How much money was awarded in case 4676977?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4676977?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4676977?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9619014-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4676977?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4676977?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4676977?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9619014-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4676977 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4676977 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.

An order is made pursuant to section 91B(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) dispensing with service of this application on the tenant.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $212.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately, being part of rent arrears owing by the tenant to the landlord as at 16 May 2023.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $212 and for refund of the bond. The tenancy ended on 16 May 2023 and the rent arrears owing as at that date were $859.71. The landlord is however only claiming $212 because that is the amount of the bond that is being held with the Bond Centre.

The application was filed more than two months after the end of the tenancy so the usual service rules no longer apply.

The rule is that the application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made. See section 91A(2) of the RTA.

The application has not been served in accordance with these requirements.

The reason for that is that the landlord has no information at all as to where the tenant is currently located. The landlord has no forwarding address nor any e- mail address. The cell phone is not being answered. The tenant did not provide any notice of termination of the tenancy, he simply left. The landlord’s evidence is that as a social housing provider this is a natural characteristic of many of its tenants. They do not have forwarding addresses or e-mail addresses.

The landlord asks for an order dispensing with any service under s 91B (2) today, in the light of these circumstances just outlined.

Given the landlord’s explanation of the facts applying in this case, I am satisfied by a narrow margin that an order can be made today dispensing with service of the application on the tenant and I am therefore prepared to make the substantive orders sought today.

Going forward, the landlord should ensure that if it is wanting any orders relating to service to be made at the first hearing of the matter, the application for those orders relating to service should be set out in its application, together with all relevant supporting evidence such as attempts to promptly locate the tenant and the like. That way, the tenant has full notice of the orders that are being sought.

Typically, I would expect a landlord to produce documented evidence of attempts to locate a tenant or communicate with them as soon as the tenancy came to an end. It would not be uncommon for a tenant to be more difficult to locate, the more time that passes following the ending of the tenancy.

Regarding adequate service on a respondent, the first step would usually of course be exploring any avenues to try and actually serve the tenant or otherwise bring the application to the attention of the tenant by leaving it an address where a landlord knows the tenant may now reside or emailing it to the tenant at an e- mail address the tenant has recently used. It would really only be in a last resort situation that a landlord would apply for an order dispensing with service.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord’s name and identifying details.
An order is made pursuant to section 91B(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) dispensing with service of this application on the tenant.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $212.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately, being part of rent arrears owing by the tenant to the landlord as at 16 May 2023.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $212 and for refund of the bond. The tenancy ended on 16 May 2023 and the rent arrears owing as at that date were $859.71. The landlord is however only claiming $212 because that is the amount of the bond that is being held with the Bond Centre.
The application was filed more than two months after the end of the tenancy so the usual service rules no longer apply.
The rule is that the application must be served either personally on the tenant, on someone over the age of 16 living at address where the tenant now lives, or by post to an address provided by the tenant within two months before the application was made. See section 91A(2) of the RTA.
The application has not been served in accordance with these requirements.
The reason for that is that the landlord has no information at all as to where the tenant is currently located. The landlord has no forwarding address nor any e- mail address. The cell phone is not being answered. The tenant did not provide any notice of termination of the tenancy, he simply left. The landlord’s evidence is that as a social housing provider this is a natural characteristic of many of its tenants. They do not have forwarding addresses or e-mail addresses.
The landlord asks for an order dispensing with any service under s 91B (2) today, in the light of these circumstances just outlined.
Given the landlord’s explanation of the facts applying in this case, I am satisfied by a narrow margin that an order can be made today dispensing with service of the application on the tenant and I am therefore prepared to make the substantive orders sought today.
Going forward, the landlord should ensure that if it is wanting any orders relating to service to be made at the first hearing of the matter, the application for those orders relating to service should be set out in its application, together with all relevant supporting evidence such as attempts to promptly locate the tenant and the like. That way, the tenant has full notice of the orders that are being sought.
Typically, I would expect a landlord to produce documented evidence of attempts to locate a tenant or communicate with them as soon as the tenancy came to an end. It would not be uncommon for a tenant to be more difficult to locate, the more time that passes following the ending of the tenancy.
Regarding adequate service on a respondent, the first step would usually of course be exploring any avenues to try and actually serve the tenant or otherwise bring the application to the attention of the tenant by leaving it an address where a landlord knows the tenant may now reside or emailing it to the tenant at an e- mail address the tenant has recently used. It would really only be in a last resort situation that a landlord would apply for an order dispensing with service.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4676977 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4676977 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions