What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902893 about?

The tribunal order states: Maia Rauora Archer must pay the sum of $2,400 to [The tenant/s], being $1,400

How much money was awarded in case 4902893?

To [The Tenant/S], Being: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902893?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902893?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10764585-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902893 about?

The tribunal order states: Maia Rauora Archer must pay the sum of $2,400 to [The tenant/s], being $1,400

How much money was awarded in case 4902893?

To [The Tenant/S], Being: $1,400.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902893?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902893?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10764585-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

6 High Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4902893 — Exemplary damages

Tenantcheck Insights

6 High Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4902893 — Exemplary damages | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902893. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
to [The tenant/s], being	$1,400.00		to [The tenant/s], being
for the bond and rent in advance and	$1,000.00		for the bond and rent in advance and

Claims and awards for application 4902893. Verify on MoJ.

to [The tenant/s], being

Amount: $1,400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: to [The tenant/s], being

for the bond and rent in advance and

Amount: $1,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: for the bond and rent in advance and

Order

Maia Rauora Archer must pay the sum of $2,400 to [The tenant/s], being $1,400 for the bond and rent in advance and $1,000 by way of exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond.
Name suppression is ordered in favour of [The tenant/s].

Reasons

Only the tenant attended the hearing.
The tenant saw an advertisement for the property on [online platform]. She contacted the landlord and communicated with him at [email address].
The tenant was in a hurry to find premises. The landlord said she could not see the property until she had signed the agreement and paid the bond and three weeks rent in advance. The rent was $280 per week. The total amount was $1400.
The agreement is highly irregular in appearance. It has the form of a commercial lease. The agreement is described as “periodic” basis but is for two years in duration.
It was also co-signed by the landlord’s so called lawyer, one “Bishar Burale, Responsible Lawyer for this tenancy”. This is unusual and I have never struck this before. This appears to have been intended to give the document some veneer of added credibility.
After signing, the tenant was told to pay the $1400 to this so-called lawyer, which she duly did. She was given an acknowledgement of that payment.
The respondent then advised the tenant she would need to pay a deposit of a further two months rent. Smelling a rat, the tenant refused. This has proven to be fortuitous with the benefit of hindsight, in that she has avoided the loss of this further sum.
When the tenant refused to pay the landlord discontinued contact.
These background facts suggest strongly the tenant has been scammed.
During the hearing, the Tribunal contacted the Bond Centre. It confirmed that it holds no bond for this tenant at the relevant address.
I find that the $1,400 is to be repaid by the landlord. Having agreed an amount for rent in advance and bond it was required to allow the tenant access to the property, not to insist on further payments. It is also to pay the sum of $1,000 by way of exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond. There is no excise for bond not to be deposited with the Bond Centre.
Because [The tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. I also award name suppression in her favour.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902893. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
to [The tenant/s], being	$1,400.00		to [The tenant/s], being
for the bond and rent in advance and	$1,000.00		for the bond and rent in advance and

Claims and awards for application 4902893. Verify on MoJ.

to [The tenant/s], being

Amount: $1,400.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: to [The tenant/s], being

for the bond and rent in advance and

Amount: $1,000.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: for the bond and rent in advance and

Order

Maia Rauora Archer must pay the sum of $2,400 to [The tenant/s], being $1,400 for the bond and rent in advance and $1,000 by way of exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond.
Name suppression is ordered in favour of [The tenant/s].

Reasons

Only the tenant attended the hearing.
The tenant saw an advertisement for the property on [online platform]. She contacted the landlord and communicated with him at [email address].
The tenant was in a hurry to find premises. The landlord said she could not see the property until she had signed the agreement and paid the bond and three weeks rent in advance. The rent was $280 per week. The total amount was $1400.
The agreement is highly irregular in appearance. It has the form of a commercial lease. The agreement is described as “periodic” basis but is for two years in duration.
It was also co-signed by the landlord’s so called lawyer, one “Bishar Burale, Responsible Lawyer for this tenancy”. This is unusual and I have never struck this before. This appears to have been intended to give the document some veneer of added credibility.
After signing, the tenant was told to pay the $1400 to this so-called lawyer, which she duly did. She was given an acknowledgement of that payment.
The respondent then advised the tenant she would need to pay a deposit of a further two months rent. Smelling a rat, the tenant refused. This has proven to be fortuitous with the benefit of hindsight, in that she has avoided the loss of this further sum.
When the tenant refused to pay the landlord discontinued contact.
These background facts suggest strongly the tenant has been scammed.
During the hearing, the Tribunal contacted the Bond Centre. It confirmed that it holds no bond for this tenant at the relevant address.
I find that the $1,400 is to be repaid by the landlord. Having agreed an amount for rent in advance and bond it was required to allow the tenant access to the property, not to insist on further payments. It is also to pay the sum of $1,000 by way of exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond. There is no excise for bond not to be deposited with the Bond Centre.
Because [The tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. I also award name suppression in her favour.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902893 — Exemplary damages at 6 High Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902893 — Exemplary damages at 6 High Street, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions