What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4922537 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Nicola Bull at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792 is

How much money was awarded in case 4922537?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $9,002.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4922537?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4922537?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10669917-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4922537 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Nicola Bull at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792 is

How much money was awarded in case 4922537?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $9,002.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4922537?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4922537?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10669917-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4922537 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4922537 — net $9,022.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 05 August 2024	$9,002.00	Rent arrears to 05 August 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,022.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,022.44

The tenancy of Nicola Bull at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11:59pm on 05 August 2024.

Nicola Bull must pay [The landlord/s] $9,022.44 immediately, being rent arrears to 05 August 2024 and the filing fee, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond. The landlord advised during the hearing that they wished for the bond to remain with the Bond Centre.

During the hearing, the landlord added an additional claim, being that the tenant was subletting the premises contrary to her obligations under the Tenancy Agreement. The parties were advised that as the claim had not been included in its application, it could only be heard during today’s hearing with the tenant’s consent. The tenant agreed for the additional claim to be heard.

Was the tenant subletting the premises in breach of the Tenancy Agreement?

The landlord asserted that the tenant is letting a unit on the property to a third party. The landlord advised that the unit is not consented and is not suitable to be occupied as a residential premises. I asked the landlord if there are working smoke alarms in the unit and was advised that there are not.

The Tenancy Agreement states that there is to be a maximum of 5 occupants at the premises. It goes on to state that, while the tenant can use the unit, it is “... not included in the rental area” and it is the tenant’s responsibility “... to maintain in a reasonable state of repair ...”.

Section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) relates to the landlord’s obligations, with subsection (1)(c) requiring that landlords: ... comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises.

There are important health and safety reasons for requiring landlords to comply with these obligations and it is not open to the landlord to contract out of them.

The tenant advised that there are currently two occupants in the unit and that they pay $450 per week to live there. The tenant referred to them as “flatmates”. However, she confirmed that the unit has a separate kitchen and bathroom.

Section 44 of the RTA provides: (1) There may be included in a tenancy agreement a provision that expressly and unconditionally prohibits the tenant from subletting or parting with possession of the premises during the term of the tenancy. (2) In the absence of such a provision, the tenant may at any time during the tenancy sublet or otherwise part with possession of the premises with the prior written consent of the landlord and in accordance with any conditions attached to that consent by the landlord.

The definition of premises in the RTA includes “any part of any premises”. I find that the tenant is subletting part of the premises, the unit. However, I do not consider that the landlord has in the Tenancy Agreement “expressly or unconditionally” prohibited her from doing so. The wording regarding the unit is, at best, contradictory. It states that the small unit is not included in the rental area but goes on to say that the tenant can use it.

This claim is dismissed. However, I am very concerned that there are people living in the unit which appears to be an unlawful residential premises.

Should a conditional or a final termination order be made?

Where rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed, sections 55(1)(a) and 55(1A) of the RTA provides that the Tribunal must make either a final or a conditional termination order.

The landlord has provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger which prove the amount owing and that rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed.

The landlord indicated during the hearing that it was willing to consider a conditional termination order for a period of 6 weeks. The tenant said that without the income from the unit she could not afford to pay the rent. I am concerned that the tenant would not be able to comply with a conditional termination order. For this reason and, given my concerns regarding the unit being an unlawful residential premises, I decline to make a conditional termination order and instead make a final termination order.

[The applicant/s] has been substantially successful with the claim and I order reimbursement of the filing fee and grant the application for suppression of the landlord’s name.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4922537 — net $9,022.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 05 August 2024	$9,002.00	Rent arrears to 05 August 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$9,022.44
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$9,022.44

Order

The tenancy of Nicola Bull at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792 is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11:59pm on 05 August 2024.
Nicola Bull must pay [The landlord/s] $9,022.44 immediately, being rent arrears to 05 August 2024 and the filing fee, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond. The landlord advised during the hearing that they wished for the bond to remain with the Bond Centre.
During the hearing, the landlord added an additional claim, being that the tenant was subletting the premises contrary to her obligations under the Tenancy Agreement. The parties were advised that as the claim had not been included in its application, it could only be heard during today’s hearing with the tenant’s consent. The tenant agreed for the additional claim to be heard.

Was the tenant subletting the premises in breach of the Tenancy Agreement?

The landlord asserted that the tenant is letting a unit on the property to a third party. The landlord advised that the unit is not consented and is not suitable to be occupied as a residential premises. I asked the landlord if there are working smoke alarms in the unit and was advised that there are not.
The Tenancy Agreement states that there is to be a maximum of 5 occupants at the premises. It goes on to state that, while the tenant can use the unit, it is “... not included in the rental area” and it is the tenant’s responsibility “... to maintain in a reasonable state of repair ...”.
Section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) relates to the landlord’s obligations, with subsection (1)(c) requiring that landlords: ... comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises.
There are important health and safety reasons for requiring landlords to comply with these obligations and it is not open to the landlord to contract out of them.
The tenant advised that there are currently two occupants in the unit and that they pay $450 per week to live there. The tenant referred to them as “flatmates”. However, she confirmed that the unit has a separate kitchen and bathroom.
Section 44 of the RTA provides: (1) There may be included in a tenancy agreement a provision that expressly and unconditionally prohibits the tenant from subletting or parting with possession of the premises during the term of the tenancy. (2) In the absence of such a provision, the tenant may at any time during the tenancy sublet or otherwise part with possession of the premises with the prior written consent of the landlord and in accordance with any conditions attached to that consent by the landlord.
The definition of premises in the RTA includes “any part of any premises”. I find that the tenant is subletting part of the premises, the unit. However, I do not consider that the landlord has in the Tenancy Agreement “expressly or unconditionally” prohibited her from doing so. The wording regarding the unit is, at best, contradictory. It states that the small unit is not included in the rental area but goes on to say that the tenant can use it.
This claim is dismissed. However, I am very concerned that there are people living in the unit which appears to be an unlawful residential premises.

Should a conditional or a final termination order be made?

Where rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed, sections 55(1)(a) and 55(1A) of the RTA provides that the Tribunal must make either a final or a conditional termination order.
The landlord has provided rent records in the form of a rent ledger which prove the amount owing and that rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed.
The landlord indicated during the hearing that it was willing to consider a conditional termination order for a period of 6 weeks. The tenant said that without the income from the unit she could not afford to pay the rent. I am concerned that the tenant would not be able to comply with a conditional termination order. For this reason and, given my concerns regarding the unit being an unlawful residential premises, I decline to make a conditional termination order and instead make a final termination order.
[The applicant/s] has been substantially successful with the claim and I order reimbursement of the filing fee and grant the application for suppression of the landlord’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4922537 — Rent arrears at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4922537 — Rent arrears at 151 Top Road, Dairy Flat, RD 2, Dairy Flat 0792

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the tenant subletting the premises in breach of the Tenancy Agreement?

Should a conditional or a final termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the tenant subletting the premises in breach of the Tenancy Agreement?

Should a conditional or a final termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions