EQC bill

My mother just received the bill for the house they bought after being retreated, it's $800.00
How can this be, the house they bought was in an area that no one was allowed access to for over two years after the Feb quake, ( in Sumner) EQC say its to do with all the claims made on it, but no one was even living in it or allowed on the property for two years. And as soon as it turned green it was put on the market and sold, it had very little damage.
They rang EQC who said they'd take $60.00 off

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 10:36 am

i assume it's the excess for the claims made. is that what you're referring to?

jonners2013, Sep 5, 11:18 am

I'm guessing the previous owners made a claim(or claims) and this is the excess payment for those claims.
Did your mother buy as an "as is" property? Maybe contact her lawyer?

kathy9, Sep 5, 11:31 am

Yes it's claims made, but considering no one was living in it to make claims on any supposed new damage after subsequent earth quakes it was a shock, they thought it would be between $400./$600 no one lived in it from 22nd of Feb, and considering the minor damage it seems odd!
Katy yes I think they need to talk to their lawyer, but then that'll probably cost them almost the extra $200. ???

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 11:55 am

Tell your mother to ask for copies of all the Scopes of Works done on the property, presumably for more than one claim. EQC say a houseowner has to pay 1% of the total claims, so one must assume that $80,000 of repair work was done on the property.
Your mother should also ask whether the claims included contents because surely she shouldn't have to pay 1% of the money paid out to replace any contents that were destroyed?

lankylass, Sep 5, 11:57 am

Previous owner ripping the system the EQC off and taking the payment without saying anything .
Thought with buying a place you should check for EQC claims and the agent selling the place should have told her about them .

martin11, Sep 5, 11:59 am

I'm a bit curious as to how that could happen.
Any claim made and paid by EQC was an arrangement/contract between the previous owner and EQC, and any excess which hadn't been deducted is the previous owner's problem to sort out. Land claim or other dwelling damage claim "cash settled" - would have had an excess deducted at time of payment.
$800 seems like the excess for an $80,000 Fletcher EQR job, which is rather more than "minor" IMO.
I wouldn't go to a lawyer just yet - they can "eat up" $800 rather quickly of things are messy. Things often seem to get very messy with EQC - because they're a pack of bungling useless incompetent fools who keep appalling records in most cases.
I think I'd throw it back to EQC, and ask for them to disclose the full details of the claim so you can see how the $800 excess was calculated. Otherwise, it's just like a pro-forma invoice scam - they could make up anything they liked. My guess is that they'll come back at you citing "privacy" for the claimant as reason to not disclose those details. In which case throw it straight back at them saying thanks for confirming that as the claim was an arrangement/contract between EQC and that previous owner, then so is the outstanding excess.
If they reject that, then next step may be the lawyer who did the conveyancing when she purchased the house, just to check whether there wasn't some clause somewhere allowing the vendor to pass on the excess.

mm12345, Sep 5, 12:11 pm

isn't there a minimum excess of something like $200? if so, the $800 could be for multiple small claims perhaps?

jonners2013, Sep 5, 12:42 pm

Thanks everyone I will pass your comments on, :) it's hard when their 80 to understand it all and I think something is not right, there's no way this house had $80.000. Of damage, just some minor cracks in walls that needed plastering/painting and minor cracks in the stucco outside, and the tile floor,

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 12:43 pm

http://www.eqc.govt.nz/sites/public_files/Property%20Lawyer%2015-3%20Page%209%20EQC%20article.pdf
try this PDF link from The Property Lawyer, the quarterly journal of the Property Law Section of the New Zealand Law Society]. it explains who is responsible for excesses.

greenfruit1, Sep 5, 12:50 pm


Yes and how can that be right when they only fixed the house once, my insurance paid for my accomodation for ten weeks and a new driveway, they charged me $200.00 my excess, they came round here three times,
Doesn't seem right to me

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 12:53 pm

Note for future for NZ homeowners - don't lodge multiple claims if there are aftershocks (likely) following any major quake unless it's blindingly obvious that significant extra damage has occurred and the original damage has been scoped.
The EQC "cap" is going to be raised to $200k (&GST), if they were to "apportion" claims the way they did in Chch under that scenario, then hardly anyone would be "over cap" unless a town got leveled from a single large quake.
The liability/exposure private insurers have for future quakes in NZ has (or soon will be) been greatly reduced, yet premiums have gone through the roof. No surprise that the highest paid executive in NZ is from IAG. If she's been in negotiation with Gerry, she's done rather well - reducing future risk exposure to her company on the back of vastly increased premium income.

mm12345, Sep 5, 1:42 pm

Dont the bills go to the owner at the time, not the current owner?

Either it's for a property they owned during the quakes, or it should be addressed to their seller.

We are still expecting our bill for the house we owned then, and our sellers have received two notices of theirs here (I assume it's that, it gets RTS each time). We do not expect the couple who bought our house to receive any bill.

This sounds dodgy.

astrophe, Sep 5, 1:45 pm

It all sounds very dodgy, and mm12345 gives good advice.
It might be mixed up in one of the many EQC stuff-ups?
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/8574725/Overpaid-claims-of-100m-by-EQC-revealed
or one of the Fletcher "overcharges".
If you know someone with the leaked EQR spreadsheet get them to look at the address to see whats there.

david_270, Sep 5, 1:59 pm

My question would be, did the previous owners get a cash settlement, and keep the money, doing no work? Our cash settlement had the excess already taken off. I thought the recent bills sent out were for excess on repairs done by Fletchers etc, not cash settlements. To me, buying a house 'as is where is' means that no work had been done.
Surely, your parents lawyer, when handling the sales process would have have demanded a copy that work had been done, or a copy that a cash settlement was already paid out to the sellers?

dogbond, Sep 5, 2:02 pm

We got our account today for excess. They are saying it cost $41,000, acct was for $400. My question is how do we know that their amounts are correct.

sharonann1, Sep 5, 5:01 pm

& her lawyer is the 1 who is supposed to investigate any claims on the property ( assuming she used 1 )

elect70, Sep 5, 5:31 pm

They bought the house, before it was fixed after getting an engineers report done on it, as I said no one lived in it from the 22nd of Feb, so how did they come up with four claims, my mother expected as I said the bill from EQC to be between $400. To $600 considering the minor damage, there cant have been more damage after the 22nd of Feb, it may have gotten a little worse but no new damage,
Thank you David I will check that out

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 5:38 pm

Best bet is to just ring EQC and ask them to explain it. No point going off on a tangent if it's not necessary.

jonners2013, Sep 5, 5:40 pm


Yes it's sicking isn't it, no other business could expect payment without an itemised account of work done,
It feels like we're being lied to!

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 5:40 pm


If you read above you'd see they did and EQC said they'd deduct $60.00

nz_nicola, Sep 5, 5:41 pm

Residential Advisory Service (RAS) - were set up to help people deal with EQC. They provide lawyers free of charge for a set number of hours to anyone having these sorts of issues. They are great and free.

rob312, Sep 6, 8:24 am


yes i did read above thanks. but that sounds like EQC are just knocking a bit off to keep them happy. it doesn't actually explain what the $800 bill is. that's why i'd go back and ask them - otherwise you're just guessing.

jonners2013, Sep 6, 8:28 am

if you read the above link it looks likely that because your parents bought the property before the repairs were done then they will have had the benefit of the claims therefore the liability for the excesses are theirs. They can ask EQC to provide details of the excesses and what claims they attach to. There could have been a claim for the Sept quake, Feb 22, the June quakes and the 23 Dec quake and that would make 4 = $800. Ask EQC for the detail. If you check the agreement for sale and purchase, which they should have a copy of, it will say whether the claims have been assigned to them, and I suspect they will have been, and that will give the active claim numbers for when the property was purchased. If they dont have the agreement simply phone their solicitor and ask for a copy - it will be on file.Assignment of eqc claims will be listed in the special terms of the contract nearer the back.

bigrichie, Sep 6, 12:12 pm

"above link" as in the one posted that gives you the rules for who pays that is.

bigrichie, Sep 6, 12:13 pm

I have just received mine from EQC, now firstly I want to stress it is not the amount but the ethics that get me. Our property was munted in the first quake, following advice from EQC we put in a claim for each subsequent quake but there was only damage to already munted buildings so no further money came our way. Our house was demolished as were two outbuildings, two other outbuildings needed minor repairs. We have been told that as these were repaired we have to pay for the work that Hawkins did in organising the work. I never asked them to do this, as everyone will recall they were appointed by Government to oversee the work, all my buildings were munted/damaged in the first quake, one event one massive Insurance claim, so this bill is just extortion, I never asked for Hawkins to do anything, it was forced on me, I paid my Insurance to cover ALL buildings on the property but EQC say that they were separate, what a crock of s. t.

granda1, Sep 6, 1:42 pm

I have just now tried to access the CERA survey line only to find that it no longer available, just what the hell are these people playing at?

granda1, Sep 6, 1:45 pm

Interesting, if 'nothing' was done to the house, even if the previous owner did get a payment, that anyone should get a bill. A few years before the EQs we made an EQC claim on some subsidence under out garage, they just made the payment to us, less the excess. So I can't see IF nothing has ever been done to the house how any excess comes into it?

deanna14, Sep 7, 9:21 am

Our place too was totally munted in the Feb quake, though like you I registed another claim for the next big one, as I was advised to do, as there was more damage, but it didn't change the overall picture. We only ever had one excess taken off our claim.

deanna14, Sep 7, 9:23 am



Isn't the number of bills for excess related to the number of times they came out and fixed your property, rather than the number of claims?

If you registered 3 clams and they came out once and fixed them all at once - one excess.

If they came out and fixed your damage from September's, and then you registered a claim in February for which they made further repairs - two excesses.

astrophe, Sep 7, 9:46 am



Yes we had 2 claims and got a bill for 2 excess , was told about this in the early stages both verbally and in writing . Just got our bill recently

martin11, Sep 7, 9:57 am

Eqc excess are not like the insurer excess, they only know how much the excess would be, once repairs are finished. My pick is that the repairs have been done, and they have finally worked out the excess.

stupettig, Sep 7, 10:34 am

If the property hadn't been repaired or cash settled prior to purchase, vender and purchaser will have had to sign a Deed of Assignment (DOA), relinquishing the repairs/cash and information in the EQC file from the vendor to the new owner. Mine stated that the vendor was to pay any excess or excesses. From my understanding, this was standard for all DOA's signed, so check what your mothers DOA states, she should have a copy from her solicitor upon signing their copy. EQC incorrectly removed the excess from my cash settlement, and after a bit of prompting (threatening my solicitor get involved) they must have read the DOA and said they would return the excess to me.

As EQC are discussing the file with her, she must have signed a DOA changing it to her name, otherwise it would be against the Privacy Act discussing the file if still in the previous owners name. I know this first hand as EQC took nearly 6months to load my DOA so I had no access to my file for that period of time

nzmax, Sep 7, 10:49 am

We registered 4 claims and have only been charged $400 excess, $24500 cost, 3 different repairs. (chimney and roof, both fixed at the same time). Only Einstein can understand that one!

family007, Sep 7, 10:55 am



You may have made 4 claims, but likely damage was apportioned between 2 claims and not the 3rd and 4th claim. Upon saying that, EQC removed $400 ($200 for Sept claim and $200 from Feb claim) from my cash settlement, even though damage was apportioned to Feb claim only, and depending on who you spoke to at EQC. some said that an excess was payable to any claim made whether damage was apportioned to it or not, and some said an excess was only payable on a claim with damage apportioned against it. If EQC don't understand how their own system works, Im not sure how we are supposed to understand it.

nzmax, Sep 7, 11:22 am


Agree!

nz_nicola, Sep 7, 3:05 pm

Thanks everyone, the house was bought at auction I'm pretty sure the owners deal was they wanted nothing more to do with the property and that my mother and stepfather would be taking over the EQC claim, I believe the property would not have had damage from the Sept quake, as even after the Feb quake the damage was minor,
i will pass the info here on to them, but I think they'll just roll over and pay it, there's so much wrong with the way things are/have been done it's not funny!

nz_nicola, Sep 7, 3:11 pm


It's meant to be per claim, but it seems crazy when the house has only been fixed once, that we/they are expected to pay four excesses,

nz_nicola, Sep 7, 3:21 pm

Interesting you say that, as it made me recall how we got two $100,000 payments from EQC (Total Loss) but only paid one excess. No repairs done as demolished. So two claims were accepted.

deanna14, Sep 7, 6:58 pm

I rang EQC this morning regarding our amount, they are sending copies of all invoices related to our amount. I am not objecting to paying the 10%, but find it hard to see where the amount they have said was spent on the house. At no time while any work was being carried out did the contractors say this particular job would cost xxxx amount of dollars. They do advise it would take up to 21days for information to arrive. I said that's fine cause your not getting any money until I have seen and am happy with the costs.

sharonann1, Sep 8, 1:48 pm



I am the same. I have requested copies of all invoices relating to the amount claimed. My contractor had on the scope of works, scaffolding, removal of carpet, floor covering, strange as I had lifted all the carpet before they actually started painting inside and a few other things, that were not used. I have no idea what the scaffolding was for or where it was used, as my house is single level and they only painted one wall outside and 3 walls inside that only needed ladders. the carpet the contractor supposedly removed cost me 3 trips to the dump and approx $90 dollars in fees to dump it.

gran333, Sep 8, 6:21 pm

Seems like some of the Fletcher rorts are coming to the surface.
Who is going to let them get away with it?

And for anyone who missed it:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/71771196/late-inadequate-and-frequently-defective

david_270, Sep 8, 6:40 pm

Looks like we got off rather lightly?

Split into two claims at about 50% each.
Total repairs were about $48,000 plus over $1,000 for contents claim to insurance company.
Total just under $50,000, so excess is just under $500.
They took off $200 for contents claim excess that insurance company has deducted.
Excess balance to pay is now under $300.

They have payment plans on the back of the forms, so will probably make them wait by drip feeding $25 a month for the next twelve months.

sparkyz, Sep 10, 6:02 pm

good luck to your parents, eqc sure can get things wrong (understatement of the decade) . someone else's boxing day claim was lumped onto my file somehow, although eqc are still virtually calling me a liar but unable to provide any proof i made a claim for boxing day quake damage. insurance company don't seem concerned, perhaps more interested in an extra 'cap' payment!

lambrat, May 26, 4:31 am

Share this thread