Meth contamination rules still unclear, confusion for landlords

Thursday, 25 October 2018

Landlords say they have been left in limbo by confusion around what is an acceptable level of methamphetamine contamination for housing.

The Tenancy Tribunal has confirmed it will follow the Government's Gluckman report and generally accept 15 micrograms per 100cm2 as the minimum standard for concern about methamphetamine contamination in rental properties, if the testing was done after the report was published on May 28.

That report turned the meth-testing industry on its head, suggesting that much of the worry about decontamination of rental properties had been unwarranted.

Housing New Zealand has now also opted to follow the Gluckman report's standard, which principal adjudicator Melissa Poole indicated forced the Tenancy Tribunal's hand.

**READ MORE: 

* The meth house is a myth: There's 'no risk' from drug smoking residue, Govt report finds

* Housing NZ spent $90m on work relating to methamphetamine contamination since 2013**

The tribunal could still opt for the 1.5 micrograms limit per 100cm2 if there was evidence of meth manufacturing. This is because, in those circumstances, methamphetamine is taken as a proxy for other harmful chemicals that could be present. 

But Tim Grafton, chief executive of the Insurance Council, said that was not in line with insurers' approach.

'Most insurers refer to Ministry of Health guidelines in their policy wordings regarding the level of methamphetamine contamination at which an insured could make a claim. These guidelines reference the current standard, NZS8510, which specifies 1.5 micrograms per 100cm2 for high-use areas and 3.8 micrograms per 100cm2 for limited-use areas,' he said.

'An insured is entitled to claim for any damage incurred which is covered by their insurance policy. It's feasible that will mean a landlord could claim for damage done by meth which is below the level the Tenancy Tribunal is currently enforcing.'

Andrew King, executive officer of the New Zealand Property Investors Federation, said the New Zealand standard needed to be updated to provide consistent.

But he said while insurers were at a lower level than the tribunal, investors would not be left out of pocket.

Investor Nick Gentle said the confusion was difficult to navigate.

'For example, what happens with a level of 10 for example? Say I detect a level of 10 at the end of a tenancy when at the start it was confirmed at zero.

'The Tenancy Tribunal appears to be saying they will not consider any claim against the tenant unless there is evidence of manufacture. Which implies that the tribunal would be happy with that property manager re-renting without saying anything about the meth traces.'

The official standard could be reviewed once the regulations under the Residential Tenancy Act had been made, a Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment spokeswoman said. 'When there will be clarity on the legally binding maximum level of methamphetamine. We will work with stakeholders to potentially review the standard at that point.'