We continue our series of meth contamination case studies – all of these have been collected by MethSolutions’ staff while out on testing and sampling jobs.
Example 1 – South Auckland
A vendor purchased a house 12 months ago from the owner-occupiers, without getting a meth test. A year later, having lived in the house with their family, a meth test was done as part of a pre-purchase process. This identified meth present in the kitchen 28 times over currently acceptable Guideline levels. In the hall next to the kitchen, it showed no meth present.
This case study serves to demonstrate a number of things:
1. The importance of a meth test as part of due diligence – $200 a year ago and none of this would be happening.
2. That painting a property masks meth residues.
3. That painting a property significantly increases the cost of clean-up.
Example 2 – North Island
A long-term owner-occupied property has a short-term tenant who was related to the owner living there while the house was up for sale. Purchaser initiated meth test reveals meth at 39µg. Significant meth contamination does not take long to occur.
Example 3 – West Auckland
This in the new owners own words:
“I have just bought a house and two days after we took possession a neighbour came around and told us of a police drug raid a year before. We tested both properties on the section and found extremely high levels of contamination. We thought we had done our due diligence, LIM and builders report, we asked specifically if there were any issues that we should be aware of. We can’t claim insurance, we have no money to clean and refit the main house and demolish and rebuild the minor dwelling – can you suggest anything that can help? We are trying to make the vendor accountable, but this seems to be costing a stupid amount of money we don’t have. Couple that with mortgage payments and rent payments – I am at a loss what to do next – any ideas would be gratefully received.”
Meth residues in the garage area are 360 times greater than Guideline levels. The property was owner-occupied and no disclosure was made.
Example 4 – East Auckland Example
Family members suspected a sibling was manufacturing in a property owned and lived in by elderly parents when they were away from the property. A Baseline meth test confirmed high levels of meth in the property. Follow up detailed testing identified meth residues in the kitchen range hood, which vented to the roof space, at 300 times currently acceptable guideline levels
Example 5 – South Auckland
Family home lived in by a brother and sister being sold to fund health care. A pre-purchase meth test identified the presence of meth and a Baseline meth test confirmed high levels indicative of possible manufacture.