What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926714?

The tribunal order states: Sukhdev Badesra must pay O'neills Real Estate Limited $706.15 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4926714?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,885.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926714?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926714?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10752784-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926714?

The tribunal order states: Sukhdev Badesra must pay O'neills Real Estate Limited $706.15 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 4926714?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,885.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926714?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926714?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10752784-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6, 17 Margot Street, Epsom, Auckland 1051 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4926714 — Rent arrears

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4926714 — net $706.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 4 July 2024	$3,885.71	Rent arrears to 4 July 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$706.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$706.15

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy began on 27 April 2024 and was fixed until 27 April 2025.

The tenant is highly sensitive to dust mites and mould.

The tenant conducted an inspection of the property before signing the tenancy agreement. He conducted a thorough inspection of the property and requested that the carpets be commercially cleaned, which they were. The tenant wanted to inspect the property one more time after the commercial cleaning of the carpets before he signed the tenancy agreement. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to facilitate this and advised the tenant that the property was in hot demand. Concerned that he might lose the property, the tenant signed the tenancy agreement before completing a final inspection to make sure the property was suitable to him.

The tenant advised the Tribunal that shortly after he moved into the property, he began experiencing symptoms associated with his hyper-sensitivity to mould and dust-mites. The tenant attempted living in every room in the house to alleviate the symptoms, including the garage. Unfortunately, his symptoms persisted and he gave notice to end the tenancy on 17 May 2024.

The tenant advised the Tribunal that he suspected that the property had experienced a leak, due to signs in the garage. The landlord vehemently denied this, advising the Tribunal that the house had suffered a leak approximately nine years ago, which had been fixed. The house is compliant with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019. No evidence of a recent leak was provided to the Tribunal.

The tenant facilitated rental inspections and did everything he could to try to get a new tenant into the property as quickly as possible. On 5 July 2024, the property was re-tenanted. Mr Badesra submitted that the landlord delayed re- tenanting the property by approximately three weeks. He said that he withheld rent to encourage the landlord to quickly find a new tenant. The landlord disputed any allegation of delay, advising that the new tenants were required to give 28 days’ notice to terminate their existing tenancy.

The Tribunal has some sympathy for Mr Badesra. It appears that his condition makes it difficult for him to find suitable, long-term accommodation and on more than one occasion, he has had to pay two rents whilst in between properties. Perhaps there is some force in Mr Badesra’s submission that the landlord could have handled this issue with a little bit more care and sensitivity. I note from the emails provided that the landlord appears to communicate without greeting Mr Badesra and often with a sense of urgency. Unfortunately, Mr Badesra was not permitted to withhold rent for the reasons he did. Under a fixed-term tenancy, he is liable to pay rent up until the date that the tenancy ended and the property was re-tenanted.

The landlord provided rent records, which prove the amount owing on 4 July 2024, namely $3,885.71.

Because O'neills Real Estate Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4926714 — net $706.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 4 July 2024	$3,885.71	Rent arrears to 4 July 2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$706.15
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$706.15

Order

Sukhdev Badesra must pay O'neills Real Estate Limited $706.15 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,200.00 (5052663-004) to O'neills Real Estate Limited immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy began on 27 April 2024 and was fixed until 27 April 2025.
The tenant is highly sensitive to dust mites and mould.
The tenant conducted an inspection of the property before signing the tenancy agreement. He conducted a thorough inspection of the property and requested that the carpets be commercially cleaned, which they were. The tenant wanted to inspect the property one more time after the commercial cleaning of the carpets before he signed the tenancy agreement. Unfortunately, the landlord was unable to facilitate this and advised the tenant that the property was in hot demand. Concerned that he might lose the property, the tenant signed the tenancy agreement before completing a final inspection to make sure the property was suitable to him.
The tenant advised the Tribunal that shortly after he moved into the property, he began experiencing symptoms associated with his hyper-sensitivity to mould and dust-mites. The tenant attempted living in every room in the house to alleviate the symptoms, including the garage. Unfortunately, his symptoms persisted and he gave notice to end the tenancy on 17 May 2024.
The tenant advised the Tribunal that he suspected that the property had experienced a leak, due to signs in the garage. The landlord vehemently denied this, advising the Tribunal that the house had suffered a leak approximately nine years ago, which had been fixed. The house is compliant with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019. No evidence of a recent leak was provided to the Tribunal.
The tenant facilitated rental inspections and did everything he could to try to get a new tenant into the property as quickly as possible. On 5 July 2024, the property was re-tenanted. Mr Badesra submitted that the landlord delayed re- tenanting the property by approximately three weeks. He said that he withheld rent to encourage the landlord to quickly find a new tenant. The landlord disputed any allegation of delay, advising that the new tenants were required to give 28 days’ notice to terminate their existing tenancy.
The Tribunal has some sympathy for Mr Badesra. It appears that his condition makes it difficult for him to find suitable, long-term accommodation and on more than one occasion, he has had to pay two rents whilst in between properties. Perhaps there is some force in Mr Badesra’s submission that the landlord could have handled this issue with a little bit more care and sensitivity. I note from the emails provided that the landlord appears to communicate without greeting Mr Badesra and often with a sense of urgency. Unfortunately, Mr Badesra was not permitted to withhold rent for the reasons he did. Under a fixed-term tenancy, he is liable to pay rent up until the date that the tenancy ended and the property was re-tenanted.
The landlord provided rent records, which prove the amount owing on 4 July 2024, namely $3,885.71.
Because O'neills Real Estate Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926714 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 17 Margot Street, Epsom, Auckland 1051

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926714 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 17 Margot Street, Epsom, Auckland 1051

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions