Twyford PhilPart 2 Unit Titles Act 2010PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū): I want to talk about some issues in relation to the Unit Titles Act which is the subject of Part 2. There were some really interesting debates at the Local Government and Environment Committee about the Tenancy Tribunal and whether or not the tribunal is the appropriate device for resolving conflicts under the Unit Titles Act. It is true I think that although we are seeing a big increase in the building of multi-dwelling buildings—apartment buildings and flats—the Unit Titles Act has been under quite a lot of pressure because of increased demand and perceived inadequacies in that Act to do with governance and the regulation of bodies corporate. We are going to be touching on a number of those issues as they pertain to Part 2 of the bill.The issue of the Tenancy Tribunal and its role is very relevant here. There was quite a lot of discussion at the select committee about whether or not the current provision of a four-step dispute resolution system under the Unit Titles Act basically consisting of self-resolution and mediation provided by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and also adjudication at the tribunal itself and ultimately access to the courts—about how well that is working and whether it needs review and possible change.Under the current system the tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine disputes between the owners and former owners of units a future development unit owner a body corporate itself the administrator of the body corporate a registered valuer an occupier of one of the units a contractor who is providing services to the residents original owners a lessor and even the chief executive of MBIE. The tribunal has quite an array of powers to order resolution of disputes to order parties to do anything to remedy breaches and so on.But there are currently limitations under the Unit Titles Act. The tribunal cannot order a body or a person to pay any more than $50000 so that is a pretty significant limit. It is unable to hear a dispute in relation to insurance money or anything to do with land titles. Really the committee was considering in relation to Part 2 the best approach to deal with dispute resolution in this sense. The officials came back with a number of proposals and effectively I think kicked for touch on most of the matters of substance and really pointed to the wider review of the Unit Titles Act that is being done.There was a question that was also discussed in relation to filing fees which are basically set down under the regulations that come out of the Unit Titles Act. But basically the officials advised the committee that it does not consider that establishing any kind of alternative regime is worthwhile or proportionate to the perceived problems in relation to the current policy settings in the Unit Titles Act. There is a proposal to lower the fee settings of the tribunal and introduce a reduced fee for mediation but essentially the officials advised that the $50000 threshold should basically be considered as part of the wider review of the Unit Titles Act. That will include things like requirements for properly funded repair and maintenance plans for bodies corporate and various other governance regulations to do with bodies corporate.That is just by way of an opening contribution. There is plenty more to say about Part 2. We will be coming back with a number of contributions.