Quake Outcasts v The Minister for Canterbury Earthquake

Quake Outcasts v The Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery

CERA Release of ‘Draft Residential Red Zone Offer Recovery Plan’

25 June 2015

Earlier today the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority released its ‘Draft Residential Red Zone Offer Recovery Plan’. The plan purports to state the CERA Chief Executive’s preliminary views on what sort of offers might now be made for properties not yet acquired by the Crown in red zone areas. For the Quake Outcasts group the following proposals are set out in the draft plan (page 4):

- For all vacant red zone land: a new Crown offer at 100% of the 2007/08 rateable land value.

- For all insured commercial red zone properties: a new Crown offer at 100% of the 2007/08 rateable land value and 100% of the 2007/08 rateable improvements value for the insured improvements, if the insurance benefits are transferred to the Crown. Alternatively, the owners may choose not to accept any payment for the improvements and keep the benefits of their insurance claims.

- For all uninsured improved red zone properties: a new Crown offer at 80% of the 2007/08 rateable land value only.

Mr Cameron, Solicitor for the Quake Outcasts group said today “there are 24 owners of our group who own vacant land, and 2 who own commercial properties. Were the CEO to later make offers to these owners in the terms intimated in the draft plan, we anticipate that most might accept”.

He added, “the proposed offer to the uninsured owners of residential properties in red zones is illogical and inappropriate. There are 26 owners in this category and the proposal provides no payment whatsoever for the value of improvements on those properties and consequently, does nothing to advance owners recovery from the effects of the earthquakes.”

He then confirmed that “After short discussion with Queen’s Counsel, Francis Cooke QC, the Quake Outcasts group has decided to take up the ‘leave reserved’ by the Supreme Court when it issued its judgment in March 2013 and it will seek intervention by the Supreme Court”.

“We feel the Minister misdirected himself as to the need for a Recovery Plan following the Supreme Court’s judgment. The proposed offers to the uninsured owners of residential land would be completely inconsistent with that judgment.”

“Despite proceeding with an unnecessary Recovery Plan process, today’s proposal ignores the very findings revealed by that process in that many said that ‘impact on people’s lives in the red zone’, and ‘health and wellbeing’ issues were very important considerations, whereas ‘insurance status’ was irrelevant”.

The Supreme Court’s judgment in March found that red zoning decisions by government were unlawful and that offers to purchase land from uninsured red zone property owners had been unlawfully made and would need to be done again.

Mr Cameron also said, “our residential home owners have had to suffer appalling circumstances in consequence of the Crown’s attempt to take their land for next to no value. That has been made clear to all courts throughout a protracted process and also, has been very plainly put before Minister Brownlee. Unfortunately, today’s decision reflects both a disregard for those persons’ welfare and for the Supreme Court judgment.

ENDS

© Scoop Media