What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4571192?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4571192?

Orders Apply Around Publication Of T…: $375.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4571192?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Compensation.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4571192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9543896-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4571192?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4571192?

Orders Apply Around Publication Of T…: $375.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4571192?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Compensation.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4571192?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9543896-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5 Geoffrey Road, Torbay, Auckland 0630 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4571192 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4571192. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
orders apply around publication of this decision. 2. By consent, Barfoot & Thompson Torbay as agent for Tim Veale will p	$375.00		orders apply around publication of this decision. 2. By consent, Barfoot & Thompson Torbay as agent for Tim Veale will p

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4571192. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
orders apply around publication of this decision. 2. By consent, Barfoot & Thompson Torbay as agent for Tim Veale will p	$375.00		orders apply around publication of this decision. 2. By consent, Barfoot & Thompson Torbay as agent for Tim Veale will p

Order

No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
By consent, Barfoot & Thompson Torbay as agent for Tim Veale will pay Anika Hopper $375.00 as reimbursement for an insurance excess.
The application for a market rent adjustment is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant seeks reimbursement of the insurance excess paid for accidental flood damage to the property and seeks a market rent assessment following a rent increase.
The landlord accepts that the insurance excess should be reimbursed. That amount is ordered by consent.
The landlord submits that the new rent is in line with market rents and seeks that the application for adjustment is dismissed. The premises
The premises is a 5-bedroom, 2-bathroom house located in Torbay, on Auckland’s North Shore. The tenant estimates the premises is about 150m 2 and it has a shared driveway. There is small, grassed area outside.
There are three double bedrooms and two smaller bedrooms. The tenant describes there as more akin to offices. The landlord says, while smaller, they do contain the amenities of a bedroom, such as built-in wardrobes.
The tenancy commenced on 4 September 2020. The rent at the start of the tenancy was $760 per week. That increased to $780 in March 2022.
In 2023, the tenant was given notice of a rent increase to $850 per week from 14 May 2023. That increase, of $70 per week is what the tenant objects to.
At the hearing I was referred to the bond data held by Tenancy Services for rents in Torbay. The tenant says these show a rental range of $544 - $793 for the six- month period ending 31 March 2023.
Further, the tenant relied on a statement on the landlord’s website indicating that average rents across the North Shore had increased by 3.2% over the last year. On that basis, she submits that an increased of 8.9% is beyond the range.
Finally, the tenant notes that the premises is in a condition which shows it age – there is single glazing, wooden window frames, and the property tends to be cold, particularly in the evenings. There are some outstanding maintenance issues.
The landlord submits that the new rent is within the market range for Torbay. They note that the bond range relied on by the tenant is generic and does not break the properties down by number of bedrooms. When that is analysed, there is a cross-over between the top end of the range for a 4-bedroom house and the bottom end of the range for a 5+ bedroom house in Torbay. The rent charged is within that range.
Both parties referred me to advertised properties they said were comparable to the premises, and which supported their positions in relation to the market rent for the premises. Analysis
The relevant provision of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) is section 25, which provides: Market rent (1) On an application made to it at any time by the tenant, the Tribunal may, in accordance with the succeeding provisions of this section, on being satisfied that the rent payable or to become payable for the tenancy exceeds the market rent by a substantial amount, make an order reducing the rent to an amount, to be specified in the order, that is in line with the market rent. (2) .... (3) For the purposes of this Act, the market rent for any tenancy shall be the rent that, without regard to the personal circumstances of the landlord or the tenant, a willing landlord might reasonably expect to receive and a willing tenant might reasonably expect to pay for the tenancy, taking into consideration the general level of rents (other than income-related rents within the meaning of section 2(1)of the Public and Community Housing Management Act 1992) for comparable tenancies of comparable premises in the locality or in similar localities and such other matters as the Tribunal considers relevant. (4) An order made under this section shall take effect on and from a date to be specified in the order, which may be the date of the order or any earlier or later date, but being no earlier than the date of the application for the order and no later than 30 days after the date of the order.
Accordingly, the Tribunal may order a reduction of the rent to an amount in line with market rent, if the rent for the tenancy exceeds the market rent by a substantial amount. ‘Market rent’ is the rent that a willing landlord might reasonably expect to receive, and a willing tenant might reasonably expect to pay, taking into consideration the general level of rents for comparable tenancies or comparable premises in the locality or in similar localities and such other matters as the Tribunal considers relevant.
The questions we must determine are as follows: a.Firstly, what a market rate of rent would be for these premises b.Secondly whether the rent increase is substantially above the market rate, and, if so, c.Thirdly, what the rent should be.

