The 2019 Residential Tenancies Amendment Act (RTAA) moved things forward… a bit.
Landlords can now access the property to test for meth contamination. But the elephant in the room remains: what is the acceptable maximum level of meth
presence at a rental property? Standards New Zealand says it is 1.5µg/100cm2, Sir Peter Gluckman says 15µg/100cm2,
The Residential Tenancies Act is silent, and Tenancy Services says ‘both [Standards NZ] and [Gluckman] can be used as guidance to assist landlords
and tenants.’
In addition to securing access for landlords, the RTAA also allows for eventual regulations specifying a maximum acceptable level for meth contamination,
processes for testing and decontamination to be developed. For the time being, there is no legally binding acceptable maximum to be found in statutes.
Sir Peter Gluckman’s opinion of 15 µg/100cm2 being
the highest safe level of meth presence could very well come unstuck once the government carries out the necessary studies to determine a
statutory acceptable maximum.
So, does the Gluckman opinion trump the New Zealand Standard? It would appear so if you are in front of the Tenancy Tribunal which has so far considered
anything below the Gluckman maximum as safe (i.e. not damaged). The ‘not damaged’ descriptor is an important one. Even if it can be proven that the
contamination happened during the tenancy, the tenant will not be liable for the insurance excess because a <15µg/100cm2 contamination is not considered
‘damage’ to the rental property.
But most landlords I deal with are just as concerned about their legal obligations as they are about the state of their properties. Meth is meth. Oftentimes
when it is found on...
