The figure of 850 dwellings categorised as “red” in the pyrite report is an indicative figure only. The Panel used the information it had collected to estimate the possible distribution of the ground floor dwellings across the three classifications of red, amber and green. However, it should be noted that the inclusion of a dwelling in the 850 figure does not necessarily mean that the dwelling has been confirmed as having reactive pyrite in the hardcore and/or pyritic heave.
The pyrite report clearly states that those parties with direct or indirect responsibility for the pyrite problem should bear the costs of remediation. Those identified as having responsibility include quarries, material suppliers, vendors, builders/subcontractors and relevant insurance companies. It is not intended that the establishment of any remediation process should absolve responsible parties, including warranty companies, from meeting their obligations under the terms and conditions of their respective schemes.
While I have no function in the operation of warranty companies I have expressed my disappointment with the stance adopted by HomeBond in withdrawing, in August 2011, cover for pyrite related damage to homeowners. I fully support the recommendation in the pyrite report that HomeBond should review its position and reinstate cover for pyrite damage. Following receipt of the pyrite report I engaged with all key stakeholders, including HomeBond, with the objective of advancing solutions for homeowners. I have given the stakeholders until the end of September to come back to me with credible solutions to the pyrite problem.
