Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 4776140 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2E, 4 Lorne Street, Auckland Central, Auckland
Decided 10 Apr 2024 · Published 10 Apr 2024 · Application 4776140
Dismissed
- Rent arrears
Order
- Bradley McGlashan to pay Investment Citi Limited T/As Oneciti Property Management $1,756.15 calculated as shown in table below.
- The respondent’s application is dismissed.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing, the tenant did not.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, termination, refund of the bond (only if termination is granted), and reimbursement of the filing fee.
How much is owed for rent?
- The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing for rent is currently $1,735.71.
Should the tenancy be terminated?
- Where rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed, the Tribunal must make either a final or a conditional termination order. See section 55(1)(a) and (1A) Residential Tenancies Act 1986, (“the Act”.)
- As the tenant is paying $600.00 rent per week, 21 days arrears amounts to $1,800.00.
- The landlord’s application was filed on 09 January 2024. According to the landlord’s Rent Summary on 09 January 2024, the tenant was $1,100.00 or less than 13 days, in arrears.
- For this reason, the Tribunal has no power to terminate the tenancy under section 55(1)(a) of the Act.
- The landlord has filed several 14-day notices-to-remedy breach notices on the tenant under section 56 of the Act.
- Where an application is made to the Tribunal under section 56 of the Act, and at the time of determining the matter, an application could have been made under section 55 of the Act (for example, at time of application rent was less than 21 days in arrears, but by the hearing date rent is now 21 days or more in arrears) the matter may be determined as if the application was made under section 55 of the Act. This is the “section 56 becoming section 55” provision.
- As the arrears is less than 21 days in arrears at the date of the hearing, that provision doesn’t apply to this matter.
- A 14-day notice-to-remedy regarding rent arrears was served on the tenant on 4 January 2024 and the breach has not been remedied. Therefore, the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy subject to section 56(1) of the Act which states “that the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy.”
- In my view the breach is not of such a nature or extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy, for the following reasons: a. The rent breach has never exceeded 21 days arrears. b. Rent payments have been unreliable, but as recently as December 2023, rent was up to date. c. The tenant has not previously been served any orders regarding rent arrears for this tenancy, and therefore an order to pay the rent may be sufficient to convince the tenant to get up to date with his rent. d. The rent breach is the only breach the landlord has filed with the Tribunal.
- For these reasons the tenancy should not be terminated.
- Because Investment Citi Limited T/As Oneciti Property Management has substantially succeeded with their claim, I must reimburse the filing fee.