What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4964727 about?

The tribunal order states: By declaration, the agreement between [The applicant/s] and Andrew

How much money was awarded in case 4964727?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4964727?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4964727?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10896306-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4964727 about?

The tribunal order states: By declaration, the agreement between [The applicant/s] and Andrew

How much money was awarded in case 4964727?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4964727?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4964727?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10896306-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

79 Milton Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4964727 — Boarding House

Order

By declaration, the agreement between [The applicant/s] and Andrew Donaldson in relation to the premises at 79 Milton Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 is not a residential tenancy and is therefore not subject to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[The applicant/s] attended the teleconference hearing. The phone number for Mr Donaldson, the respondent, the last three digits being 795, was called twice. Both calls received no response. As Mr Donaldson was served, the hearing proceeded in his absence.
[The applicant/s] applied for refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. The Tribunal was initially required to decide whether it had jurisdiction to hear the claim.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claim?

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
Section 5(1)(n) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) provides that the RTA shall not apply where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
[The applicant/s] said that he moved into a room in Mr Donaldson’s house on 27 August 2023 at an initial weekly rent of $275.00. He said that there was no written or signed Tenancy Agreement, nor was there any discussion of any notice provisions for when [The applicant/s] was to leave.
[The applicant/s] confirmed that he lived in one bedroom in the main house whilst Mr Donaldson lived in another bedroom in the main house. [The applicant/s] said they both shared the kitchen, bathroom, dining and living areas and that the bills were initially included in his weekly rent. [The applicant/s] clarified that Mr Donaldson owned the house.
[The applicant/s] was under the impression when the room was advertised that Mr Donaldson would be working overseas most of the time but after he moved in, he said Mr Donaldson went to France for 5 weeks but then returned to live in the house with him until he moved out on 20 July 2024.
[The applicant/s] said he had an accident on 19 December 2023 when he lost an eye and then required extensive surgeries. He said the relationship between he and Mr Donaldson became very difficult then and he was keen to move out when his physical health allowed him to. [The applicant/s] said he gave Mr Donaldson two weeks’ notice and then moved out.
This is not a boarding house as defined by the RTA.
I find that [The applicant/s]’ evidence that he and Mr Donaldson both had bedrooms in the main house and shared common facilities, such as the kitchen, bathroom, dining and living areas and both contributed to the household bills, while Mr Donaldson was the owner of the house and continued to live at the premises during [The applicant/s]’ time living at the premises, shows it is likely that the premises continued to be used during the tenancy principally as a place of residence by the owner of the premises. As such, this tenancy is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal.
As this tenancy is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal, the claim is dismissed.
The applicant can obtain advice as to the appropriate forum that could address this dispute. Suppression
The applicant requested name suppression.
Section 95A(4) RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
[The applicant/s] gave evidence of his very challenging circumstances, in terms of losing an eye in an accident, having to have 5 surgeries on his eye, and being unable to work during his health issues, at the same time as dealing with a difficult relationship with Mr Donaldson. The dispute has yet to be resolved, possibly in another forum. As such, I find that [The applicant/s] interests outweigh the public interest in publishing his name. Therefore, I order that the applicant’s name and identifying details are not to be published. Filing fee
As [The applicant/s] has not been successful with the claim, I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Order

By declaration, the agreement between [The applicant/s] and Andrew Donaldson in relation to the premises at 79 Milton Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110 is not a residential tenancy and is therefore not subject to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[The applicant/s] attended the teleconference hearing. The phone number for Mr Donaldson, the respondent, the last three digits being 795, was called twice. Both calls received no response. As Mr Donaldson was served, the hearing proceeded in his absence.
[The applicant/s] applied for refund of the bond following the end of the tenancy. The Tribunal was initially required to decide whether it had jurisdiction to hear the claim.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claim?

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
Section 5(1)(n) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) provides that the RTA shall not apply where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
[The applicant/s] said that he moved into a room in Mr Donaldson’s house on 27 August 2023 at an initial weekly rent of $275.00. He said that there was no written or signed Tenancy Agreement, nor was there any discussion of any notice provisions for when [The applicant/s] was to leave.
[The applicant/s] confirmed that he lived in one bedroom in the main house whilst Mr Donaldson lived in another bedroom in the main house. [The applicant/s] said they both shared the kitchen, bathroom, dining and living areas and that the bills were initially included in his weekly rent. [The applicant/s] clarified that Mr Donaldson owned the house.
[The applicant/s] was under the impression when the room was advertised that Mr Donaldson would be working overseas most of the time but after he moved in, he said Mr Donaldson went to France for 5 weeks but then returned to live in the house with him until he moved out on 20 July 2024.
[The applicant/s] said he had an accident on 19 December 2023 when he lost an eye and then required extensive surgeries. He said the relationship between he and Mr Donaldson became very difficult then and he was keen to move out when his physical health allowed him to. [The applicant/s] said he gave Mr Donaldson two weeks’ notice and then moved out.
This is not a boarding house as defined by the RTA.
I find that [The applicant/s]’ evidence that he and Mr Donaldson both had bedrooms in the main house and shared common facilities, such as the kitchen, bathroom, dining and living areas and both contributed to the household bills, while Mr Donaldson was the owner of the house and continued to live at the premises during [The applicant/s]’ time living at the premises, shows it is likely that the premises continued to be used during the tenancy principally as a place of residence by the owner of the premises. As such, this tenancy is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal.
As this tenancy is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal, the claim is dismissed.
The applicant can obtain advice as to the appropriate forum that could address this dispute. Suppression
The applicant requested name suppression.
Section 95A(4) RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
[The applicant/s] gave evidence of his very challenging circumstances, in terms of losing an eye in an accident, having to have 5 surgeries on his eye, and being unable to work during his health issues, at the same time as dealing with a difficult relationship with Mr Donaldson. The dispute has yet to be resolved, possibly in another forum. As such, I find that [The applicant/s] interests outweigh the public interest in publishing his name. Therefore, I order that the applicant’s name and identifying details are not to be published. Filing fee
As [The applicant/s] has not been successful with the claim, I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4964727 — Boarding House at 79 Milton Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4964727 — Boarding House at 79 Milton Road, Bluff Hill, Napier 4110

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claim?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction to hear the claim?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions