Homebuyers face confusion over unconsented work

New building consent exemptions are confusing homeowners and buyers, a Mackenzie councillor says.

Mackenzie District councillor Jan Spriggs believed new building exemptions and ownership changes were fuelling unconsented work, where people may not realise the legislation and standards for compliance.

"Properties change hands and [there's] a risk that comes with it ... Government exemptions have confused some people."

The consent exemptions, introduced by the Government in January, allowed for unconsented granny flats, solar panels, small additions under 10 square metres, boundary changes, and off-site building of granny flats.

Spriggs said "more flexibility" in the guidelines meant "more responsibility" for sellers and buyers, with homeowners still required to comply with standards and legislation.

It was also up to prospective owners to ensure the property complied, she said.

The consent exemptions were aimed at increasing housing supply, reducing costs and giving homeowners more flexibility.

A recent request for the Mackenzie District Council to clarify its position on unconsented buildings and additions, made under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA), has drawn attention to the issue.

That request, lodged in September by an anonymous prospective buyer in the Twizel market, outlined concerns about the number of properties with unconsented dwellings or additions.

The buyer told the council they had "seriously considered" purchasing a property in the town for a number of years but found many of properties listed for sale had unconsented "buildings, facilities, and dwellings".

"In several cases, the properties appear to include buildings, toilet facilities, solar panel installations, rainwater collection systems, and in some instances multiple dwellings or accommodation structures," they said.

The buyer, who the council did not name, said they wanted to understand what protections or processes exist for prospective buyers who are encountering these issues in the market.

In its response, published on its website, the council said while it conducted investigations into alleged consent breaches it did not have control over the disclosure or remedy of unconsented work.

"The council proactively works to identify non-compliances, and in other cases, responds to non-compliances when they are brought to our attention. Enforcement may be taken depending on the type and nature of the non-compliance."

It said prospective buyers could access the district's property information via the council website to establish what consents were in place for a property.

"Council holds information on properties regarding consents which can be sourced through LIM or property file requests."

A Real Estate Institute of New Zealand (REINZ) spokesperson said agents had to disclose known building problems and other defects to buyers under the Real Estate Authority's code of conduct.

Agents who became aware of a potential problem were expected to discuss it with the vendor and seek supporting information, the spokesperson said.

"Where a ... salesperson would identify a significant potential risk of hidden or underlying defects, they must obtain evidence or expert advice supporting the vendor's confirmation that there is no defect."

For consenting issues, they said the agent should make appropriate enquiries regarding the property, including through council records.

"Buyers should receive relevant information about the unconsented building work before an offer is drawn up and submitted, so they can make an informed decision and seek legal or expert advice."

While agents were not required to disclose known problems in marketing or at open homes, the spokesperson said the buyer should receive the information before an offer is made.

The council began addressing consent issues in July, hiring a short-term accommodation compliance officer to investigate properties that were not correctly consented or were not paying the correct rates.

By early September, the council confirmed they had 655 properties under investigation for potential breaches of he district's short-term visitor accommodation rules.