KEY POINTS:
The dispute between Colleen Dicks and the builder of her Hobsonville home could have been just one of 40,000 other such claims over leaky homes, but for the widow's tenacity.
The 70-year-old widow fought a three-year legal battle, during which she became the public face of the many
homeowners left distraught and out of pocket by the damage done to their homes.
The saga seemingly ended in February after Mrs Dicks learned an appeal would not be filed against the landmark judgment in her favour.
But Mrs Dicks faces a large legal bill - and Building and Construction Minister Clayton Cosgrove has waded in with a crack at lawyers involved in leaky building disputes.
Mr Cosgrove claims some lawyers drag out the settlement process but Mrs Dicks' lawyer, Paul Grimshaw, said his bill was "entirely justified".
Why did Colleen Dicks go to court? In 1994 Mrs Dicks hired building firm Hobson Swan, now in liquidation, to build her new house. The Waitakere District Council granted approval for the house and carried out building inspections.
By 2005, Mrs Dicks had been forced to leave her home. Water started pouring down the inside of the house's windows soon after she moved, and the builder did not fix leaks caused by window seals having not been installed. The water eventually rotted the frame of the house.
What happened? Mrs Dicks sued the builders, the company director and the Waitakere City Council. The High Court found in favour of Mrs Dicks and awarded her $250,000 damages.
Because Hobson Swan was in liquidation Waitakere City Council was liable for the bill - a precedent-setting situation. The council's insurers, Riskpool, considered appealing but in February decided not to.
Mrs Dicks must have been pleased after such a comprehensive victory? The bubbly flowed until the moment she received her lawyer's bill for $198,117. Mrs Dicks winced, and she wished she had not tried to get justice.
Mr Grimshaw has said the bill was so high because the approach the defendants took to the case led to a lengthy and costly court process.
The final figure was heavily discounted, he said.
Mr Grimshaw's law firm has about 5000 clients involved in claims arising from leaky buildings.
"Our staff are dedicated to obtaining the best result for our clients at the most cost-effective price," the firm's website says.
"We won't offer any false hopes or promises, rather an honest and objective assessment based on our unique experience in this field."
What can Mrs Dicks do now? She has asked a lawyer friend to scrutinise Mr Grimshaw's account.
"We have got the costs put on hold, and he's going to work it out with Mr Grimshaw and see what should be a fair outcome," Mrs Dicks said.
"Do I feel happier about the bill? Indeed not, I'm just prepared to go with the flow and see what happens.
"I don't want it all to get nasty or anything, I just want things clarified."
Building and Construction Minister Clayton Cosgrove suggested Mrs Dicks could ask the Law Society to see whether the bill was fair and reasonable.
The Law Society advises people with concerns about a lawyer's bill to ask for an itemised account. If still concerned, they can ask the relevant district law society to review the bill. If still not satisfied, the complainant can appeal to a registrar of the High Court.
Why has Clayton Cosgrove become involved? Mr Cosgrove, who is also an Associate Justice Minister, oversees the Weathertight Homes Tribunal - the Government's response to the leaky homes crisis.
In claiming that lawyers would prefer to take leaky homes cases through the courts, Mr Cosgrove is also promoting the tribunal as a "cheaper and faster alternative".
"My heart goes out to Mrs Dicks, who fought hard to get compensation ," Mr Cosgrove said.
"Mrs Dicks said ... she honestly believed that when she was told she would receive costs at the end of the court trial that she would receive 100 per cent."
What does Paul Grimshaw say in response?
He replies that his firm's costs covered the full processes of the case from beginning to end, mediation efforts and a six-day High Court trial.
Mrs Dicks was awarded $367,356, and after fees, court costs, expert costs and general expenses she would be left with a net result of around $169,000.
"She achieved a complete victory and an excellent result."
Mr Grimshaw has not returned further calls.
What happens now? Mr Cosgrove has introduced a bill to Parliament to clarify that leaky homes claimants could be awarded general damages, including damages for mental distress and anxiety.
The move follows a High Court decision that existing legislation did not allow general damages - a remedy already awarded in 21 per cent of settlements.
Mrs Dicks is considering what she can do to keep as much as possible of her court settlement in her own pocket.
"I'm just hoping we do come to an amicable agreement," she said.
"There were just a couple of things I thought were not as they should be.
"All I do want is to be able to say I am at home and shut the door."
