Owners sometimes reset the alarm system after a false alarm, but “there is a risk that they render the alarm inoperable, leaving the building and its occupants unprotected”.
MBIE said it had alerted councils to intervene and improve the boarding houses.
“The response has been positive and in many cases the recommendations have already been implemented, and issues resolved,” head of building system, delivery and assurance Simon Thomas said in a statement.
He told RNZ the inquiry set out to find if buildings similar to Loafers posed a fire safety risk.
“All those buildings, despite having a similar profile, they’re all different, the issues present themselves in different ways… so I’m not in a position to say that, yes, there was a clear fire risk to life in one of those buildings.”
As to the problems still not fixed at some of the boarding houses, he said: “This is a system that relies on building owners and councils and [independent safety system inspectors] being aware of their responsibilities, and, look, the operation has showed that all of those people need to probably improve their performance, and we’re working with all of those people to help them do that.”
But the wider problems were ongoing: “A lack of a consistent definition of a boarding house used by each council and a lack of oversight in relation to the number and location of boarding houses in each region raises concerns for the ability to regulate this sector and ensure the safety and welfare of tenants,” the inquiry report said.