What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4770601 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $589.94 immediately, being rent

How much money was awarded in case 4770601?

The reconciled net award was $589.94.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4770601?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4770601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10058684-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4770601 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $589.94 immediately, being rent

How much money was awarded in case 4770601?

The reconciled net award was $589.94.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4770601?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4770601?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10058684-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4770601 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4770601 — net $589.94 NZD. Verify amounts on MoJ.
Claim	Category	Amount	Awarded to	Reason
Net award	$589.94

Both parties attended the hearing, the landlord being represented by Ms A. Possession

The landlord applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy.

The landlord said that the tenancy ended on 9 December 2023 as a result of a 90-day notice given to vacate for renovations to take place. A copy of the notice was filed. It did not specify what the renovations are, but the parties agreed that the landlord intended to refit the kitchen.

The tenant said that the kitchen did not require renovation, that he had been told at the start of the tenancy that the kitchen would be renovated and he understood that such work would take only a few days. He did not accept that he needed to vacate the property and he believed this was not a valid reason to terminate.

Ms A said that the landlord’s sons were going to come to Whanganui and stay at the property while they renovated.

Under section 51(2)(f) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 says that a tenancy may be terminated on 90 days’ notice if: extensive alterations, refurbishment, repairs, or redevelopment of the premises are to be carried out by the landlord or owner, and— (i)it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work is undertaken; and (ii)the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date; or

The onus is on the landlord to establish that the replacement of the kitchen meets those criteria. The landlord had not filed any information about the extent of the alterations.

Ms A said that she had emails from the landlord, but she did not have them with her. This is despite having filed an application on or about 19 December, and the parties having been given two months’ notice of the date of hearing. She was unable to forward the emails to the Tribunal from her phone.

I advised the parties that I would adjourn for 20 minutes to allow further evidence to be gathered. The matter was recalled after 31 minutes. There was no appearance for the landlord and accordingly the application was dismissed on the basis that the landlord has not established that the alterations are extensive and that it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work was undertaken. Rent arrears

The tenant agreed that he owed some rent to the landlord. A rent summary submitted showed that the amount owing up to 10 March 2024 will be $589.94. That is two days in advance. The daily rent is $78.57. I have deducted $157.14 from the balance on the rent summary and calculated that as at today’s date, the tenant is $432.80 in arrears. That amount is ordered. Lack of tenancy agreement

The tenant sought damages because he does not have a tenancy agreement in writing. The tenant said that when Inspire Real Estate Limited took over from Integrity Property, no new agreement was drawn up.

The landlord said it was not necessary.

I agree. The tenancy continued on the same terms and conditions. The new property manager simply needs to notify the tenant and the bond centre of the change and ensure the tenant knows the new contact details and address for service.

The tenant’s claim is dismissed. Breach of quiet enjoyment

The tenant claimed that the landlord had breached his rights of quiet enjoyment. This related to an incident last year when the landlord attended the property with an order for possession, made on 16 May 2023, a copy of which was provided to the Tribunal. The tenant says that the property manager was loud and talked about his financial situation in the presence of others. Ms A denies that she was loud and says that they talked away from his visitors. Following that discussion in fact the tenant cleared arrears owing and the parties agreed that he could remain in possession.

Section 38 of the Act says that the tenant is entitled to quiet enjoyment without interruption by the landlord and the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises.

The onus is on the tenant to prove that there was a breach of his rights.

I do not consider a visit from a landlord is a breach of the tenant’s quiet enjoyment. Anyone is entitled to visit the tenant without notice. It was not unreasonable that the landlord wanted to bring the order to the attention of the tenant. I am not satisfied that the landlord breached section 38 by attending the property.

The landlord denies that she behaved as described by the tenant, and in the absence of any further evidence from the tenant (such as statements from other people present as to what they heard), I am not satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the landlord behaved as described. The tenant’s claim is dismissed. Because both parties have had some success, I make no orders for refund of the filing fee, and I order name suppression for both parties.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4770601 — net $589.94 NZD. Verify amounts on MoJ.
Claim	Category	Amount	Awarded to	Reason
Net award	$589.94

Both parties attended the hearing, the landlord being represented by Ms A. Possession

The landlord applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy.

Ms A said that the landlord’s sons were going to come to Whanganui and stay at the property while they renovated.

The onus is on the landlord to establish that the replacement of the kitchen meets those criteria. The landlord had not filed any information about the extent of the alterations.

The landlord said it was not necessary.

The tenant’s claim is dismissed. Breach of quiet enjoyment

The onus is on the tenant to prove that there was a breach of his rights.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4770601 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4770601 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions