Ken Huang estimates it could cost him more than $30,000 to demolish his deck and put in landscaping according to the original Resource Consent - which he's now seeing for the first time. Photo: RNZ / Lucy Xia
Several first time Auckland homeowners - who've been sold new-builds with just soil and dirt in their front and backyards - say they've been misled into buying the homes which they now know to be non-compliant with resource consents, and say they're facing bills of potentially tens of thousands of dollars to complete landscaping works or demolish work already done to comply.
About 14 homes in the Royal Road development in Massey, West Auckland, were told by Auckland Council in late June that they don't comply with the original consent plans - the final compliance checks happened more than half a year after the properties were sold.
The owners were told by the council that the responsibilities sat with them - the current landowners - and were given deadlines to have planted trees and grass by the end of September.
The developer, Youd Ltd - responsible for the subdivisions on Kautawa Lane and Paina Crescent - has remained silent.
Several owners told RNZ they were told by property agents that the homes came as they are, and others were encouraged to build decks without being warned about unclosed consent processes.
Ken Huang, who bought his townhouse for over $800,000 in October last year, said he's frustrated that the agent, the developer and the lawyers have all failed to be transparent about the non-compliance.
He said when he bought the property through a Barfoot & Thompson agent, all the parts outside the house were bare.
"From the outside it's completely just soil, soil, clay, dirt, nothing else, maybe just a letterbox, nothing else is provided on the landscape, just the building itself," he said.
Huang said only the carpark was laid out with cement, and when he asked the agent if the vendor could build fences, he said he was told the developer didn't want to spend money.
Huang said he didn't think much of it at the time as nothing was flagged as non-compliant in the building reports by his lawyer, or by his agent.
Are you a homeowner of a new-build who has had a similar experience? Contact Lucy.Xia@rnz.co.nz if you'd like to share your story.
He went on to spend over $25,000 building a deck, pavements and fences for his house, only to be told in June by council that none of these are compliant with the original consent.
Huang said he doesn't understand why the current law allows homes to be sold without passing the resource consents final checks.
"I feel very angry and frustrated about the developer, firstly because this should be done before you even sell the house, even if it's not done, the developer should at least communicate with the council to let them know that you're selling the house without all this landscaping ... now it becomes our responsibility which we don't find it fair, and we don't find it making sense," he said.
Ken Huang's house at the time of purchase in October 2024. Photo: Supplied / Ken Huang
Huang estimates it could cost him more than $30,000 to demolish his deck and put in landscaping according to the original resource consent - which he's now seeing for the first time.
"I think the council is not being reasonable, because we clearly feel this should be the developer's responsibility," said Huang.
Another owner told RNZ they don't have the thousands of dollars needed for landscaping before council's deadlines by the end of September.
Huang and three other owners have collectively written to the developer - Youd Ltd - a month and a half ago, but heard nothing back.
Youd Ltd hasn't responded to RNZ's questions, but just days after RNZ's queries to them, an affected owner saw people planting trees in his front yard.
Inland Revenue had filed for the company's liquidation in November 2023, at the High Court in Auckland, but a hearing is yet to be held.
The current Resource Management Act has no requirements for when councils need to complete the final resource consent compliance checks on properties built.
Council's environmental monitoring manager Robert Laulala said it could take anywhere between a month to seven months for the final checks to be done after the building is complete.
He said his team of 65 monitoring officers for the Auckland region is stretched, and the growth of staff members of his team by 20 percent over the past five years, hasn't kept up with the increasing volume of resource consent applications from housing intensification.
Another owner, who doesn't want to be named out of fear of repercussions, now potentially needs to spend thousands of dollars to bring his front and backyards to consent standards. Photo: RNZ / Lucy Xia
Laulala said council relies on the consent holders, or developers, to inform them to trigger the final checks, and admits the final checks on this part of the Royal Road development is delayed.
"It's unfortunate in terms of delays, we simply don't have the resources to be out there proactively going out and knocking on doors.
"We'll prefer that when these developments are completed, you know, someone contacts the monitoring officer and then we can go out and do the inspection."
Laulala said the legislation requires the owner of the land to be responsible for complying with resource consents, and homeowners inherit that responsibility when they purchase.
Laulala said the council is willing to negotiate with owners in cases where there is financial hardship, "we are pragmatic with these types of things, and we do consider people's circumstances," he added.
He said he estimates there are possibly hundreds of homeowners who've been sold homes that are not compliant with resource consents - but he stressed that it's the owner's responsibility to do due diligence before buying.
The president of the Home Owners and Buyers Association (HOBANZ), John Gray, said while he's unable to say whether these situations are widespread, he has come across it "reasonably often".
"The resource consent hasn't been closed out...one event is one too many in our opinion. In so far as the damage it causes and the legal nightmare that it creates for the new owners," he said.
Gray said owners shouldn't be picking up the slack.
"It is very unfair for the new owners, who've had nothing to do with the construction or development whatsoever and now put to the pains of dealing with this breach," he said.
He said while owners should always check council documents for resource consent compliance, it doesn't free other parties of their responsibility.
Gray said owners should pursue any legal remedies against the developer, and potentially other parties that have caused them losses.
It's disappointing that lawyers haven't ensured that these homeowners obtain a copy of the council's property files to ensure checks are made, said Gray.
He added that any good property agents would look deeply into the property to ensure that consents have been complied with.
Meanwhile, a Barfoot and Thompson agent, Gina Gao, who's sold at least nine of the properties in the Royal Road Development said it's not her responsibility to provide any information on resource consents.
"If the vendor didn't disclose the information to the agent, we don't know, we can't access those documents," she said.
Gao said while it's not a good thing for the homes to not have resource consents, these matters are beyond her control.
Gao said there were other Barfoot and Thompson agents who have also been involved in the sales of the affected properties.
Barfoot and Thompson said it's undertaking a review on the matter, and can't comment.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
