What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4947264 about?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Alistair Chong Nee at 66 Survila Street,

How much money was awarded in case 4947264?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $11,480.00 awarded to landlord; Wall: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $278.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4947264?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4947264?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10867866-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4947264 about?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Alistair Chong Nee at 66 Survila Street,

How much money was awarded in case 4947264?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $11,480.00 awarded to landlord; Wall: $207.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $278.41 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4947264?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4947264?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10867866-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4947264 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4947264 — Rent arrears | 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 4947264 — net $8,712.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$11,480.00	Rent arrears
Water rates	$278.41	Water rates
Repairs: Wall	$207.00	Repairs: Wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,712.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,712.41

Claims and awards for application 4947264 — net $8,712.41 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $11,480.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Water rates

Amount: $278.41
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Repairs: Wall

Amount: $207.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Wall

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $8,712.41

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $8,712.41

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Water Rates

Order

The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Alistair Chong Nee at 66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110 is reduced and now ends at 5pm Tuesday 22 October 2024, or earlier if a new tenancy forms before that date.
Alistair Chong Nee must pay [The landlord/s] $8,712.41 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via video. The tenant did not join and a call out was made. The call went unanswered and to voicemail. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the call went unanswered.
The tenant had earlier advised the Tribunal he was unable to join the hearing as he is overseas due to a family bereavement. He made written submissions that were considered and discussed with the landlord at the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. Background
This is a fixed-term tenancy that commenced 23 February 2024 and was to end 24 February 2025.
The tenant explained the reasons for the change in his plans. No formal application to break or reduce the fixed-term was made by the tenant but he outlined the grounds in his written submission why he considered unforeseen changes in his circumstances would justify such.
After some mixed messages in May 2024, the tenant confirmed to the landlord he would move out on 23 June 2024. Prior to this the landlord had clearly cautioned him of the continued liability for rent under the fixed-term tenancy agreement.
Since leaving the premises there has been no success in finding new tenants. The premises is one of a similar number available within close proximity. Some are newer and offered at a lesser rent.
The landlord outlined the steps taken to try and find new tenants. There has been active marketing as well as some direct engagement with the tenant on optional incentives such as a free week rent and subsidised weekly rent to attract new tenants. Again, the circumstances of the tenant has meant that accepting such strategies has been mixed. The tenant initially declined subsidising any rent but suggested in his submission that he had later reconsidered this and accepted the option but he stated in his submission the landlord has not responded.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing to the rent week ending Thursday 26 September 2024 is $11,480.00.
The tenant rightly queried a recent water invoice as he had left the premises during that billing period. The reason for an invoiced sum is the difference between prior estimates and the later actual meter read. The landlord confirmed there is no one in occupancy at the premises.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
During the move out, the tenant acknowledged a wall was damaged by a large item of furniture while being carried out. The cost of repair is $207.00. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has accepted liability for the damage.
The amount for the repair is ordered.

Should the term be reduced?

The rent arrears are increasing rapidly. While I have some sympathy with the tenant’s circumstances, without a formal application for a reduction it is problematic to make any consideration of the circumstances. That said, the continued tenant rent liability, potentially through to February 2025, was acknowledged by the landlord as being particularly onerous.
Where any party to a tenancy agreement breaches any of the provisions of the agreement or of this Act, the other party shall take all reasonable steps to limit the damage or loss arising from that breach, in accordance with the rules of law relating to mitigation of loss or damage upon breach of contract (see s 49 RTA).
I am satisfied the landlord has been acting appropriately and the changes in stance of the tenant, while understandable given the circumstances, have introduced some additional challenges to the landlord.
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
In this instance, having considered all submissions and evidence, I make orders for current rent arrears as at now but provide an effective future end date of the tenancy and rent liability on 22 October 2024, if not earlier by a new tenancy forming. In the absence of a formal tenant application per s 66 RTA, I consider it equitable to provide a reduction in the fixed-term from that date. Further rent arrears of over $3000.00 may accrue from the date of this order.
The parties should continue to work together on seeking a new tenancy as soon as possible. Filing Fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.

