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 two (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

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