Retirement villages offer a desirable lifestyle choice for some. But what protection do you have if things go wrong? We look at what you need to consider, plus we've developed a free downloadable checklist for assessing a retirement village: Retirement villages checklist (47.2 KB)
Join today and get instant access to all test results and research.
Promises were plenty at Wanaka Bay Village in New Plymouth. Over 100 luxury villas were planned, complete with swimming pool, spa, all-weather tennis court, bowling green and gym. But when the retirement village folded in September 2012, 5 years after it opened, only 9 of the villas had been built.
Residents of the village have since moved out. A buy-out deal involving another operator has seen them finally able to get on with their lives after months of financial uncertainty. The 9 brick-and-tile units have been advertised on TradeMe for rent at $360 a week each.
Industry commentators say Wanaka Bay's demise is unfortunate but doesn't indicate wider troubles in the sector. The Retirement Villages Association, which represents 80 percent of villages, says companies fail from time to time in any industry and the sector is still geared for growth.
Receivership may be a worst case but the Wanaka Bay saga exposes the risks consumers face when a village fails to deliver on its grandiose plans. While you can check in any time you like, it's hard to get out without taking a financial hit if the reality doesn't match the rhetoric.
Retirement villages have grown rapidly over the last decade. Data from the Companies Office show there are 348 registered villages.
Around 5 percent of Kiwis over 65 have moved to a retirement village. Research indicates most believe it was the right thing for them. Bill Atkinson from the Association of Residents of Retirement Villages calls it the "best move" he ever made.
But it's not all beer and bowling greens. Bill says the Retirement Villages Act, introduced in 2003 in an effort to protect residents in the rapidly expanding market, is "far too open to interpretation". He says standards vary as a result and residents bear the brunt of poor performers.
Several reports for the Retirement Commissioner have also flagged concerns about the financial oversight of villages and the role of the statutory supervisor. The Act requires all villages (unless they have an exemption) to appoint a statutory supervisor to monitor their financial position.
Changes that came in late 2012 now require statutory supervisors to be licensed by the Financial Markets Authority (FMA). Licences have been granted to 8 companies, subject to conditions. Supervisors are required to report regularly to the FMA, with the first reports due at the end of March 2013.
Retirement Commissioner Diana Crossan says there's still more that can be done to clarify the supervisor's role, including the extent to which they act as advocates for residents. She says this should be considered in a review of the legislation. The issue of an independent advocate for residents also warrants "more thinking".
Report by Jessica Wilson.
We're not suggesting you should only go into a village where the answer to every question is "yes". Rather, be aware of the issues raised by our checklist and decide what's best for you.
Retirement villages checklist (47.2 KB)
The checklist is presented as a PDF document. To view this document you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader software installed on your computer. This is available free from Adobe.
|Operators||Number of villages||Base weekly fee range ($)||Maximum deferred-management fee (%)||Capital gain payable to resident?||Capital loss paid by resident?||Legal & marketing costs on re-sale?|
|Bupa Care||22||96 to 131||28||No||Yes||No|
|MetlifecareA||23B||107 to 150D||30||No||Yes||No|
|Oceania Group||27||69 to 141||20 to 30 (depending on village)||No||No||Resident pays operator's legal fees plus marketing costs of 1.5-2.5% of the original capital sum.|
|Ryman HealthcareA||25||99 to 129||20||No||No||Resident pays operator's legal fees.|
|Summerset GroupA||15C||99 to 139||25E||No||No||No|
Guide to the table: Our data is from villages’ websites and disclosure statements. Base weekly fee is for villas.
The Canterbury earthquakes destroyed several retirement villages and exposed major cracks in the Retirement Villages Code of Practice. Provisions in the code meant residents weren't automatically entitled to get back what they'd paid for their unit because the operator was able to deduct deferred-management fees.
Changes that took effect in October 2013 will mean operators can no longer deduct these fees when an earthquake or other natural disaster strikes and the village won't be rebuilt. In future, residents will be entitled to get back their original capital – although it's unlikely this will be enough to buy into another village.
If the owner of a retirement village goes into receivership, protections in the Retirement Villages Act mean you can't be evicted - provided the village is properly registered. The Act gives residents priority ahead of the holders of any security interests. The retirement village effectively has to be sold as a going concern.
However, you may be living under a long cloud of financial uncertainty until a new buyer is found or the village trades its way out of trouble.
You can check if a village is registered by going to the Retirement Villages Register at www.companies.govt.nz.
The Consumer Advice Line is available to all our members for support on any consumer-related issue. Our expert advisers can explain your rights and help you resolve problems with a retailer. Become a member now from just $9.95 and let us help you get a resolution.
This information is available to Consumer members only.