What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4782145 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal allows a verbal application by the landlord for $3,400 for rent

How much money was awarded in case 4782145?

Compensation: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent For The Last Four Weeks Of The…: $3,400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4782145?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4782145?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10285485-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4782145 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal allows a verbal application by the landlord for $3,400 for rent

How much money was awarded in case 4782145?

Compensation: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent For The Last Four Weeks Of The…: $3,400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4782145?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4782145?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10285485-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4782145 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4782145 — net $1,379.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent for the last four weeks of the tenancy	$3,400.00		Rent for the last four weeks of the tenancy
Compensation		$2,000.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,400.00	$2,020.44
Net award	$1,379.56
Bond	$3,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,379.56

Order

The Tribunal allows a verbal application by the landlord for $3,400 for rent arrears.
[The tenant/s] to pay Rent Care Property Management Ltd, Sonul Dutt and Swastika Dutt $1,379.56 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
All other clams are dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Rent Care Property Management Ltd, Sonul Dutt and Swastika Dutt: $1,379.56 [The tenant/s]: $2,020.44

Reasons

The tenant, the property manager, and the owner attended the hearing.
The parties had a fixed term tenancy agreement. The end of the fixed term was in November 2023. In August the property managers gave a notice that the fixed term tenancy would not be renewed because the house would be needed for the owner or for a member of the owner’s family. The tenant found somewhere else to live and moved out on 10 October 2023.
After she moved out the parties agreed the tenant would sign over the bond to pay rent for the last four weeks, and the landlord agreed to pay a further $630 as compensation for the shower which was not working during the year. This agreement fell apart when the tenant realised that the house had been readvertised and tenanted to a friend of hers. She filed an application, and her claims include compensation and the refund of the bond.
The landlord should have made an application for the bond. I explained that there was an option for me to hear everything today and allow a verbal application for the bond because of a claim for four weeks of rent arrears. This was agreed and the tenant waived her right to notice of the claim. See section 22B(2) and Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The questions I have to decide are: • Does the tenant owe rent? • Should I allow more compensation for the shower? • Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Does the tenant owe rent?

The tenant submitted that she found another rental and on 28 September she asked the landlord if she could leave the fixed term earlier than 11 November 2023. She said she did not receive any reply to her emails and texts until 12 October 2023, and by that time it was too late because she had agreed to rent another house and was in the process of moving. The property manager said there were conversations in the office where the tenant was told she could not give notice.
I note that the notice given to the tenant referred to ending a periodic tenancy, and this was a fixed term tenancy. The notice does make it clear that the tenancy would end on 11 November 2023 because the owners or family would be moving in. The tenant also understood she had a fixed term tenancy. I find she was effectively given a notice under section 60A(2)(d) RTA - that the fixed term tenancy would not be extended or become a periodic tenancy. I find the tenant could not give 28 days notice in this situation. The only way the term of the tenancy could be reduced was by negotiation.
This is the tenant’s claim to prove. The verbal evidence conflicts. She has not been able to provide me with any supporting evidence, such as texts or emails, to prove there was no communication from the property manager between 28 September and 12 October. I find the tenant was not able to give notice, and therefore she owes the four weeks rent claimed by the landlord.

Should I allow more compensation for the shower?

The parties agree the tenant received the equivalent of $1,630 as compensation because one of the showers could not be used for most of the tenancy. This seems like reasonable compensation to me. The claim for additional compensation for the shower is dismissed.

Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Under Section 60AA RTA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so. Exemplary damages – which are like a penalty - are available for this breach, in the maximum amount of $6,500. This tenant has claimed compensation instead.
A landlord can end a fixed term tenancy by giving a notice before the end of the fixed term if the tenancy premises are to be used as the principal place of residence for the owner or a member of the owner’s family. At least 63 days notice must be given. See sections 60A(2)(d) and 51(1) RTA.
This tenant was given at least 63 days notice. Her claim is that she should never have been given the notice at all because the owners were not 100% certain they would need to live in the house, or to provide the house for family.
The relevant time for determining the landlord’s intention is when the notice is given. For the notice to be valid the landlord should genuinely intend to carry out the stated objective. It is not enough that it is a mere possibility or one of a range of options available.
The owner submitted that they had family from Fiji interested in moving into the house. I have not been provided with any supporting evidence this was anything other than conversations about possible plans. This does not satisfy the requirements of section 51(1) RTA.
The owners’ submission was that they are renting in Auckland and were considering a return to Wellington. One of the owners resigned from a job at the end of July. On 9 August their Auckland landlord advised them of the process for leaving their fixed term tenancy early. On 11 August the property manager in Wellington gave this tenant the notice to end the tenancy. Discussions about whether to live in Wellington or Auckland continued, and the owner found a new job early in October. By 22 October they had engaged a new property manager and the house was advertised for rent. They are still living in Auckland.
The property manager submitted that the owners should have the right to terminate a tenancy when they are considering housing options because they own the house, and it is reasonable to do this is where there is a greater chance than not that the owners would need the rented house as a home.
I am not persuaded by the submissions. It seems unreasonable for the owners to prove there was a 100% certainty that they would move before giving notice. I am not persuaded by the property manager’s submission either, that owner’s have the right to give notice on the chance they might need the house. I am not persuaded, on the evidence before me, that the owners had formed a genuine intention to move back to Wellington on 11 August. It seems most likely to me that they were still considering their options. I find the landlord gave a notice it was not entitled to give.
The tenant has asked for compensation in the amount of $3000. Part of this is because of the cost of moving, but I have only been provided with one invoice. I further note that the Tribunal does not usually allow moving costs because they are an inevitable cost for tenants at some stage in a tenancy.
Instead, I allow compensation in the amount of $2000 for the stress and inconvenience of moving unnecessarily only a year after moving in. In coming to this number, I have been guided by the amount I would have awarded for exemplary damages had that been claimed. Other orders
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because she has been successful in her claim about the notice. Essentially, I have upheld the agreement made by the parties last November and note that agreements made by consent are usually confidential. I have allowed the tenant’s new claim for compensation because the house was relet. I find there is no public interest in her being named.
The landlord’s application for suppression is not allowed. There is public interest in landlord’s being named when a wrong notice is given.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4782145 — net $1,379.56 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent for the last four weeks of the tenancy	$3,400.00		Rent for the last four weeks of the tenancy
Compensation		$2,000.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$3,400.00	$2,020.44
Net award	$1,379.56
Bond	$3,400.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,379.56

Order

The Tribunal allows a verbal application by the landlord for $3,400 for rent arrears.
[The tenant/s] to pay Rent Care Property Management Ltd, Sonul Dutt and Swastika Dutt $1,379.56 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
All other clams are dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Rent Care Property Management Ltd, Sonul Dutt and Swastika Dutt: $1,379.56 [The tenant/s]: $2,020.44

Reasons

The tenant, the property manager, and the owner attended the hearing.
The parties had a fixed term tenancy agreement. The end of the fixed term was in November 2023. In August the property managers gave a notice that the fixed term tenancy would not be renewed because the house would be needed for the owner or for a member of the owner’s family. The tenant found somewhere else to live and moved out on 10 October 2023.
After she moved out the parties agreed the tenant would sign over the bond to pay rent for the last four weeks, and the landlord agreed to pay a further $630 as compensation for the shower which was not working during the year. This agreement fell apart when the tenant realised that the house had been readvertised and tenanted to a friend of hers. She filed an application, and her claims include compensation and the refund of the bond.
The landlord should have made an application for the bond. I explained that there was an option for me to hear everything today and allow a verbal application for the bond because of a claim for four weeks of rent arrears. This was agreed and the tenant waived her right to notice of the claim. See section 22B(2) and Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The questions I have to decide are: • Does the tenant owe rent? • Should I allow more compensation for the shower? • Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Does the tenant owe rent?

The tenant submitted that she found another rental and on 28 September she asked the landlord if she could leave the fixed term earlier than 11 November 2023. She said she did not receive any reply to her emails and texts until 12 October 2023, and by that time it was too late because she had agreed to rent another house and was in the process of moving. The property manager said there were conversations in the office where the tenant was told she could not give notice.
I note that the notice given to the tenant referred to ending a periodic tenancy, and this was a fixed term tenancy. The notice does make it clear that the tenancy would end on 11 November 2023 because the owners or family would be moving in. The tenant also understood she had a fixed term tenancy. I find she was effectively given a notice under section 60A(2)(d) RTA - that the fixed term tenancy would not be extended or become a periodic tenancy. I find the tenant could not give 28 days notice in this situation. The only way the term of the tenancy could be reduced was by negotiation.
This is the tenant’s claim to prove. The verbal evidence conflicts. She has not been able to provide me with any supporting evidence, such as texts or emails, to prove there was no communication from the property manager between 28 September and 12 October. I find the tenant was not able to give notice, and therefore she owes the four weeks rent claimed by the landlord.

Should I allow more compensation for the shower?

The parties agree the tenant received the equivalent of $1,630 as compensation because one of the showers could not be used for most of the tenancy. This seems like reasonable compensation to me. The claim for additional compensation for the shower is dismissed.

Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Under Section 60AA RTA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so. Exemplary damages – which are like a penalty - are available for this breach, in the maximum amount of $6,500. This tenant has claimed compensation instead.
A landlord can end a fixed term tenancy by giving a notice before the end of the fixed term if the tenancy premises are to be used as the principal place of residence for the owner or a member of the owner’s family. At least 63 days notice must be given. See sections 60A(2)(d) and 51(1) RTA.
This tenant was given at least 63 days notice. Her claim is that she should never have been given the notice at all because the owners were not 100% certain they would need to live in the house, or to provide the house for family.
The relevant time for determining the landlord’s intention is when the notice is given. For the notice to be valid the landlord should genuinely intend to carry out the stated objective. It is not enough that it is a mere possibility or one of a range of options available.
The owner submitted that they had family from Fiji interested in moving into the house. I have not been provided with any supporting evidence this was anything other than conversations about possible plans. This does not satisfy the requirements of section 51(1) RTA.
The owners’ submission was that they are renting in Auckland and were considering a return to Wellington. One of the owners resigned from a job at the end of July. On 9 August their Auckland landlord advised them of the process for leaving their fixed term tenancy early. On 11 August the property manager in Wellington gave this tenant the notice to end the tenancy. Discussions about whether to live in Wellington or Auckland continued, and the owner found a new job early in October. By 22 October they had engaged a new property manager and the house was advertised for rent. They are still living in Auckland.
The property manager submitted that the owners should have the right to terminate a tenancy when they are considering housing options because they own the house, and it is reasonable to do this is where there is a greater chance than not that the owners would need the rented house as a home.
I am not persuaded by the submissions. It seems unreasonable for the owners to prove there was a 100% certainty that they would move before giving notice. I am not persuaded by the property manager’s submission either, that owner’s have the right to give notice on the chance they might need the house. I am not persuaded, on the evidence before me, that the owners had formed a genuine intention to move back to Wellington on 11 August. It seems most likely to me that they were still considering their options. I find the landlord gave a notice it was not entitled to give.
The tenant has asked for compensation in the amount of $3000. Part of this is because of the cost of moving, but I have only been provided with one invoice. I further note that the Tribunal does not usually allow moving costs because they are an inevitable cost for tenants at some stage in a tenancy.
Instead, I allow compensation in the amount of $2000 for the stress and inconvenience of moving unnecessarily only a year after moving in. In coming to this number, I have been guided by the amount I would have awarded for exemplary damages had that been claimed. Other orders
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because she has been successful in her claim about the notice. Essentially, I have upheld the agreement made by the parties last November and note that agreements made by consent are usually confidential. I have allowed the tenant’s new claim for compensation because the house was relet. I find there is no public interest in her being named.
The landlord’s application for suppression is not allowed. There is public interest in landlord’s being named when a wrong notice is given.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4782145 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4782145 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the tenant owe rent?

Should I allow more compensation for the shower?

Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the tenant owe rent?

Should I allow more compensation for the shower?

Did the landlord give a notice it was not entitled to give?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions