What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4774562 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4774562?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,600.07 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4774562?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4774562?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9931160-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4774562 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated,

How much money was awarded in case 4774562?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,600.07 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4774562?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4774562?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9931160-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4774562 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4774562 — net $1,060.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 8.2.24	$2,600.07	Rent arrears to 8.2.24
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,060.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,060.51

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson, at 11:59pm Thursday 22 February 2024.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,560.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson immediately.

[The tenant/s] must pay Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson $1,060.51 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

The application by the tenant is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Tenant application:

The tenant is seeking reimbursement of a locksmith invoice and the cost of a new cell phone. The tenant says that he was locked out of his apartment and the building manager stated that he would have to pay $50.00 cash to let him back in. The tenant did not have any cash so he went to his car and called the property manager who he was unable to be reached. He then called the property manager’s 0800 number which was unmanned. The tenant then had to call a locksmith who attended resulting in a callout fee of $356.50.

The tenant also claims that two weeks later he lost his phone at the gym. The gym is connected to the apartment building. The next morning he contacted the building manager advising him of this. Tenant says that he put up a notice on the apartment community notice board outside the gym asking if anyone had seen his phone. He says the building manager kept taking his notice down. He asked the building manager why he was taking down the notice to which he replied that if no one has handed the phone in by now then no one will. He further says that the building manager could have seen who had been in there by looking through the electronic entry records. The tenant then had to buy a new phone for $2299.00.

The tenant is claiming the locksmith fee of $356.50 and the cost of the new phone $2299 from the Body Corporate.

The tenant has provided receipts for the two claims.

In response, the landlord says that the owner should not be held liable for these costs. The owner has not in any way contributed towards these issues.

I agree with the landlord. There is no contractual obligation on the owner to pay these costs. Nor do I see any contractual obligation on the Body Corporate to reimbursement the tenant. The tenant is ultimately responsible for looking after his own property (in this case his cell phone) and I see no evidence connecting either the Body Corporate or the owner to these two events. As an observation it is also common practice for apartment building managers to impose a lockout fee on tenants. This policy is often contained within the building rules.

Accordingly, the tenant’s application must be dismissed. Landlord’s application:

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond.

Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy is terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the date the application was filed. The landlord also provided an updated rent ledger during the hearing confirming the outstanding rent. Having sighted both ledgers I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for payment of this debt.

Because Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.

The tenant applied for non-publication of his name and identifying details. Although he has been unsuccessful in his application I take into account his personal circumstances and consider on this occasion that publication is not in the public interest.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4774562 — net $1,060.51 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 8.2.24	$2,600.07	Rent arrears to 8.2.24
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,060.51
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,060.51

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson, at 11:59pm Thursday 22 February 2024.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,560.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson immediately.
[The tenant/s] must pay Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson $1,060.51 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The application by the tenant is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Tenant application:
The tenant is seeking reimbursement of a locksmith invoice and the cost of a new cell phone. The tenant says that he was locked out of his apartment and the building manager stated that he would have to pay $50.00 cash to let him back in. The tenant did not have any cash so he went to his car and called the property manager who he was unable to be reached. He then called the property manager’s 0800 number which was unmanned. The tenant then had to call a locksmith who attended resulting in a callout fee of $356.50.
The tenant also claims that two weeks later he lost his phone at the gym. The gym is connected to the apartment building. The next morning he contacted the building manager advising him of this. Tenant says that he put up a notice on the apartment community notice board outside the gym asking if anyone had seen his phone. He says the building manager kept taking his notice down. He asked the building manager why he was taking down the notice to which he replied that if no one has handed the phone in by now then no one will. He further says that the building manager could have seen who had been in there by looking through the electronic entry records. The tenant then had to buy a new phone for $2299.00.
The tenant is claiming the locksmith fee of $356.50 and the cost of the new phone $2299 from the Body Corporate.
The tenant has provided receipts for the two claims.
In response, the landlord says that the owner should not be held liable for these costs. The owner has not in any way contributed towards these issues.
I agree with the landlord. There is no contractual obligation on the owner to pay these costs. Nor do I see any contractual obligation on the Body Corporate to reimbursement the tenant. The tenant is ultimately responsible for looking after his own property (in this case his cell phone) and I see no evidence connecting either the Body Corporate or the owner to these two events. As an observation it is also common practice for apartment building managers to impose a lockout fee on tenants. This policy is often contained within the building rules.
Accordingly, the tenant’s application must be dismissed. Landlord’s application:
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond.
Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy is terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the date the application was filed. The landlord also provided an updated rent ledger during the hearing confirming the outstanding rent. Having sighted both ledgers I am satisfied that the tenant is responsible for payment of this debt.
Because Viaduct City Rentals Limited As Agent For Jeremy Rawlinson has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The tenant applied for non-publication of his name and identifying details. Although he has been unsuccessful in his application I take into account his personal circumstances and consider on this occasion that publication is not in the public interest.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4774562 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4774562 — 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