What would a market rent be for these premises?

My understanding is that this premises is part of a cross-lease property, with a second dwelling down a shared driveway. Both dwellings are standalone. There is limited lawn, and no covered parking.
One of the challenges that we have faced in this case, is that neither party has provided clear of rental rates, for what I consider to be comparable premises. Both parties provided examples they said were comparable, but the landlords tended to be newer and larger, and the tenant focussed on 3-bedroom homes.
Further, as I indicated, they are the rents the premises are offered for, there is no indication of if they were rented, and if so, at what rate.
Given that, the best evidence that is available to the Tribunal relating to rental levels in Torbay, is the Tenancy Services bond data. When bonds are lodged with the Bond Centre, data is collected for all that area, and is publicly available. I note that this data has been referred to by both parties. I also note that when I have considered this data, I have used the most current data at the time I heard this matter, noting that this data is updated 6-monthly. 1 So the data referred to in this decision is for the period ending 31 August 2023. 1 Found at https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/rent-bond-and-bills/market-rent/
The Tenancy Services bond data records that over the 6-month period from 1 March 2023 to 31 August 2023, the Bond Centre received 855 bonds lodged, and as far as the rentals are concerned, are reported as follows: a.Lower quartile $569 b.Median rent $685 c.Upper quartile $830
The data also includes a market rent estimate taking account of all 192 bonds held for four-bedroom houses in Torbay: a.Lower quartile $775 b.Median $850 c.Upper quartile $905
The data also includes a market rent estimate taking account of all 54 bonds held for 5+-bedroom houses in Torbay: a.Lower quartile $850 b.Median $900 c.Upper quartile $1100
As far as this data is concerned, in my assessment it must be accepted as fairly representative of general rentals in the area, given the data is calculated based on 855 total tenancies, then 192 four-bedroom premises and a further 54 five+ bedroom premises. That is a large sample population, which means that in the event there were outliers (i.e. tenancies with very high rent, or very low rent), then that would average out over all of the tenancies.
I also note that the data is based on mathematical quartiles. That said, in my view it can be accepted that they would very likely represent the standard and amenity of the premises to which they relate. For example, a tenancy which is of a high quality, new, large and well-appointed, will attract a higher rent, and therefore likely fall within the mathematical upper quartile. The same could be said for tenancies of a more modest standard.
Considering the photographs provided, and taking into account the age of the premises, the facilities provided, the size of the premises, and in particular the size of the two smaller bedrooms, I consider this premises falls somewhere between middle quartile of four-bedroom homes and the bottom quartile of five+ bedroom range. While there are 5 bedrooms, the total floor area is smaller than expected for a 5-bedroom home, and it more comparable with a 4-bedroom home.
While I accept that the two bedrooms are smaller than some, I consider they are still bedrooms, they are used by the tenant as such, and they could be re- tenanted to others as bedrooms. It is not accurate to describe this premises as a three-bedroom home, and its market rent should not be assessed on that basis.
The rent set by the landlord falls within the range I have considered appropriate for this premises.
Accordingly, the tenant’s assessment for a market rent adjustment must fail.
The application is accordingly dismissed. Suppression
Under Section 95A(1) RTA suppression order must be granted if on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings.
In the present case, the tenant was not wholly or substantially successful.
I have considered if I should grant a name suppression order for the tenant having regard to the interests of the parties and public interest under Section 95A(4) RTA.
I am mindful that open justice is a fundamental principle in our legal system. The issue here I need to consider is whether suppressing the tenant’s name and identifying details outweigh the interest of the open justice reporting principle.
In my view, the application for name suppression and identifying details ought to be declined for the following reasons: a. It is common for parties appearing before the Tribunal to seek suppression orders. But that is not of itself a sufficient reason to make the order. b. The disputes before me are not unusual or other than the ordinary business of the Tribunal. c. The open justice principle requires the outcome of adjudication to be available to the public; and d. Weighing up the interests of the tenant and the public interest, the public interest outweighs the tenant’s interests.
Accordingly, no order is made for suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4571192 — Property damage at 5 Geoffrey Road, Torbay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4571192 — Property damage at 5 Geoffrey Road, Torbay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What would a market rent be for these premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What would a market rent be for these premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions