Christchurch earthquakes

[dangerous]

It will be interesting to see what the Govt do with all the houses etc they 'purchase'.

as said all will be junked and the land looking at the red zone around and following the river (there will be a reason for there zoneing other than removing rooted properties) and you will find a reserve running from town out to the beach... walk ways bike ways etc... give it time.

[Winston001]

I suspect the Govt cheque will be made payable to the bank that holds the mortgage in the first instance - else people could take the money and leave.

Absolutely. Remember, the land is sold to the government and any money owing on that land (which includes buildings attached to it) must first be applied to secured debts. Rates, mortgages, and any other registered charges.

The owner gets what is left but can get a new mortgage for the replacement property. The problem will be the new loan is likely to be a larger sum. Plus people whose jobs have disappeared are in a real bind.

... insurance still covers for replacement value of the house so you wont just get the rates value. so its not so bad after all

You'd think so wouldn't you. However, what if the house is only partly damaged and easy to repair? Why would an insurance co pay out say $300k when $50k will do the repair.?

That is a core problem. The answer may have to be legislation which condemns all red zone properties = no repair possible = total loss = insurance co has to pick up the replacement tab.

Admittedly this problem doesn't exist if you simply take the house and land offer.

[Subike]

Will tenders come up for removal of some houses?
I am sure there would be some in the red zone that are still well worth repairing, but the land they sit on is fucked. Even those undamaged on solid land, but just in the zone.
So will there be the possibility of houses being picked up and relocated,
No problem with power lines or damaging roads, as they are going anyway.
A good weatherboard house, transfered to a section,
must be a viabile and swift action for someone without a home.
Now who already has a section that can be used.........put in a tender for removal of X house on X street?

[dangerous]

Absolutely. Remember, the land is sold to the government

I wonder if they will be asked to give it to some bunch that reckon ther were hard done by a couple a hundred years back...

[cynna]

You'd think so wouldn't you. However, what if the house is only partly damaged and easy to repair? Why would an insurance co pay out say $300k when $50k will do the repair.?

That is a core problem. The answer may have to be legislation which condemns all red zone properties = no repair possible = total loss = insurance co has to pick up the replacement tab.

Admittedly this problem doesn't exist if you simply take the house and land offer.

it gets worse - my parents house is in the red zone but is undamaged therefore it has nothing to do with the insurance company. they will only get the ratable value which probably wont even buy them the same size land anywhere let alone a house

a 3 bedroom house, 3 car garage with a 2 room sleepout on a .098 hectare section rated at $217 000!!

[ajturbo]

I wonder if they will be asked to give it to some bunch that reckon ther were hard done by a couple a hundred years back...

my grand parents lived in Sumner... i think i should be given some of that land...

[FJRider]

Will tenders come up for removal of some houses?
I am sure there would be some in the red zone that are still well worth repairing, but the land they sit on is fucked. Even those undamaged on solid land, but just in the zone.
So will there be the possibility of houses being picked up and relocated,
No problem with power lines or damaging roads, as they are going anyway.
A good weatherboard house, transfered to a section,
must be a viabile and swift action for someone without a home.
Now who already has a section that can be used.........put in a tender for removal of X house on X street?

I would say speed rather than cost will prevail ... Neighbourhoods gone in a day ...

[oldrider]

I wonder how many ex Christchurch houses will end up on the vacant sections across the road from us?

[Grumph]

I've already been told of one case in Kaiapoi where the house was a write-off and the land was not much better...owner after receiving insurance and EQC payout approached the insurance co and asked if he could tender for the house.- less then 4 years old apparently..yes, sir you can.
Tendered - I was told 10 grand...cut the house into 3 - not a lot of cutting needed apparently, moved it to a section he already owned up Ohoka/west Eyreton way and reassembled his house.
Nice deal if you can get it...

[FJRider]

I wonder how many ex Christchurch houses will end up on the vacant sections across the road from us?

The cost of getting them there, may prohibit that happening ... there's plenty of cheap(er ?) house's closer ...

[Subike]

The cost of getting them there, may prohibit that happening ... there's plenty of cheap(er ?) house's closer ...

you think so FJ, lets see

$15000 to demolish house $7000 to dump the rubble.
Owner buys a new house and builds in a new area. 6 mths
$15000 to remove house on transporter, $7000 to put on new foundations,
Owner moves into relocated house in 6 weeks,
Problem solved

I have no fucking idea what the costs would be in reality, just think its a realistic option that should be looked at.

[gsxr]

Because to cover every eventuality the levy up until now would have been far more than 6/10ths of fuck all and you and everybody else would have been complaining about that instead.

Kind of like ACC.

I believe our policies would have been at best the same or very slightly more as insurance companies have had to factor in the difference between EQC liability and actual insured value.
I don.t think anyone envisaged the utter destruction that has occurred in many areas of Christchurch nor the fact that it is impossible to maintain or repair infrastructure in certain areas of Christchurch nor any other city or community in New Zealand.
Quite simply a lot of the properties are below either sea level or the Avon River bed.
Whilst it is possible on occasions to push shit up hill in the long term scheme of things it isn't practical.

[FJRider]

you think so FJ, lets see

$15000 to demolish house $7000 to dump the rubble.
Owner buys a new house and builds in a new area. 6 mths
$15000 to remove house on transporter, $7000 to put on new foundations,
Owner moves into relocated house in 6 weeks,
Problem solved

I have no fucking idea what the costs would be in reality, just think its a realistic option that should be looked at.

You think so ... lets see ... a 20 Tonne digger's hire rate is about $120 an hour ... two hours and most houses are on the back of a truck heading for landfill ...

As opposed most of those affected ... want a HOME ... NOW .... and will take the money and BUY NOW ...

There will be some (business's) that may speculate during these times ... but I very much doubt if it will be very wide-spread ...

[gsxr]

The figure quoted at this afternoons public meeting was quoted by Roger Sutton at $15,000 for a standard house.
Page A9 of yesterdays press quotes "It costs a minimum of $15000 to $20.000 to demolish a house ".
Some are obviously going to make some seriously good money out of this.

[Winston001]

Its a tough call for all parties - government, council, insurance, and people.

Primarily the earthquake is pure bad luck. Just like a flood or hurricane. Or a heart-attack. Those with insurance are partly covered. EQC helps too. Taxpayers contribute emergency housing and welfare but that can only be temporary.

The taxpayer is going a lot further and buying condemned properties. That seems generous and compassionate to me. Is it realistic to get into arguments over existing valuations on 5000+ properties? Imagine how long that would take, the stress, the delay, the inevitable heartbreak for some.

No. I think the government offers are fair to our whole community.