What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4548869 about?

The tribunal order states: The applications are dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4548869?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4548869?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4548869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9644959-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4548869 about?

The tribunal order states: The applications are dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4548869?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4548869?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4548869?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9644959-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1806, 1 Courthouse Lane, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4548869 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord had claimed in respect of rent arrears, outgoings and compensation.

The tenant had claimed in respect of a breach of quiet enjoyment and an invalid rent increase. Background

Around September 2020 a tenancy began where [The party] was the tenant. What confuses matters is that [The party] has been a Property Manager with her own company or companies. She was also involved with the Property Management company which had authority from May 2020 until the commencement of the tenancy.

The landlord was not sure at all times who was living in the premises. This was further confused by the rent payments coming from a variety of sources including [The tenant/s], [The tenant/s], two companies that [The tenant/s] was involved with being Mauri Ora Ltd and Waipa Homes Ltd, as well as two other individuals.

There was no tenancy agreement. What was agreed was that the rent at the beginning of the tenancy was $450.00 per week. The tenancy commenced around September or October 2020 with the first payment made on 20 October 2020.

The occupants living in the premises at the end of the tenancy left on 10 February 2023. Landlord’s application

The landlord failed to establish that any rent was in arrears at the end of the tenancy. The rent summary was not sufficient.

The landlord did not submit sufficient evidence to show that the tenant owed money for outgoings or that any invoices were provided to the tenant during the tenancy.

The landlord did not provide any photographs of damage at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also did not have any photographs from the beginning of the tenancy.

The landlord has not been successful with any of his claims, and they are dismissed. Tenant’s application

The tenant did not provide sufficient evidence to show that the landlord breached the tenant’s quiet enjoyment. On the day complained of the landlord was in regular communication with the tenant, rather than the occupants, about money owed. The landlord’s evidence was that he was told that the tenants had vacated the premises.

The tenant did raise doubt about the legality of the rent increase in January 2022. Had the landlord been successful with his claim for rent arrears the amount of rent owed would have been $450.00 for the entire tenancy rather than including the increased amount of $480.00 in 2022.

The tenant’s claim is also dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord had claimed in respect of rent arrears, outgoings and compensation.

The tenant had claimed in respect of a breach of quiet enjoyment and an invalid rent increase. Background

The occupants living in the premises at the end of the tenancy left on 10 February 2023. Landlord’s application

The landlord failed to establish that any rent was in arrears at the end of the tenancy. The rent summary was not sufficient.

The landlord did not submit sufficient evidence to show that the tenant owed money for outgoings or that any invoices were provided to the tenant during the tenancy.

The landlord did not provide any photographs of damage at the end of the tenancy. The landlord also did not have any photographs from the beginning of the tenancy.

The landlord has not been successful with any of his claims, and they are dismissed. Tenant’s application

The tenant’s claim is also dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4548869 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1806, 1 Courthouse Lane, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4548869 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1806, 1 Courthouse Lane, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions