Waikato woman says council needs to take responsibility for the burnt-out asbestos site next door

Tara Mclaren​​ has spent the last four years living next to a burnt out house containing asbestos that no one wants to take responsibility for.

The Waikato District Council said the owner of the home in Pukemiro, north of Hamilton, was dead and no next of kin was willing to take responsibility for the property.

The council also said it was not responsible for the building because it “does not meet the definition of a dangerous building”, despite council tests confirming it contained asbestos.

Mclaren​ was concerned the asbestos would affect her health and that of her 11-year-old son if it was blown onto her property.

READ MORE:
* ‘We don’t give up’ – Sleepyhead’s Waikato development clears final hurdle
* Waka Kotahi-NZTA appeals Sleepyhead development to Environment Court
* Ponsonby school fire: Residents kept in the dark after asbestos forces them from homes

“I have had breast cancer twice in the last two years, and I am terrified of it happening again. I am just so scared for the health of my son,” Mclaren​ said.

After numerous calls and emails to the council, council staff erected a plastic fence around the perimeter of the property.

But pieces of the burnt building material, and dust continued to be blown onto the road and onto neighbouring properties.

“I told the council my dog was bringing bits of the house into my lounge. They said to make sure my dog doesn’t roam. Well my dog was not roaming, bits of the house were flying off and coming onto the lawn.”

Jason Catterall​, director of hazardous material management company Morecroft, said cordoning off the building was the least the council could do.

“Asbestos is the country’s biggest workplace killer with approximately 170 deaths per year, although it takes decades for the disease to take hold. The only way to prevent it is to stop exposure,” Catterall​ said.

If the structure was not disturbed then it was likely to not be shedding fibres. But as the building was fire damaged it was important that it was dealt with sooner rather than later, he said.

“If the site is exposed this should be dealt with as a matter of some urgency. Storms or high wind could have asbestos fibres blowing over the whole neighbourhood.”

Waikato District Council chief executive Gavin Ion​ wrote to local MP Tim van de Molen in July 2020, explaining the owner of the property was deceased and the council could not find anyone to take responsibility for it.

Ion said the council would not take responsibility for the building, citing the costs to ratepayers would be unreasonably high.

“If we were to construct a more robust permanent fence or remove the asbestos ourselves, it would come at a significant cost to the general ratepayer. This is not something we wish to do,” Ion wrote.

But Mclaren​​ was not happy with the response.

“I mean, what the hell? I am a ratepayer too. If the council is not going to fix it, and the guy who owns the property is dead, then who is responsible for this house spreading asbestos in the community?” Mclaren​ said.

Sue O’Gorman, council customer support general manager told Stuff the asbestos was not the council’s responsibility because the house was private property.

Only if the asbestos became a risk to the public would the council get involved, she said.

O’Gorman​ said the council would test for asbestos at the fire damaged property and Mclaren’s home.

Mclaren said she was glad the council was “finally taking some responsibility”.

Property lawyer Joanna Pidgeon​ said the situation is unusual and complicated.

Pidgeon​ said generally finding someone responsible to look after land when the previous owner had died, was a complicated process.

If there was no valid will granting powers of executor to someone, then a letter of administration must be written.

A search for unknown children who potentially had a claim against the estate would need to be conducted, which could take three to six months, depending on court workload, Pidgeon​ said.

But if no responsible party could be found, the Crown became responsible for the house, she said.

If asbestos was spreading from the building, then the landowner could be found liable for any health issues caused to neighbours, she said.

Ultimately the regional council had responsibility under the Resource Management Act to control the discharges of contaminants into the air, she said.

But because the council had told Mclaren​ it was not prepared to spend any money to deal with the building, Mclaren could lay a complaint with Regional Health, the Commissioner of Lands, the Waikato Regional Council or take a claim to the Environment Court.

Court action would be expensiv, Pidgeon​ said.