Critical Issues


1. Limitations Act

If you have concerns regarding the Limitations Act and the six year limit it imposes on your claim(s), use one of the template letters in our Resources page to seek clarification from your insurer. Template content provided, in collaboration, with Mr Peter Woods and Dr Duncan Webb.

  • Mr Peter Woods Presentation on Limitation HERE.


Share this with friends and family

2. Foundations Pre-1970 homes

Peter Woods of Anthony Harper is working with people who own pre-1970 homes to fast track them through the process as best as possible. Contact Peter: Email

At we believe there is a significant issue regarding the reinstatement strategies used by EQC on homes built before 1970. This is, in part, because many Christchurch homes built before 1970 have rubble foundations. A rubble foundation is made from three main products; rubble, cement and plaster. Several specialists are of the view that most earthquake damaged rubble foundations in homes built pre-1970 cannot be repaired to meet the repair standard under the Earthquake Commission Act 1993. 


Who does this concern?

This concerns a potential reinstatement failure of homes built before 1970, homes with perimeter ring foundations, a category of home that appears to have not been repaired (or cash settled) in accordance with the Earthquake Commission Act.

Who should be concerned?

Any person who has a current EQC earthquake claim, has home repaired by EQC and who is concerned that the repair is substandard, is concerned that their EQC cash settlement was for less than the repair would cost, is buying and selling in the Canterbury property market.

Get the Facts

Download the fact sheet: PDF


Next steps:

Share this with friends and family


3. Southern Response DRA's

 One couple we know of at has a variance between DRA's of more than $300,000.

One couple we know of at has a variance between DRA's of more than $300,000.

Some people that settled with Southern Response before 23 July 2015 have become aware that prior to settlement Southern Response did not disclose all versions of its Detailed Repair/Rebuild Analysis (DRA).

Southern Response had a practice of maintaining tw0 (2) versions of each DRA.  One version did not include all costs that are part of a repair/rebuild cost such as demolition, professional fees and contingency.

Southern Response’s failure to disclose all of the DRA’s and the omitted costs is a breach of its “good faith” obligations.  It is also likely a breach of the Fair Trading Act by Southern Response misrepresenting the  rebuild or repair cost in the DRA or accompanying letter that then led to the settlement.

Grant Shand is wanting to work with people in this situation, sharing information and knowledge as group, to see if he can fast track their claims.

Share this with friends and family

4. Case Law

Here is a court judgment in Sadat v EQC & Tower from 6 July 2017 that is a lesson in not over-reaching the facts of the claim. At paras 292 to 298 it contains a useful discussion about under insurance. House was only insured to 85% of its floor area but court did not not apportion all costs based on %, but rather used an elemental approach for items that would be needed no matter what the floor area.

More Information coming soon