What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4707550 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4707550?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4707550?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4707550?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9949773-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4707550 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4707550?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4707550?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4707550?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9949773-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1, 4 Dalmeny Close, Murrays Bay, Auckland 0630 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4707550 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr. Al-Maani appeared via phone while Mr. Wu, as the representative of the landlord, appeared in person but arrived 15 minutes after the hearing commenced.

Fortunately, not much was missed because I was talking to Mr. Al-Maani to find out his case and how he was going to satisfy me that he had discharged the burden of proof.

Mr. Al-Maani’s case can be summarised as follows: a. He did not sign the bond form. b. The bond form’s signature resembled his signature. c. He was not in New Zealand between 3 October 2022, and 9 September 2023. d. The email address on the bond form was not his. e. The bank account number on the bond form was not his. f. He allegedly signed the bond form on 22 August 2023, when he was not in New Zealand. The year ”2023” was not clear, but the date of 22 August was legible on the bond form.

I informed Mr. Al-Maani that I did not have the power to investigate and suggested that he report the matter to the police. Mr. Al-Maani confirmed he had already reported the matter to the police, and an investigation might have already been commenced.

Mr. Wu informed me that the bank account on the bond form was his and that the bank account was for him to receive his monthly pay.

Mr Wu also said that he did not receive the bond from the Bond Centre and that he did not sign the bond form on behalf of the landlord. Mr Wu said the signature on the bond form was not his. In other words, someone signed the bond without his knowledge.

I asked Mr Wu if the bond was still with the Bond Centre. Mr. Wu indicated that he would contact the Bond Centre after the hearing.

Mr Wu indicated that he did not have an issue signing the bond form if the bond was with the Bond Centre. Mr. Wu offered to email Mr. Al-Maani and coordinate with him to refund his bond from the Bond Centre provided the bond was with the Bond Centre.

Both parties expressed their interest in knowing who signed the bond form and where the bond went (if it was not with the Bond Centre), and it seems this matter could be resolved between the parties.

Mr. Al-Maani failed to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. Mr. Al-Maani claimed that someone forged his signature and received his bond, but I cannot determine if Mr. Al-Maani did not sign the signature on the bond form. I can only say that Mr. Al-Maani told me he was not in the country when the bond form was signed.

Accordingly, Mr Al-Maani’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr. Al-Maani appeared via phone while Mr. Wu, as the representative of the landlord, appeared in person but arrived 15 minutes after the hearing commenced.

Fortunately, not much was missed because I was talking to Mr. Al-Maani to find out his case and how he was going to satisfy me that he had discharged the burden of proof.

Mr. Wu informed me that the bank account on the bond form was his and that the bank account was for him to receive his monthly pay.

I asked Mr Wu if the bond was still with the Bond Centre. Mr. Wu indicated that he would contact the Bond Centre after the hearing.

Both parties expressed their interest in knowing who signed the bond form and where the bond went (if it was not with the Bond Centre), and it seems this matter could be resolved between the parties.

Accordingly, Mr Al-Maani’s application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4707550 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 1, 4 Dalmeny Close, Murrays Bay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4707550 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 1, 4 Dalmeny Close, Murrays Bay, Auckland 0630

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Property management

Frequently asked questions