Legal action taken against apartment owner

Oaks Queenstown Shores Resort on Queenstown’s Frankton Rd. PHOTO: ODT FILES
Oaks Queenstown Shores Resort on Queenstown’s Frankton Rd. PHOTO: ODT FILES
The fallout from Queenstown’s leaky Oaks Shores complex continues, with its body corporate taking legal action against an apartment owner who has refused to pay his share of remediation costs.

A High Court judgement released last week confirmed Singapore-based business executive Jeffrey Carvell owes the body corporate just over $640,000 in unpaid special levies, interest and other costs.

Body corporate chairman Graeme Kruger said the special levies allowed Oaks Shores’ 70-plus owners to fund the costs of rebuilding the complex, as well as pursuing its leaky building claim against the Queenstown Lakes District Council.

The owners took action against Carvell because he had refused to pay what he owed, Mr Kruger said.

"It’s a large sum of money, and effectively other owners have been having to cover that.

"We’ve exhausted a number of avenues to reach him, through his legal representatives, his bank, through whichever means. We’ve gone beyond the call of duty for a constructive outcome in his favour."

The body corporate successfully applied for a summary judgement against Carvell on August 25, a process by which a court can decide on a claim, without a trial, where a defendant has no arguable defence.

Unless Carvell appealed, the body corporate would put the apartment on the market within weeks, Mr Kruger said.

Carvell would receive any funds remaining after his bank recovered its loan and the body corporate’s debt was satisfied.

Carvell could not be reached for comment.

The 84-unit lakeside complex below Frankton Rd, completed only 16 years ago, has a litany of weathertightness and other building defects. Remediation work is under way on the second of its four blocks.

It was developed by Invercargill-based Ross Wensley, who went bust after the global financial crisis.

Oaks Shores’ owners are pursuing a $163 million claim against the district council, as the body that issued the building consents, and about a dozen other parties.

Unless the claim is settled by mediation, it will go to the High Court in February.

 

 

 

Advertisement

OUTSTREAM