Author: MIL-OSI Publisher

Source: Radio New Zealand

For Christchurch father of two Joe Baxter, there was no question he needed to act fast when alarms were raised over asbestos in children’s play sand sold by Kmart.

“We were doing what was logical, we were removing the threat,” the teacher said.

It was mid-November when the alert went out; three Magic Sand colour sets and a sandcastle building kit were being recalled after testing positive for tremolite, a form of asbestos.

“We had to act, without good information we had to act on it and clear it up as quickly as possible,” Baxter told RNZ.

One of the three tubs in the house matched the batch numbers being recalled.

Toys were thrown out and carpet ripped up from about three-quarters of the house that had the sand in it.

But weeks later came an about turn – the recall was cancelled – Kmart said there was no evidence of asbestos in the initially recalled sand.

“So there’s two-and-a-half, three weeks in which time what were we meant to do?” Baxter said.

“Were we meant to leave our house contaminated? Were we meant to live with the idea that we had asbestos in the house while children were playing?”

That wasn’t a feasible option, Baxter said.

“And it’s not something we could have done in good conscience, so we had to act to remove it.

“We wanted to know that we’d done everything possible to make sure that the hazard was not there in the house.”

Baxter did not get the house tested for contamination before lifting up the carpet, but pointed to the official recall of asbestos already being found in the batch of sand his family had.

“One of the products that we had in our house was confirmed by them to be having asbestos in it at the time,” he said.

“Really, there was no need to get that batch tested because they themselves had confirmed the asbestos in it.

“So what we needed to do then was not to pay more money to confirm what we already knew,” he said.

What needed to happen, Baxter said, was to remove the hazard as quickly as possible.

The carpet came up in a day with the help of Baxter’s father.

“The living room, the hallway, the kids’ bedroom, we removed that because we knew there were trace elements, we could see it,” he said.

“Or, we just knew that it had been played with in there.”

That left Baxter and his family out of carpet and out of pocket and struggling for guidance from Kmart since.

Complicating matters, was that the family had three tubs of play sand – one purchased from Kmart and two identical tubs bought from a charity second-hand store.

He cannot tell for certain which outlet the tub with the initially recalled batch number came from.

That has left Baxter unsure what his rights are, but he believed Kmart should be involved.

“I believe there’s a wrong that needs to be righted here, I think there needs to be some accountability at the very least for this,” Baxter said.

“We’ve tried to contact them on numerous occasions but effectively we haven’t got anything back,” he said of his efforts to talk further with Kmart.

“We’ve been told that we’ll be contacted by the customer services team… we just didn’t hear back from them, so that was really frustrating.”

Baxter also wanted Kmart to provide the testing that had been done on the coloured sand products.

Kmart ‘haven’t been particularly forthcoming’ – Consumer

Baxter believed Kmart still shouldered some responsibility though his family couldn’t tell whether the affected sand was bought directly or from the charity store.

Gemma Rasmussen, Consumer’s head of research and advocacy, said Kmart “haven’t been particularly forthcoming” in its communications.

“We are disappointed with Kmart’s response in relation to what’s transpired and it does seem that they aren’t being as proactive in terms of giving shoppers guidance around what their rights are and what Kmart is owed to do,” she said.

“So we would hope that they would be a little bit more on the front foot with this.”

Under the Consumer Guarantees Act, it was the manufacturer that shouldered responsibility for a product,” Rasmussen said.

“So they could, potentially be contacting Kmart, assuming Kmart are also the manufacturer, and really looking to get a right of response and some responsibility acknowledged there,” she told RNZ.

“And I think this really highlights some of the issues that we have with our product safety laws in New Zealand,” Rasmussen said.

“I think that it’s very unsettling for shoppers to be thinking that potentially there are products on shelves that are unsafe.”

The sand was from Anko, Kmart’s in-house brand which describes itself as being “trusted by millions” and owned by Kmart Australia Ltd and part of the Kmart Group.

Kmart referred to previous statements when asked about Baxter’s case.

Baxter believed they do have responsibility.

“They need to come to the party and do what we think is the right thing to do,” he said.

“I suppose it’s a bit feeling in limbo land about some that’s, you know, your kids and your family’s safety at the end of the day.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

How old is too old for a home loan?

One woman who argued that she should not have been allowed to take out a mortgage, given her age and that of her husband, has lost her complaint to the Banking Ombudsman – and mortgage advisers say it is not unusual for age to be a hurdle for some borrowers.

The Banking Ombudsman said the woman and her husband first applied for a home loan in 2020, when they were aged 56 and 53. In 2022, they agreed to take out loans worth $479,000.

But in 2025, the woman’s husband died, and she claimed the loan was irresponsible and should not have been approved.

She said the bank had not considered her and her husband’s ages, and the 30-year loan term.

She said they had never intended to work past typical retirement age or to increase their repayments.

The ombudsman looked into the case, including the bank’s notes from the time, and said the bank had considered the couple’s age and future plans, as well as discussing with them how they planned to repay the loan.

“We also reviewed the bank’s affordability assessment. The bank verified income and expenses, applied conservative calculations and included reasonable buffers.

“There was a reasonable surplus of income over expenses and the bank made inquiries about likely changes to income. We found the bank had reasonable grounds to believe the couple could meet repayments without suffering substantial hardship, having regard to any likely changes in income.”

The complaint was not upheld.

Link Advisory head Glen McLeod said he saw many borrowers in that sort of situation.

He said banks and lenders would have different policies for loan terms that would take people past the age of 65.

“Some set a maximum age of 65, while others may allow terms to extend to 70 or even 75.

“The key consideration is always the client’s exit strategy, which is discussed as part of the lending process. An exit strategy outlines how the loan will be repaid, and provides confidence for both the client and the lender.

“This could include using KiwiSaver funds at retirement, selling an investment property or downsizing their home.

“Ensuring clients fully understand what they’re borrowing and the long-term implications is an essential part of the Responsible Lending Code. This approach helps protect clients, and ensures lending decisions are made with care and transparency.”

Another adviser, Jeremy Andrews from Key Mortgages, said banks could not discriminate based on age, but agreed they had to follow responsible lending rules.

“Often we see banks declining first-home buyers nearing retirement age loans that are similar or sometimes even lower than their rent payments.”

He said that was because, if someone needed a longer-loan term to make the loan affordable, they may have to stay in full-time work for the duration.

“That said, there are plenty of mitigants that banks can consider case by case, which are referred to as exit strategies.

“As part of a client’s affordability analysis, lenders and mortgage advisers should investigate and consider whether clients are in sedentary jobs and able to continue work beyond retirement age. Some banks can then consider up to 70 years of age, others longer.”

He said other things borrowers could think about were whether they could increase payments once dependents left home or clear other debts to increase their ability to pay off the home loan.

Loan Market adviser Karen Tatterson said lenders and advisers had a responsibility to ensure a client had repaid their loans by the time they retired, or that they had an exit strategy.

“As a general rule of thumb, banks consider 70 years of age as the end date to a loan term,” she said. “There are other considerations too – KiwiSaver, overseas superannuations and pensions, and the impact these will have in terms of repaying the loan, once they are able to access these funds.

“I understand, in many instances, the longer loan term is requested by clients for the purpose of keeping the loan repayments at a lower value for affordability reasons, but the risk of this must be discussed.

“The other consideration here is whether the clients received any advice regarding the risk of taking out a mortgage at their age, and were offered any income protection, mortgage protection or life insurance.

‘In my mind, this is an important aspect of the process and, in this instance, if the male partner had some life cover, this may have gone a long way to paying off all or part of the home loan.

“This would have made the ongoing home loan repayment affordable for the surviving partner.”

What you need to know if you’re applying for a home loan as an older borrower

• Have a plan – will you work until the loan is repaid or do you have another way to pay it off?
• Be prepared to have a shorter loan term
• Different lenders may have different approaches

Sign up for Money with Susan Edmunds, a weekly newsletter covering all the things that affect how we make, spend and invest money.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand