Accepting a Jack and Pack has unforeseen consequences. The process involves exceptions from a building consent and Existing Use Rights. These are the rights of the owner of the land and the property, not the insurance companies. Allowing the insurance company to use there rights transfers a significant amount of risk and liability onto the claimant. Risk the claimant had insurance cover for. The insurance company has a duty of disclosure and has to hold the claimant harmless. This part has been missed in the insurance claim settlements. FIrst consequence, if the repair fails, ground gives, Owners cost. Second consequence, As no building consent a Hazard notice is not put on the lim. When issued, up to 50% reduction in house value. Owners loss Third consequence, Due to the hazard notice EQC may determine that they will not cover the property in a future flood event. Due to the EQC decision the insurance company (if insured at all) can also deny the claim. Owners loss. These practices can not be deemed acceptable recovery following a natural disaster IMHO This treatment of people I find cruel and inhuman. It is time to step up and deliver the duty of care that people are owed after all this time.
Posted on: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 03:05:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015