What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4623571 about?

The tribunal order states: Brady Tibble must pay [The landlord/s] $4,649.01 by 5pm on Wednesday 26

How much money was awarded in case 4623571?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4623571?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4623571?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10421461-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4623571 about?

The tribunal order states: Brady Tibble must pay [The landlord/s] $4,649.01 by 5pm on Wednesday 26

How much money was awarded in case 4623571?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $5,200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4623571?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4623571?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10421461-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4623571 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4623571 — net $5,220.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 27/10/2023	$5,200.00	Rent arrears to 27/10/2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,220.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,220.44

Order

Brady Tibble must pay [The landlord/s] $4,649.01 by 5pm on Wednesday 26 June 2024, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Further to the hearing held on 16 February 2024 and the Tribunal’s order of 18 March 2024.
This matter was originally a rehearing of the Tribunal’s order of 22 August 2023 terminating the tenancy on 15 September 2023 and ordering total rent arears of $5,000.00 to that date.
The tenant moved out of the property on 27 October 2023. Therefore, the remaining issue for the Tribunal to determine is whether rent arrears were owed following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy started on 18 January 2022 and ended on 27 October 2023. The landlord says the tenancy agreement was made verbally and was never written down. The landlord claims the rent per week was $100.00.
In my order dated 18 March 2024, taking into account the landlord’s rent summary, the landlord’s bank statements and the tenant’s evidence of rent payments he has made, I found the tenant owes the landlord rent arrears of $5,200.00 to 27 October 2023 (the end of the tenancy), calculated below: Total rent owing at $100.00 pw from 18/01/2022 to 18/08/2023 as claimed by the landlord $7,600.00 Rent owing from 19/08/2023 to 27/10/2023 (the date the tenant vacated the tenancy) $1,000.00 Total rent owed $8,600.00 Less total rent paid by the tenant $3,400.00 Total rent arrears owed by the tenant $5,200.00
Before finalising a decision on the matter, the parties were given an opportunity to provide final written comments to the Tribunal.
The tenant disputes the amount of rent arrears owing. He provided a response to the Tribunal on 3 April 2024 stating: I Brady Tibble would like this matter to be reconsidered as the information provided by [The landlord/s] is untrue and incorrect. I was given the opportunity to reside at [Tenancy Address] by [Party A]. The rent amount was not discussed so out of good faith I thought $100.00 per week was a fair price. [Party A] then approached myself asking how everything was at the cottage. I told her it was great and how grateful I was. I then told her I had been paying $100.00 per week into the WWL bank account for rent, she then told me that was too much and to only pay $50.00 per week. Which I had started to do. At no time [The landlord/s] had been present during the agreement for accommodation between [Party A] and I . Only time she had approached me was to get toilet replaced as it was leaking and unhygienic. Please take this into consideration as I feel it is not fair on my behalf.
I note on the court file there is an undated letter purportedly provided by [The landlord/s] in support of the tenant’s application for Emergency Housing Assistance, where it states the tenant had been living at [Tenancy Address] for approximately 1 year and was paying $200.00 per month to stay there. This seems to support the tenant’s understanding of the rent he was liable to pay.
On 4 April 2024, [The landlord/s] provided a response for the landlord stating: I disagree with this statement by Brady Tibble. For the last year since i applied to the Tenancy Tribunal Brady has never mentioned anything about the statement he has supplied. It is just a ploy to not pay the amount specified in the judgement. This should not be reconsidered.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 states at section13(1) and section 13B that every tenancy agreement and every variation and renewal of a tenancy agreement shall be in writing and signed by both the landlord and the tenant. However, it then states at section 13C that "no tenancy agreement or variation or renewal of a tenancy agreement shall be unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing". Therefore, the absence of a formal written renewal signed by the tenant does not necessarily mean that there was no agreement.
It is a basic principle of contract that understanding and acceptance of essential terms is fundamental to the existence of a binding contract. There must be a "meeting of minds".
While I acknowledge the tenant’s position, that he understood there was an agreement for him to pay a reduced rent at the rate of $50.00 per week, he has not provided any robust independent evidence to support his view. It is critical to note that the landlord denies that there was any mutual agreement that his rent would be reduced to $50.00 per week.
On that basis, I do not accept that there is evidence to support a concluded agreement or "meeting of minds" whereby both parties understood that there would be a variation of the tenancy agreement for the tenant to pay rent at $50.00 per week.
As such, I find the landlord’s claim for rent arrears is proved as ordered above.
[The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee and grant suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4623571 — net $5,220.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 27/10/2023	$5,200.00	Rent arrears to 27/10/2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,220.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,220.44

Order

Brady Tibble must pay [The landlord/s] $4,649.01 by 5pm on Wednesday 26 June 2024, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Further to the hearing held on 16 February 2024 and the Tribunal’s order of 18 March 2024.
This matter was originally a rehearing of the Tribunal’s order of 22 August 2023 terminating the tenancy on 15 September 2023 and ordering total rent arears of $5,000.00 to that date.
The tenant moved out of the property on 27 October 2023. Therefore, the remaining issue for the Tribunal to determine is whether rent arrears were owed following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy started on 18 January 2022 and ended on 27 October 2023. The landlord says the tenancy agreement was made verbally and was never written down. The landlord claims the rent per week was $100.00.
In my order dated 18 March 2024, taking into account the landlord’s rent summary, the landlord’s bank statements and the tenant’s evidence of rent payments he has made, I found the tenant owes the landlord rent arrears of $5,200.00 to 27 October 2023 (the end of the tenancy), calculated below: Total rent owing at $100.00 pw from 18/01/2022 to 18/08/2023 as claimed by the landlord $7,600.00 Rent owing from 19/08/2023 to 27/10/2023 (the date the tenant vacated the tenancy) $1,000.00 Total rent owed $8,600.00 Less total rent paid by the tenant $3,400.00 Total rent arrears owed by the tenant $5,200.00
Before finalising a decision on the matter, the parties were given an opportunity to provide final written comments to the Tribunal.
The tenant disputes the amount of rent arrears owing. He provided a response to the Tribunal on 3 April 2024 stating: I Brady Tibble would like this matter to be reconsidered as the information provided by [The landlord/s] is untrue and incorrect. I was given the opportunity to reside at [Tenancy Address] by [Party A]. The rent amount was not discussed so out of good faith I thought $100.00 per week was a fair price. [Party A] then approached myself asking how everything was at the cottage. I told her it was great and how grateful I was. I then told her I had been paying $100.00 per week into the WWL bank account for rent, she then told me that was too much and to only pay $50.00 per week. Which I had started to do. At no time [The landlord/s] had been present during the agreement for accommodation between [Party A] and I . Only time she had approached me was to get toilet replaced as it was leaking and unhygienic. Please take this into consideration as I feel it is not fair on my behalf.
I note on the court file there is an undated letter purportedly provided by [The landlord/s] in support of the tenant’s application for Emergency Housing Assistance, where it states the tenant had been living at [Tenancy Address] for approximately 1 year and was paying $200.00 per month to stay there. This seems to support the tenant’s understanding of the rent he was liable to pay.
On 4 April 2024, [The landlord/s] provided a response for the landlord stating: I disagree with this statement by Brady Tibble. For the last year since i applied to the Tenancy Tribunal Brady has never mentioned anything about the statement he has supplied. It is just a ploy to not pay the amount specified in the judgement. This should not be reconsidered.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 states at section13(1) and section 13B that every tenancy agreement and every variation and renewal of a tenancy agreement shall be in writing and signed by both the landlord and the tenant. However, it then states at section 13C that "no tenancy agreement or variation or renewal of a tenancy agreement shall be unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing". Therefore, the absence of a formal written renewal signed by the tenant does not necessarily mean that there was no agreement.
It is a basic principle of contract that understanding and acceptance of essential terms is fundamental to the existence of a binding contract. There must be a "meeting of minds".
While I acknowledge the tenant’s position, that he understood there was an agreement for him to pay a reduced rent at the rate of $50.00 per week, he has not provided any robust independent evidence to support his view. It is critical to note that the landlord denies that there was any mutual agreement that his rent would be reduced to $50.00 per week.
On that basis, I do not accept that there is evidence to support a concluded agreement or "meeting of minds" whereby both parties understood that there would be a variation of the tenancy agreement for the tenant to pay rent at $50.00 per week.
As such, I find the landlord’s claim for rent arrears is proved as ordered above.
[The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must order the tenant to reimburse the filing fee and grant suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4623571 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4623571 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions