What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4756030 about?

The tribunal order states: Jurisdiction is declined.

How much money was awarded in case 4756030?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4756030?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4756030?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9823229-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4756030 about?

The tribunal order states: Jurisdiction is declined.

How much money was awarded in case 4756030?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4756030?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4756030?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9823229-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3A McLeod Road, Henderson, Auckland 0612 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4756030 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.

By way of background, it is accepted that the tenant is the daughter of the property owner. There was an agreement that she would reside in the property and would arrange flatmates who would pay rent to the landlord.

There was a rent set out in the application to the Tribunal, however no information as to how that amount was set or evidence that it was agreed with the tenant.

There is no written tenancy agreement.

In any event, no rent has been paid for the duration of the tenant’s occupation of the premises. The Law

Section 4 provides that: This Act applies to every tenancy for residential purposes except as specifically provided.

The Act defines “tenancy” in section 2(1) as: tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also includes a former tenancy.

“Tenancy agreement” is defined as: tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises; and, where appropriate, includes a former tenancy agreement and any variation of a tenancy agreement.

The exceptions to the Act are contained in Section 5. Relevantly, section 5(1)(n) of the Act provides that: where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.

“Member of the landlord’s or owner’s family” is defined in section 2(1) of the Act as: member of the landlord’s or owner’s family, in relation to a landlord or an owner, means— (a)any person who is or has been related to the landlord or owner— (i)by blood; or (ii)by or through marriage, a civil union, or a de facto relationship; or (iii)by adoption: (b)any other person who is a member of the landlord’s or owner’s whānau or other culturally recognised family group: (c)any child who is being, or is to be, cared for on a continuous basis by— (i)the landlord or owner; or (ii)the landlord’s or owner’s spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner

This definition clearly includes the tenant, who is the daughter of the landlord.

While ordinarily it will be for the party who claims the Act doesn’t apply to satisfy the Tribunal that this is the case (see section 10, RTA), where the facts are clear, as they are here, then I consider it would be remiss of me to blindly accept jurisdiction without considering the true nature of the relationship.

Taking into account the familial relationship, the lack of any indication that the parties intended there to be an “opting in” to the Act, the lack of tenancy agreement, the lack of agreement as to rent or to the terms of any tenancy, I consider that this is a situation to which section s5(1)(n) of the Act applies.

Accordingly, there is no jurisdiction for the Tribunal to hear the substantive applications.

Order

Jurisdiction is declined.
The application for rent arrears and termination is dismissed for want of Jurisdiction.

Reasons

Only the landlord attended the hearing.
By way of background, it is accepted that the tenant is the daughter of the property owner. There was an agreement that she would reside in the property and would arrange flatmates who would pay rent to the landlord.
There was a rent set out in the application to the Tribunal, however no information as to how that amount was set or evidence that it was agreed with the tenant.
There is no written tenancy agreement.
In any event, no rent has been paid for the duration of the tenant’s occupation of the premises. The Law
Section 4 provides that: This Act applies to every tenancy for residential purposes except as specifically provided.
The Act defines “tenancy” in section 2(1) as: tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also includes a former tenancy.
“Tenancy agreement” is defined as: tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any other person a tenancy of the premises; and, where appropriate, includes a former tenancy agreement and any variation of a tenancy agreement.
The exceptions to the Act are contained in Section 5. Relevantly, section 5(1)(n) of the Act provides that: where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
“Member of the landlord’s or owner’s family” is defined in section 2(1) of the Act as: member of the landlord’s or owner’s family, in relation to a landlord or an owner, means— (a)any person who is or has been related to the landlord or owner— (i)by blood; or (ii)by or through marriage, a civil union, or a de facto relationship; or (iii)by adoption: (b)any other person who is a member of the landlord’s or owner’s whānau or other culturally recognised family group: (c)any child who is being, or is to be, cared for on a continuous basis by— (i)the landlord or owner; or (ii)the landlord’s or owner’s spouse, civil union partner, or de facto partner
This definition clearly includes the tenant, who is the daughter of the landlord.
While ordinarily it will be for the party who claims the Act doesn’t apply to satisfy the Tribunal that this is the case (see section 10, RTA), where the facts are clear, as they are here, then I consider it would be remiss of me to blindly accept jurisdiction without considering the true nature of the relationship.
Taking into account the familial relationship, the lack of any indication that the parties intended there to be an “opting in” to the Act, the lack of tenancy agreement, the lack of agreement as to rent or to the terms of any tenancy, I consider that this is a situation to which section s5(1)(n) of the Act applies.
Accordingly, there is no jurisdiction for the Tribunal to hear the substantive applications.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4756030 — Rent arrears at 3A McLeod Road, Henderson, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4756030 — Rent arrears at 3A McLeod Road, Henderson, Auckland 0612

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions