex.

Tracey Cridge and Mark Unwin outside their leaky Wellington home, which they believe is due to the use of HardieTex.

A group of leaky building owners have been given the green light to take a class action lawsuit against cladding maker James Hardie.

The action, started by Wellington residents, claims James Hardie was negligent in its design, manufacture and supply of the Harditex and Titanboard cladding systems. Thousands of properties were built using Harditex and or Titanboard through the 1990s and early 2000s.

James Hardie denies the allegations.

Scott Woodhead had gone unconditional on his first house in August before discovering leaky home problems.

Scott Woodhead had gone unconditional on his first house in August before discovering leaky home problems.

Parker & Associates is representing more than 80 property owners, 19 for the Titanboard claim, and more than 60 for the Harditex claim.

READ MORE:
More than 70 home owners explore HardieTex class action
Leaky homes class action against James Hardie filed
$200 million 'leaky building' NZ class action filed against James Hardie

In December last year, Parker & Associates added a second group of leaky property owners to the cladding action with a group of 19 commercial units alleging negligence and breach of the Fair Trading Act in relation to Titanboard.

The first Harditex claim was brought by Tracey Cridge and Mark Unwin from Wellington, who were shocked to find their Island Bay home had widespread water damage.

What initially appeared to be a small leak was revealed by experts to be widespread internal water damage with an estimated repair bill of more than $300,000.

The High Court has said the Cridge proceedings would have an opt-in period of 10 weeks from the date final representative orders were made, which were expected soon.

A second Harditex claim was bought by Katrina Fowler and Scott Woodhead, who own a Wellington duplex completed in 2000. The High Court has said the Fowler proceedings would have an opt-in period of four weeks from the date final representative orders are made.

The Titanboard proceedings would have an opt-in period of two weeks from the date final representative orders are made.

The group's lawyer, Dan Parker of Parker & Associates, said it may be the last chance for owners wanting compensation relating to Harditex and Titanboard to get involved.

"Opt-in periods range from 10, four and two weeks from the judgment date depending on the representative claim, so there is a real urgency for those yet to opt in to get onboard."

A recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the leaky schools litigation held that a product liability claim against a cladding manufacturer was arguable and not subject to the 10-year limitation period under the Building Act.

Group members were pooling resources to pay for the class action, without the need for separate litigation funding.

Parker urged owners of buildings constructed since 1987 using Harditex or Titanboard to get in touch to see whether they may be eligible to join the claim.

 - www.Stuff.co.nz