新西兰这种房子是房东们可能面临的灰色地带“陷阱房
在新西兰
最近看房,看到一种房子,楼上有正规三个房间一套卫浴,楼下有两个房间和一个浴室,整个卖房广告也是按照5房来写的。但是,去市政府building helpdesk查电脑里的图纸资料,显示楼下只是一个大空间和一个洗衣房。问中介,中介说,这个屋主买来时候就是这样的,但是,可以肯定的是前任的前任的屋主在1992年之前,不知什么具体年份增建的,那时候还不要求申请CCC。现任屋主只不过装修了一下,所以看上去很新。
问市政府,市政府说,这种情况下,不可以补CCC, 也不可以申请COA,就这么着了,但是, 政府既不承认楼下房间和浴室是合法,但是也不会要求把它拆除。请问,如果买了这种房子,整租出去的时候, 是否能按照5房来出租?是否会被今后的所谓“专业租客“投诉为其实合法的只是3房,而按5房租给他们,因此被法庭判为退还租金,加被罚款(看到这里有房东最近被恶劣“职业租客”诉讼的案子,觉得现在当房东似乎要非常小心翼翼)?
还有,买保险时,保险公司问房子细节,是按照3房,还是5房买保险?告诉保险公司楼下是合法,还是非法的部分?听说, 如果找建筑公司出一个sanitary and safety report 清洁和安全报告,保险公司好像就能认可它为合法房间和浴室,是这样的吗?
评论
说真的这卖房广告就有问题,这种房子是不能按照五房来做广告的
评论
既然有这么多顾虑,就接着找呗
评论
按三房,下面两个只能自己住
评论
建议不要碰这种改建房子,特别是不能申请ccc的
评论
此房不能买。
评论
遇到好几次这种情况,中介一律用“1992年之前建的“”作为尚方宝剑,说没事的!后来次数多了,连我也逐渐觉得,是不是他们说的是真的呀,要不怎么都这样说呢?但是我相信还是咱们网友更可靠!就上来问问。
评论
这一说,真是灰色地带!
评论
www.rented.co.nz/unlawful-dwellings/
Types of unlawful dwellings:
Dwelling constructed without a building consent of any kind
Dwelling had a building consent but not approved for human residence e.g. garage
Dwelling has a building consent for permanent human residence but does not have code of compliance for being rented separately e.g. granny flat
Building consent for permanant human habitation but owner has added facilities such as a kitchenette
Dwelling has consent but the owner has added extra rooms so part of dwelling is unlawful e.g. House that had an outside deck that has been closed in by adding walls.
Where a property has a major and minor dwelling and the minor dwelling has consent but is not compliant it can’t be rented separately to the main dwelling. In this case the property would need to be rented as a single Tenancy Agreement.
Where a dwelling is unlawful, tenants can give 48 hours’ notice or apply to the Tribunal to end a tenancy. The tenant does not have to pay rent in unlawful premises. Court cases in relation to minor dwellings have seen rent repaid in full for the period of the tenancy.
评论
希望买房的大家擦亮眼睛
评论
砍到多少合适呢?CV吗?
评论