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 4947264 — net $8,712.41 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$11,480.00	Rent arrears
Water rates	$278.41	Water rates
Repairs: Wall	$207.00	Repairs: Wall
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$8,712.41
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$8,712.41

Claims and awards for application 4947264 — net $8,712.41 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Rent arrears

Amount: $11,480.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Rent arrears

Water rates

Amount: $278.41
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates

Repairs: Wall

Amount: $207.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Repairs: Wall

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $8,712.41

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $8,712.41

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Rent arrears Property damage Water Rates

Order

The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Alistair Chong Nee at 66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110 is reduced and now ends at 5pm Tuesday 22 October 2024, or earlier if a new tenancy forms before that date.
Alistair Chong Nee must pay [The landlord/s] $8,712.41 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, conducted via video. The tenant did not join and a call out was made. The call went unanswered and to voicemail. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing after the call went unanswered.
The tenant had earlier advised the Tribunal he was unable to join the hearing as he is overseas due to a family bereavement. He made written submissions that were considered and discussed with the landlord at the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. Background
This is a fixed-term tenancy that commenced 23 February 2024 and was to end 24 February 2025.
The tenant explained the reasons for the change in his plans. No formal application to break or reduce the fixed-term was made by the tenant but he outlined the grounds in his written submission why he considered unforeseen changes in his circumstances would justify such.
After some mixed messages in May 2024, the tenant confirmed to the landlord he would move out on 23 June 2024. Prior to this the landlord had clearly cautioned him of the continued liability for rent under the fixed-term tenancy agreement.
Since leaving the premises there has been no success in finding new tenants. The premises is one of a similar number available within close proximity. Some are newer and offered at a lesser rent.
The landlord outlined the steps taken to try and find new tenants. There has been active marketing as well as some direct engagement with the tenant on optional incentives such as a free week rent and subsidised weekly rent to attract new tenants. Again, the circumstances of the tenant has meant that accepting such strategies has been mixed. The tenant initially declined subsidising any rent but suggested in his submission that he had later reconsidered this and accepted the option but he stated in his submission the landlord has not responded.

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

The landlord provided rent records and water rates invoices which prove the amount owing to the rent week ending Thursday 26 September 2024 is $11,480.00.
The tenant rightly queried a recent water invoice as he had left the premises during that billing period. The reason for an invoiced sum is the difference between prior estimates and the later actual meter read. The landlord confirmed there is no one in occupancy at the premises.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
During the move out, the tenant acknowledged a wall was damaged by a large item of furniture while being carried out. The cost of repair is $207.00. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has accepted liability for the damage.
The amount for the repair is ordered.

Should the term be reduced?

The rent arrears are increasing rapidly. While I have some sympathy with the tenant’s circumstances, without a formal application for a reduction it is problematic to make any consideration of the circumstances. That said, the continued tenant rent liability, potentially through to February 2025, was acknowledged by the landlord as being particularly onerous.
Where any party to a tenancy agreement breaches any of the provisions of the agreement or of this Act, the other party shall take all reasonable steps to limit the damage or loss arising from that breach, in accordance with the rules of law relating to mitigation of loss or damage upon breach of contract (see s 49 RTA).
I am satisfied the landlord has been acting appropriately and the changes in stance of the tenant, while understandable given the circumstances, have introduced some additional challenges to the landlord.
When considering claims, the Tribunal must consider s 85 RTA which provides that the Tribunal shall determine a dispute according to the substantial merits and justice of the case and in doing so, shall have regard for the law but shall not be bound to give legal effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. This provision recognises that, although applying established legal principles will generally produce a fair result, there are circumstances where it will not. In this situation, the Tribunal is entitled to depart from the strict application of the law to achieve a just outcome. Equally, where the law is uncertain, the Tribunal may adapt an approach that best meets the merits and justice of the case.
In this instance, having considered all submissions and evidence, I make orders for current rent arrears as at now but provide an effective future end date of the tenancy and rent liability on 22 October 2024, if not earlier by a new tenancy forming. In the absence of a formal tenant application per s 66 RTA, I consider it equitable to provide a reduction in the fixed-term from that date. Further rent arrears of over $3000.00 may accrue from the date of this order.
The parties should continue to work together on seeking a new tenancy as soon as possible. Filing Fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4947264 — Rent arrears at 66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4947264 — Rent arrears at 66 Survila Street, Takanini, Takanini 2110

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should the term be reduced?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent and water rates?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Should the term be reduced?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions