What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4751831 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi

How much money was awarded in case 4751831?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4751831?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4751831?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9793560-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4751831 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi

How much money was awarded in case 4751831?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4751831?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4751831?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9793560-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi 7630 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4751831 — Rent arrears

Reasons

The hearing was conducted by telephone. Mr Montagu-Baxter attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant also attended.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, possession of the premises and rent arrears.

The parties agree that the tenant occupies the premises under an oral tenancy agreement made in about June 2015. The parties were the landlord and her late husband, Ellwood Montagu and the tenant.

Mr Montagu-Baxter is the landlord’s attorney under a Power of Attorney made on 8 November 2023. He produced a copy of the Power.

He gave evidence as to what the landlord told him about the terms of the agreement, and he produced a rent statement based on that and the landlord’s bank statements. The statement records rent arrears in the sum of $28,456.80 to 30 November 2023. I note that the figure differs from the $37,307 figure for rent arrears stated in the application.

The tenant accepted that he is a tenant, but he indicated that he was paying the landlord’s mortgage. He also referred to paying the landlord a deposit. It was not possible to investigate that any further because he said that he “had better things to do” and left the hearing.

Mr Montagu-Baxter’s evidence in relation to the agreement was hearsay because he was not present when the tenancy agreement was made. The Tribunal can accept hearsay evidence although it is not ideal.

What the rent statement shows is that from February 2018, when the rent is stated to be $600, the tenant made weekly payments of $600 and then $620 from August 2018 up to date with some short payments and some missed payments.

That pattern of payments satisfies me that the tenant had an obligation to pay rent of $600 and then $620 over that period. He would not have been making the payments otherwise.

The missed and short payments shown in the rent statement amount to well over 21 days rent when the application was filed.

Where rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed the tenancy must be terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I have therefore made an order terminating the tenancy and giving the landlord immediate possession. I note that Mr Montagu said that the tenant is not living in the premises.

The landlord should be aware that unless the tenant gives up possession of the premises voluntarily, she must go through the District Court process of a warrant of possession to obtain possession. Otherwise, the landlord would be acting unlawfully.

Mr Montagu said that the landlord was not concerned about obtaining an order for the rent arrears. Because I am not satisfied on the evidence precisely what the arrears are, I have not made an order for the arrears. This is a final order under this application, but the landlord may make another application for the rent arrears if she chooses.

No order for the filing fee was sought.

I have not ordered suppression of the landlord’s name. The principle of open justice outweighs any privacy concerns that the landlord may have.

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi 7630 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 4pm on Thursday 21 December 2023.
No order is made for rent arrears and the landlord may file an application for payment of rent arrears at a future date.

Reasons

The hearing was conducted by telephone. Mr Montagu-Baxter attended the hearing for the landlord. The tenant also attended.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, possession of the premises and rent arrears.
The parties agree that the tenant occupies the premises under an oral tenancy agreement made in about June 2015. The parties were the landlord and her late husband, Ellwood Montagu and the tenant.
Mr Montagu-Baxter is the landlord’s attorney under a Power of Attorney made on 8 November 2023. He produced a copy of the Power.
He gave evidence as to what the landlord told him about the terms of the agreement, and he produced a rent statement based on that and the landlord’s bank statements. The statement records rent arrears in the sum of $28,456.80 to 30 November 2023. I note that the figure differs from the $37,307 figure for rent arrears stated in the application.
The tenant accepted that he is a tenant, but he indicated that he was paying the landlord’s mortgage. He also referred to paying the landlord a deposit. It was not possible to investigate that any further because he said that he “had better things to do” and left the hearing.
Mr Montagu-Baxter’s evidence in relation to the agreement was hearsay because he was not present when the tenancy agreement was made. The Tribunal can accept hearsay evidence although it is not ideal.
What the rent statement shows is that from February 2018, when the rent is stated to be $600, the tenant made weekly payments of $600 and then $620 from August 2018 up to date with some short payments and some missed payments.
That pattern of payments satisfies me that the tenant had an obligation to pay rent of $600 and then $620 over that period. He would not have been making the payments otherwise.
The missed and short payments shown in the rent statement amount to well over 21 days rent when the application was filed.
Where rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed the tenancy must be terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I have therefore made an order terminating the tenancy and giving the landlord immediate possession. I note that Mr Montagu said that the tenant is not living in the premises.
The landlord should be aware that unless the tenant gives up possession of the premises voluntarily, she must go through the District Court process of a warrant of possession to obtain possession. Otherwise, the landlord would be acting unlawfully.
Mr Montagu said that the landlord was not concerned about obtaining an order for the rent arrears. Because I am not satisfied on the evidence precisely what the arrears are, I have not made an order for the arrears. This is a final order under this application, but the landlord may make another application for the rent arrears if she chooses.
No order for the filing fee was sought.
I have not ordered suppression of the landlord’s name. The principle of open justice outweighs any privacy concerns that the landlord may have.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4751831 — Rent arrears at 127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi 7630

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4751831 — Rent arrears at 127 Ohoka Road, Kaiapoi 7630

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions