What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4738809?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4738809?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4738809?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4738809?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9896075-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4738809?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4738809?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4738809?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4738809?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9896075-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

2 Nola Place, Kaitaia, Kaitaia 0410 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4738809 — 14-day notice

Reasons

Ms Fesootai-Tagataese attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant, Ms Rimene, did not attend.

The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy for breach by Ms Rimene of obligations under the tenancy agreement or the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act), but in particular: • Not repairing two broken windows; • Vehicles being parked on the lawn at the premises; • Failing to keep the stove, kitchen cupboards, and bathroom vanity reasonably clean; • Failing to keep the lawns reasonably tidy; • Failing to remove rubbish from the garage; • Failing to communicate with her tenancy manager and failing to engage with the ‘wrap around services’ provided by He Korowai Trust; and • Failing to sign a variation agreement to vary the terms of the tenancy agreement.

The Tribunal can terminate a tenancy under section 56(1) of the Act if the following criteria is satisfied: (i)the tenant has committed a breach of the Act or the tenancy agreement; (ii)for a breach capable of remedy, the landlord has issued the tenant with a notice requiring the tenant to remedy the breach within a period specified in the notice (not being less than 14 days); (iii)the tenant has failed to remedy the breach within the required period; and (iv)the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable (unfair) to refuse to make a termination order.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The first criteria in section 56(1) is that the tenant must have committed a breach of the Act or the tenancy agreement.

There is no obligation on Ms Rimene, either in the Act or in the tenancy agreement, to sign a variation of the tenancy agreement. Similarly, while it may be in her interests to do so, there is no legal obligation on Ms Rimene to communicate with the landlord or to engage in the wrap around services offered to her by He Korowai Trust. These alleged ‘breaches’ cannot therefore support an application for termination.

Sections 40(1)(c) and 40(2) of the Act provides that a tenant must keep the premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy and must not carelessly or intentionally damage the premises.

The landlord has issued 14 day notices requiring Ms Rimene to remedy the alleged breaches and Ms Fesootai-Tagataese confirmed that the vehicles have since been removed and the windows repaired. She also said that she inspected the premises on the morning of the hearing, and the areas inside the premises were now reasonably clean. However, she said that the lawns were still not reasonably tidy and, although she did not look inside the garage, she believes that there is still some rubbish there.

I am not satisfied that the landlord has provided sufficient evidence to support that, because of the nature and extent of the breach, it would be unfair to not terminate the tenancy. As mentioned, Ms Fesootai-Tagataese did not look inside the garage and therefore did not have sufficient evidence to support her belief that there was still rubbish there or, if there was, it was of such an extent that it may cause damage to the property or may pose a risk to the health or safety of any person occupying or visiting the premises. Ms Fesootai-Tagataese also did not provide photographs or other evidence to support the nature and extent of the untidiness of the lawns.

The application for termination of the tenancy is therefore dismissed.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Fesootai-Tagataese attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant, Ms Rimene, did not attend.
The landlord applied to terminate the tenancy for breach by Ms Rimene of obligations under the tenancy agreement or the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act), but in particular: • Not repairing two broken windows; • Vehicles being parked on the lawn at the premises; • Failing to keep the stove, kitchen cupboards, and bathroom vanity reasonably clean; • Failing to keep the lawns reasonably tidy; • Failing to remove rubbish from the garage; • Failing to communicate with her tenancy manager and failing to engage with the ‘wrap around services’ provided by He Korowai Trust; and • Failing to sign a variation agreement to vary the terms of the tenancy agreement.
The Tribunal can terminate a tenancy under section 56(1) of the Act if the following criteria is satisfied: (i)the tenant has committed a breach of the Act or the tenancy agreement; (ii)for a breach capable of remedy, the landlord has issued the tenant with a notice requiring the tenant to remedy the breach within a period specified in the notice (not being less than 14 days); (iii)the tenant has failed to remedy the breach within the required period; and (iv)the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable (unfair) to refuse to make a termination order.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The first criteria in section 56(1) is that the tenant must have committed a breach of the Act or the tenancy agreement.
There is no obligation on Ms Rimene, either in the Act or in the tenancy agreement, to sign a variation of the tenancy agreement. Similarly, while it may be in her interests to do so, there is no legal obligation on Ms Rimene to communicate with the landlord or to engage in the wrap around services offered to her by He Korowai Trust. These alleged ‘breaches’ cannot therefore support an application for termination.
Sections 40(1)(c) and 40(2) of the Act provides that a tenant must keep the premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy and must not carelessly or intentionally damage the premises.
The landlord has issued 14 day notices requiring Ms Rimene to remedy the alleged breaches and Ms Fesootai-Tagataese confirmed that the vehicles have since been removed and the windows repaired. She also said that she inspected the premises on the morning of the hearing, and the areas inside the premises were now reasonably clean. However, she said that the lawns were still not reasonably tidy and, although she did not look inside the garage, she believes that there is still some rubbish there.
I am not satisfied that the landlord has provided sufficient evidence to support that, because of the nature and extent of the breach, it would be unfair to not terminate the tenancy. As mentioned, Ms Fesootai-Tagataese did not look inside the garage and therefore did not have sufficient evidence to support her belief that there was still rubbish there or, if there was, it was of such an extent that it may cause damage to the property or may pose a risk to the health or safety of any person occupying or visiting the premises. Ms Fesootai-Tagataese also did not provide photographs or other evidence to support the nature and extent of the untidiness of the lawns.
The application for termination of the tenancy is therefore dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4738809 — 14-day notice at 2 Nola Place, Kaitaia, Kaitaia 0410

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4738809 — 14-day notice at 2 Nola Place, Kaitaia, Kaitaia 0410

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions