What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4987608 about?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address

How much money was awarded in case 4987608?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4987608?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4987608?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10854691-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4987608 about?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address

How much money was awarded in case 4987608?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4987608?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4987608?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10854691-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4987608 — Tenancy dispute

Order

The term of the fixed-term tenancy of [The tenant/s] at [Tenancy address suppressed] is reduced and now ends at 11.59 pm on Friday 20 September 2024.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 8 February 2025. The application was made with the support of the landlord because the parties could not decide what should happen next.
The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances b. the change was unforeseen c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case.
The tenant signed a new fixed term tenancy agreement for the tenancy premises in February. She and her partner moved in late last year. They both work in hospitality. At the time they signed the fixed term and agreed to pay $590 a week they were both working more than 30 hours a week, and they were confident they could pay the rent. Since then they have both had their hours reduced significantly. They continued paying rent by using up their holiday hours. Eventually this became too hard and the tenant told the landlord that they were going to move out. The tenant stopped living at the flat on 7 September. She moved cities and is living with her parents. She is still paying rent.
The landlord did not dispute the tenant’s submission. He advertised the property on 1 August and there were no enquiries at all. The rent was reduced by $50 a week at the start of September and there have been two enquiries and one viewing. The flat is still untenanted. The landlord said the lack of interest is unprecedented.
I find there was an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances. The parties discussed the tenant’s ability to pay the rent in February and the significant drop in hours was not foreseen by the landlord or by the tenant.
The tenant has moved in with her parents. She has to pay some expenses and for food. She is paying that and the weekly rent out of her savings. She is applying for jobs. She is not on a benefit because she left her hospitality job when the hours were reduced and she could no longer afford to live in the flat. I find there is severe hardship.
The landlord submitted that they have four rentals and their income is from the rents. He said he and his wife have both had surgery and they have significant medical costs. They have savings and money coming in from the three other rentals. He said the landlord would also suffer severe hardship if the tenant stops paying rent.
The applicant – the tenant in this case - must prove all elements of the claim on the balance of probabilities; i.e., more probable than not. Neither party provided me with financial information because there was no challenge to the submissions. This means I have to weigh up hardship based on what I have heard. It seems more probable than not that the hardship for the tenant will be greater than the hardship for the landlord. This means the fixed term tenancy will end. I did not ask about the day rent is usually paid but it is my intention that the tenant does not pay any more rent, and the landlord is not required to refund any rent already paid to him if 20 September falls part way through the rent week.
Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term. I do not find it is reasonable to award compensation here because the landlord has known since 1 August and the tenant has continued to pay rent from her savings. The tenant can pay her own cost of filing this application.
The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because the tenant is the most successful party. The landlord’s application for suppression is also allowed because any public interest is in the law rather than the names.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 8 February 2025. The application was made with the support of the landlord because the parties could not decide what should happen next.

The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.

There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances b. the change was unforeseen c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.

The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case.

The tenant signed a new fixed term tenancy agreement for the tenancy premises in February. She and her partner moved in late last year. They both work in hospitality. At the time they signed the fixed term and agreed to pay $590 a week they were both working more than 30 hours a week, and they were confident they could pay the rent. Since then they have both had their hours reduced significantly. They continued paying rent by using up their holiday hours. Eventually this became too hard and the tenant told the landlord that they were going to move out. The tenant stopped living at the flat on 7 September. She moved cities and is living with her parents. She is still paying rent.

The landlord did not dispute the tenant’s submission. He advertised the property on 1 August and there were no enquiries at all. The rent was reduced by $50 a week at the start of September and there have been two enquiries and one viewing. The flat is still untenanted. The landlord said the lack of interest is unprecedented.

I find there was an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances. The parties discussed the tenant’s ability to pay the rent in February and the significant drop in hours was not foreseen by the landlord or by the tenant.

The tenant has moved in with her parents. She has to pay some expenses and for food. She is paying that and the weekly rent out of her savings. She is applying for jobs. She is not on a benefit because she left her hospitality job when the hours were reduced and she could no longer afford to live in the flat. I find there is severe hardship.

The landlord submitted that they have four rentals and their income is from the rents. He said he and his wife have both had surgery and they have significant medical costs. They have savings and money coming in from the three other rentals. He said the landlord would also suffer severe hardship if the tenant stops paying rent.

The applicant – the tenant in this case - must prove all elements of the claim on the balance of probabilities; i.e., more probable than not. Neither party provided me with financial information because there was no challenge to the submissions. This means I have to weigh up hardship based on what I have heard. It seems more probable than not that the hardship for the tenant will be greater than the hardship for the landlord. This means the fixed term tenancy will end. I did not ask about the day rent is usually paid but it is my intention that the tenant does not pay any more rent, and the landlord is not required to refund any rent already paid to him if 20 September falls part way through the rent week.

Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term. I do not find it is reasonable to award compensation here because the landlord has known since 1 August and the tenant has continued to pay rent from her savings. The tenant can pay her own cost of filing this application.

The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because the tenant is the most successful party. The landlord’s application for suppression is also allowed because any public interest is in the law rather than the names.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4987608 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4987608 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions