What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4753733 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4753733?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4753733?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4753733?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9898459-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4753733 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4753733?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4753733?

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

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4753733?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9898459-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4753733 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended this video hearing on 30 January 2024.

The tenancy commenced on 18 September 2020 and is current. It is a fixed term tenancy through until 4 March 2024.

The landlord wishes to terminate the tenancy as a result of a 14 day rent breach notice. See s.56 (1) (b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).The landlord also applied for rent arrears and reimbursement of the filing fee.

Section 56 (1)(b) RTA applies where there is a breach capable of remedy. The most common breach being a failure by a tenant to pay rent on time and in full. Where that occurs, the landlord must serve a written notice on the tenant specifying the nature of the complaint and requiring the other party to remedy the breach within a reasonable period, being not less than 14 days.

The landlord served a 14 rent breach notice on the tenant. The notice is dated 13 October 2023. The notice records that the tenant had failed to pay rent on time and in full. The notice required the tenant to pay the rent arrears of $380.00 by 27 October 2023 and to pay any other rent payments which may fall due during the 14 day period.

Two rent payments fell due during that period totalling $1,200.00.

The rent arrears referred to in the notice and the rent payments totalled $1,580.00.

During the period from 13 October 2023 to 27 October 2023 the tenant made payments to the landlord totalling $1,480.00. This left a balance of rent arrears unpaid in accordance with the notice of $100.00. The tenant has failed to comply with the notice.

Section 56(1)(c) RTA provides that the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy for a breach of this type where it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order.

The District Court in Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management Limited (2020) NZDC 19229 set out the relevant factors for the Tribunal to consider in deciding whether it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate a tenancy. Those factors are; • The history of the tenancy. • Whether there has been a persistent failure after repeated warnings. • Whether the history of breaches was such it was unlikely the tenant would comply with their obligations in the future. • Whether the breach was inadvertent or deliberate. • The conduct of the landlord. • The gravity of the breach. • Whether termination is a proportionate response to the breach.

The tenancy commenced a little over three years ago. The tenants have been good tenants, with the exception of the payment of rent.

There have been persistent failures to pay rent over the course of the tenancy. Rent has been in arrears no less than 22 times over the last 12 months alone. Rent arrears have been a regular issue. The landlord has served a number of 14 day breach notices and have done their best to try and communicate their frustration to the tenants.

The history of breaches must make the Tribunal uncertain. The tenants have paid the rent regularly of recent time and have not been in arrears since 18 January 2024.

A failure to pay rent is a deliberate act. The tenant said in evidence that they had issues with their employer over the Christmas period and obtaining payment for their work.

The landlord’s conduct has been patient throughout.

The gravity of this particular breach is not severe. The rent arrears at the commencement of the notice period was relatively minor at $380.00. By the end of the notice period, the arrears were down to $100.00.

Would termination of the tenancy be a proportionate response to this breach? By a very slim margin, I find that terminating a tenancy for a breach of a 14 day rent notice in the sum of $100.00, would not be a proportionate response, despite the prior occasions where the tenant has been in arrears. I understand that this will be very frustrating for the landlord given the history of this tenancy.

The tenant is reminded in the strongest possible terms of their obligation to pay rent in full and on time. A failure to do so will inevitably result in the landlord filing a further application with the Tribunal. In that event, I suggest that the landlord refer the adjudicator considering the matter to this decision.

The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is dismissed as the parties agree that rent is not in arrears as of the date of this hearing.

The landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful in this matter and no order is made with respect to the filing fee.

The tenant has applied for name suppression. The tenant has been substantially successful in this matter and suppression of the tenant’s name and details is ordered.