What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4662152 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant’s] name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 4662152?

Balance Of Previous Order 4301149 Da…: $2,155.44 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,254.13 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662152?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662152?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10343166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4662152 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant’s] name and identifying details must not be published.

How much money was awarded in case 4662152?

Balance Of Previous Order 4301149 Da…: $2,155.44 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,254.13 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662152?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662152?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10343166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit 1, 9 Boutique Way, Orewa, Auckland 0931 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4662152 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Introduction

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662152 — net $2,119.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22.09.2021	$4,254.13		Rent arrears to 22.09.2021
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Balance of previous order 4301149 dated 06/09/2021		$2,155.44	Balance of previous order 4301149 dated 06/09/2021
Total award	$4,274.57	$2,155.44
Net award	$2,119.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,119.13

The application today is for rent arrears. However, the Tribunal’s, the District Court’s, and the High Court’s decisions should be factored into the outcome. 1

The landlord’s authorised persons attended the hearing.

The tenant did not attend.

This is a rehearing of the Tribunal’s decision on 15 January 2024. I must disregard the Tribunal’s earlier order and decide the case afresh.

One of the reasons a rehearing was granted was the tenant had not been given proper notice of the hearing because it was using stale service address details. Regrettably, it appears the Tribunal has sent its the notice of hearing to the tenant’s old service address again.

Despite this, I consider the rehearing should proceed. The landlord has recently emailed the tenant with its documents for the hearing, so she would have been reminded of the proceedings. A reasonably diligent litigant would have then communicated with the Tribunal about the hearing details. Even prior to the landlord’s emails, if the tenant had followed her application for rehearing with reasonable diligence, would have been aware that a rehearing had been granted. Today, the Tribunal telephoned the tenant, but she did not answer her telephone or call into the hearing as the Registrar advised she could do.

This matter has taken up a substantial amount of Tribunal and Court resources and time. Further delay is not warranted. Discussion

This matter dates from applications made by the parties in 2021. Since the original hearing and decision there have been appeals and decisions delivered in the District Court and the High Court.

Today, the Tribunal’s task is to calculate the rent arrears and factor in the implications of all the Tribunal and court findings. 1 I take a pragmatic and commonsense approach to this as required by s 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Doing so should resolve all matters between the parties.

The landlord’s agents provided a rent summary and gave oral evidence which proved the arrears owing at the end of the tenancy. the Tribunal’s order for rent reduction is disregarded because it was quashed partially in the District Court and fully in the High Court.

The Tribunal’s original order was for rent reduction, exemplary damages for discrimination and failing to lodge the bond, compensation for interference with reasonable peace, outgoings, and the filing fee.

Of those orders, the Tribunal’s orders for rent reduction and exemplary damages for discrimination have been quashed. 2 Therefore, the landlord must only pay the tenant for the remaining orders, the sum of which is $2,155.44. I have read the tenant’s rehearing application submissions and I agree with her in that regard.

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded in its application, the Tribunal must order the tenant to reimburse it for the filing fee.

The Tribunal previously granted the tenant non-publication. That is continued in this case because it is really part of the whole proceedings. 3 Overall, the tenant has substantially succeeded in her claims, and I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662152 — net $2,119.13 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22.09.2021	$4,254.13		Rent arrears to 22.09.2021
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44		Filing fee reimbursement
Balance of previous order 4301149 dated 06/09/2021		$2,155.44	Balance of previous order 4301149 dated 06/09/2021
Total award	$4,274.57	$2,155.44
Net award	$2,119.13
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,119.13

Order

[The tenant’s] name and identifying details must not be published.
[The tenant] must pay Exclusive Estates Limited $2,119.13 immediately as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

Introduction

The application today is for rent arrears. However, the Tribunal’s, the District Court’s, and the High Court’s decisions should be factored into the outcome. 1
The landlord’s authorised persons attended the hearing.
The tenant did not attend.
This is a rehearing of the Tribunal’s decision on 15 January 2024. I must disregard the Tribunal’s earlier order and decide the case afresh.
One of the reasons a rehearing was granted was the tenant had not been given proper notice of the hearing because it was using stale service address details. Regrettably, it appears the Tribunal has sent its the notice of hearing to the tenant’s old service address again.
Despite this, I consider the rehearing should proceed. The landlord has recently emailed the tenant with its documents for the hearing, so she would have been reminded of the proceedings. A reasonably diligent litigant would have then communicated with the Tribunal about the hearing details. Even prior to the landlord’s emails, if the tenant had followed her application for rehearing with reasonable diligence, would have been aware that a rehearing had been granted. Today, the Tribunal telephoned the tenant, but she did not answer her telephone or call into the hearing as the Registrar advised she could do.
This matter has taken up a substantial amount of Tribunal and Court resources and time. Further delay is not warranted. Discussion
This matter dates from applications made by the parties in 2021. Since the original hearing and decision there have been appeals and decisions delivered in the District Court and the High Court.
Today, the Tribunal’s task is to calculate the rent arrears and factor in the implications of all the Tribunal and court findings. 1 I take a pragmatic and commonsense approach to this as required by s 85 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Doing so should resolve all matters between the parties.
The landlord’s agents provided a rent summary and gave oral evidence which proved the arrears owing at the end of the tenancy. the Tribunal’s order for rent reduction is disregarded because it was quashed partially in the District Court and fully in the High Court.
The Tribunal’s original order was for rent reduction, exemplary damages for discrimination and failing to lodge the bond, compensation for interference with reasonable peace, outgoings, and the filing fee.
Of those orders, the Tribunal’s orders for rent reduction and exemplary damages for discrimination have been quashed. 2 Therefore, the landlord must only pay the tenant for the remaining orders, the sum of which is $2,155.44. I have read the tenant’s rehearing application submissions and I agree with her in that regard.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded in its application, the Tribunal must order the tenant to reimburse it for the filing fee.
The Tribunal previously granted the tenant non-publication. That is continued in this case because it is really part of the whole proceedings. 3 Overall, the tenant has substantially succeeded in her claims, and I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662152 — Rent arrears at Unit 1, 9 Boutique Way, Orewa, Auckland 0931

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662152 — Rent arrears at Unit 1, 9 Boutique Way, Orewa, Auckland 0931

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions