But Building and Construction Minister Maurice Williamson says now that all parties have agreed to the package, more leaky homes will be fixed instead of homeowners spending thousands in costly litigation.
"I am proud that this Government has been able to deliver owners of leaky homes a positive, alternative way of getting their home fixed so they can move on with their lives," he said last week.
Tim Rainey of Rainey Law welcomed the package, which he said was good but not quite in the way the Government intended.
"It is certainly good news for the many homeowners who have kept their eyes firmly closed to the possibility that they may own a leaky home. The fear of being left totally on your own with no options is now gone.
"Affected homeowners are guaranteed some help as long as they bring their claim within the 10 years."
He said any homeowner or body corporate built after July 29, 2001 - 10 years before this scheme - should apply for an assessor's report, whether they think their home is leaky or not.
"It is also good news for anyone who has an existing claim which has not been settled or adjudicated. The scheme allows those homeowners and councils to tap into a significant source of money which should make it easier to negotiate a settlement of claims.
"I do not think that in most instances the scheme will be used as an alternative to litigation because it leaves too much for the homeowners to pay to have their leaky home repaired.
"But it does not have to be used as an alternative because you can, if it is done carefully, pursue both litigation and the scheme at the same time."
The scheme would result in more potentially leaky homes being identified and repaired.
"That will probably see more legal claims in the short term because it makes sense to at least see if a better deal than 25 per cent or 50 per cent can be obtained by negotiation," Rainey said.
Gareth Lewis, a partner at Grimshaw & Co, criticised the new scheme for being too complicated. "A significant amount of work is required to identify whether any particular homeowner is eligible. It requires that homeowners sign lengthy contracts with the Government in which they give up significant rights.
"We advise homeowners not to sign these agreements without taking legal advice. ... There are many fish hooks in the scheme for homeowners.
"The option of claiming through the courts is a lot simpler. It allows the homeowner to claim for the full cost of repairs together with consequential losses and general damages for distress. The option of claiming through court also provides more flexibility to the homeowner in that they have a choice as to what they do with the money recovered.
"Unfortunately, the new package is not available to homeowners who cannot obtain bank funding for their 50 per cent contribution," Lewis said.
Structural engineer John Scarry said: "The Government, and hence taxpayer, should be paying for the repairs, and then the Government should sue liable materials suppliers and others for billions.
"Much mention has been made of the $1 billion cost to the Government of this aid package, but there is no cost. Getting off with only 25 per cent of repair costs for just some of the affected houses, by the time GST at 15 per cent is considered, plus the PAYE tax on the workers, and supplier and contractor taxes on profits are paid, the Government will be showing a profit."
