What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4632690?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4632690?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632690?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms. Related themes: Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632690?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9281339-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4632690?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4632690?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4632690?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms. Related themes: Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4632690?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9281339-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 707, 35 Hobson Street, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4632690 — Smoke alarms

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Claim dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) of the Act. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The Landlord says the tenant had a pet at the premises, contrary to the Rules of the Body Corporate. The Landlord has been sent an infringement invoice by the Body Corporate for $414.00 and is wanting the Tenant to pay it.
Section 16C of the Act states: 16C Body corporate rules part of tenancy agreement (1) This section applies to residential premises that are held in a stratum estate under the Unit Titles Act 2010. (2) Body corporate operational rules made under the Unit Titles Act 2010 that affect a tenant of premises to which this section applies are taken to be terms of the tenancy agreement. (3) A tenancy agreement that creates or evidences the letting of premises to which this section applies must set out a statement of the rules referred to in subsection (2). (4) The landlord must promptly give the tenant written notice of any variation of the rules referred to in subsection (2). (5) As soon as the tenant is notified of a variation, the terms of the tenancy agreement are taken to be varied accordingly. (6) This section does not limit section 13A.
The Body Corporate Rules (Rules) are not included with the Landlord’s application, though the Tenancy Agreement refers to them.
Even if the Rules prohibit pets at the premises, s 11 of the Act states: 11 Act generally to apply despite contrary provisions (1) Any agreement or arrangement, or any provision of any agreement or arrangement, entered into in respect of a tenancy to which this Act applies, that is inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, or that purports to exclude, modify, or restrict the operation of any such provision, shall be of no effect unless— (a) the inconsistency, exclusion, modification, or restriction is expressly permitted by this Act; or (b) the Tribunal is satisfied that, having regard to the nature of the tenancy, the provisions of the tenancy agreement, the interests of the parties, and all other relevant circumstances of the case, the inconsistency, exclusion, modification, or restriction should be permitted. (2) Subsection (1) shall not prevent a landlord from waiving voluntarily all or any of the rights and powers conferred on landlords by this Act, or from voluntarily incurring more or more extensive obligations than those that are imposed on landlords by this Act. (3) Any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon tenants by this Act shall be of no effect.
The Act does not prohibit tenants from having pets at the premises. The Body Corporate Rules are arguably inconsistent with s 40. Section 40(1)(c) requires tenants to keep premises reasonably clean and tidy. Section 40(1)(e)(i) requires tenants to leave premises reasonably clean and tidy. Had Parliament intended to import a higher standard than this, prohibiting pets, for example, on the basis of the damage they may cause or uncleanness they may leave behind at residential premises, it would have included such provisions in the Act. It has not.
I accept the Tenant agreed to not have a pet at the property and the Tenant has broken its promise. However, there is yet another legal obstacle which the Landlord encounters in its attempt to recover the Body Corporate’s invoice from the Tenant.
Section 32 of the Act states: 32 Accelerated rent or damages prohibited (1) Any provision in a tenancy agreement to the effect that, on breach by the tenant of any term of the agreement or of any of the provisions of this Act or of any other enactment, the tenant shall be liable to pay— (a) the whole or any part of the rent remaining payable under the agreement; or (b) rent of an increased amount; or (c) a sum specified in the agreement by way of damages or penalty,— shall be of no effect.
The Act prevents recovery of penalties.
I consider the Body Corporate invoice is for a rules infringement and if the Landlord requires the Tenant to pay it for breaching the tenancy agreement it would be a penalty.
Consequently, I dismiss the Landlord’s claim.
The Landlord claims the Tenant damaged a washing machine, but there were issues with the washing machine during the tenancy, which the Tenant advised the Landlord of, and which the Landlord paid to repair. There is no evidence the Tenant damaged the washing machine. Neither the Landlord or I are qualified to assess damage to the washing machine, and the repairperson has not given any definitive statement from which to impute liability to the Tenant. It was more likely a case of fair wear and tear given historic issues with the machine.

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
Claim dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, return all keys and security devices, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit. See section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). The tenant is required to replace worn out smoke alarm batteries during the tenancy. See section 40(1)(ca) of the Act. The tenant must also replace standard light bulbs.
The Landlord says the tenant had a pet at the premises, contrary to the Rules of the Body Corporate. The Landlord has been sent an infringement invoice by the Body Corporate for $414.00 and is wanting the Tenant to pay it.
Section 16C of the Act states: 16C Body corporate rules part of tenancy agreement (1) This section applies to residential premises that are held in a stratum estate under the Unit Titles Act 2010. (2) Body corporate operational rules made under the Unit Titles Act 2010 that affect a tenant of premises to which this section applies are taken to be terms of the tenancy agreement. (3) A tenancy agreement that creates or evidences the letting of premises to which this section applies must set out a statement of the rules referred to in subsection (2). (4) The landlord must promptly give the tenant written notice of any variation of the rules referred to in subsection (2). (5) As soon as the tenant is notified of a variation, the terms of the tenancy agreement are taken to be varied accordingly. (6) This section does not limit section 13A.
The Body Corporate Rules (Rules) are not included with the Landlord’s application, though the Tenancy Agreement refers to them.
Even if the Rules prohibit pets at the premises, s 11 of the Act states: 11 Act generally to apply despite contrary provisions (1) Any agreement or arrangement, or any provision of any agreement or arrangement, entered into in respect of a tenancy to which this Act applies, that is inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, or that purports to exclude, modify, or restrict the operation of any such provision, shall be of no effect unless— (a) the inconsistency, exclusion, modification, or restriction is expressly permitted by this Act; or (b) the Tribunal is satisfied that, having regard to the nature of the tenancy, the provisions of the tenancy agreement, the interests of the parties, and all other relevant circumstances of the case, the inconsistency, exclusion, modification, or restriction should be permitted. (2) Subsection (1) shall not prevent a landlord from waiving voluntarily all or any of the rights and powers conferred on landlords by this Act, or from voluntarily incurring more or more extensive obligations than those that are imposed on landlords by this Act. (3) Any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon tenants by this Act shall be of no effect.
The Act does not prohibit tenants from having pets at the premises. The Body Corporate Rules are arguably inconsistent with s 40. Section 40(1)(c) requires tenants to keep premises reasonably clean and tidy. Section 40(1)(e)(i) requires tenants to leave premises reasonably clean and tidy. Had Parliament intended to import a higher standard than this, prohibiting pets, for example, on the basis of the damage they may cause or uncleanness they may leave behind at residential premises, it would have included such provisions in the Act. It has not.
I accept the Tenant agreed to not have a pet at the property and the Tenant has broken its promise. However, there is yet another legal obstacle which the Landlord encounters in its attempt to recover the Body Corporate’s invoice from the Tenant.
Section 32 of the Act states: 32 Accelerated rent or damages prohibited (1) Any provision in a tenancy agreement to the effect that, on breach by the tenant of any term of the agreement or of any of the provisions of this Act or of any other enactment, the tenant shall be liable to pay— (a) the whole or any part of the rent remaining payable under the agreement; or (b) rent of an increased amount; or (c) a sum specified in the agreement by way of damages or penalty,— shall be of no effect.
The Act prevents recovery of penalties.
I consider the Body Corporate invoice is for a rules infringement and if the Landlord requires the Tenant to pay it for breaching the tenancy agreement it would be a penalty.
Consequently, I dismiss the Landlord’s claim.
The Landlord claims the Tenant damaged a washing machine, but there were issues with the washing machine during the tenancy, which the Tenant advised the Landlord of, and which the Landlord paid to repair. There is no evidence the Tenant damaged the washing machine. Neither the Landlord or I are qualified to assess damage to the washing machine, and the repairperson has not given any definitive statement from which to impute liability to the Tenant. It was more likely a case of fair wear and tear given historic issues with the machine.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632690 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat 707, 35 Hobson Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4632690 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat 707, 35 Hobson Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions