What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4642870 about?

The tribunal order states: Chris Eden Wallace must pay [The landlord/s] $2,113.30 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4642870?

Compensation: $1,390.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,992.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4642870?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4642870?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9775819-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4642870 about?

The tribunal order states: Chris Eden Wallace must pay [The landlord/s] $2,113.30 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4642870?

Compensation: $1,390.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,992.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4642870?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4642870?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9775819-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

367 Telephone Road, Puketaha, RD1, Hamilton 3281 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4642870 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4642870 — net $2,613.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,992.86	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation loss of rent	$1,390.00	Compensation loss of rent
Exemplary damages, Failure to allow inspection	$500.00	Exemplary damages, Failure to allow inspection
Net award	$2,613.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,613.30

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, exemplary damages refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent ?

The tenancy ended on 18 August 2023. The tenant agreed that he had received the notice to increase the rent and said he was going through a difficult time dealing with the loss of a family member. He said that if the premises had been maintained he would have paid the increased rent but did not pay the rent increase.

Later in the hearing the tenant questioned the increase weekly rent. He had not made an application to the Tribunal for a reduction in rent and based on market rent for the premises.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy and this is awarded.

Did the tenant refuse inspections?

[The landlord/s] claims that after the tenant gave notice on 21 July 2023 to end the tenancy on 18 August 2023, they have not allowed them entry to the premises when they were entitled to enter.

A landlord may enter the premises during the tenancy with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation without reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(b) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant wrote on 21 July that he did not want anyone to view the premises during the time that he was moving out of the premises and into his new rental.

The tenant prior to this time had let contractors onto the premises.

The landlord replied to the tenants notice to terminate and said that she would cancel the inspection scheduled for the next day, and get back to the tenant with a new date.

The landlord said that because she did not hear from the tenant about an agreed date for an inspection no further inspections or viewings were held before the tenancy ended. She believed that she had a legal right to conduct inspections but did not want to conduct them without the tenant agreeing.

The landlord used the ‘myrent’ app to send notices and communications to the tenant. She confirmed that the tenant also received all these by email as well.

This was confirmed by the tenant. He did not use the ‘myrent’ app as he did not know how it worked, but agreed that he received all the notices by email.

The landlord had organised for a contractor and an inspection on 30 July but cancelled this because the tenant did not reply or confirm that they were willing to have an inspection.

The tenant said that they did not refuse to have inspections or maintenance, only viewings.

There are two claims to examine, the refusal to allow inspections and maintenance and the refusal to allow prospective tenants to view the premises.

With the prior consent of a tenant a landlord may enter the premises at any reasonable time for the purposes of showing the premises to prospective tenants. See section 48(3) RTA. Failure to allow the landlord to enter without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act. See section 48(4)RTA.

The letter date 21 July from the tenant “kindly requested” that no one view the premises during the notice period , which went for a month.

The tenant on 22 July also asked for no inspections due to personal challenges and being busy sorting out the premises to move.

The landlord provided evidence that on at least one occasion she had requested a new date but received no reply.

I find that there is not enough evidence provided supporting the claim that the tenant refused inspections and maintenance. There is no requirement that the tenant agree with the landlords’ dates for these inspections. There is a statutory right for the landlord to enter and only a requirement that the landlord give the correct notice.

It was the landlord’s decision not to go ahead with the inspections based on the lack of confirmation from the tenant about the times and dates. This claim is dismissed.

The landlord sought to show prospective tenants the premises and under section 48(3) the tenant needs to give consent for this or a reasonable excuse for withholding consent if access is denied.

The tenant did not expand on what his personal challenges were but had indicated that he had a family bereavement earlier in the year, was busy moving and would find it very intrusive.

Because consent was withheld the landlord was unable to tenant the premises as soon as they could and claimed compensation for the delay of 4 weeks rent. The landlord confirmed that the premises were not re rented until October 2023.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I find that this is an intentional breach of the RTA because there was no reasonable excuse given denying the landlord the right to enter. Ending a tenancy is a busy time and having other people through the premises is intrusive. This is not unique to this tenancy.

There was no elaboration on any other excuses for this refusal. The effect on the landlord was a protracted procedure for re-tenanting the premises causing a loss to them. It is in the public interest that tenants comply with the requirements of the RTA.I find it just in these circumstances to award $500.00 in exemplary damages.

The second part of this claim is for compensation for the loss of rent. The tenants’ actions stopped the landlord from showing interested parties through the premises. However, there is no guarantee that the premises would be rented immediately, and some maintenance was done after the tenancy ended. I find an award $1390.00 being 2 weeks rent appropriate for loss of rent income during this time.

Section 95A RTA states, regarding suppression orders, that the Tribunal must on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case. The applicant sought name suppression and is substantially successful, name suppression is granted.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4642870 — net $2,613.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,992.86	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation loss of rent	$1,390.00	Compensation loss of rent
Exemplary damages, Failure to allow inspection	$500.00	Exemplary damages, Failure to allow inspection
Net award	$2,613.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,613.30