What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4991015 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for partial refund of the bond is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4991015?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4991015?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4991015?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10916291-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4991015 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for partial refund of the bond is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4991015?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4991015?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4991015?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10916291-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4991015 — Property damage

Order

The tenant’s application for partial refund of the bond is dismissed.
The landlord agrees not to make any further claim or application against [The applicant/s] relating to this tenancy.

Reasons

[The applicant/s] and [The respondent/s] attended the hearing held by video/telephone. The tenant’s father also attended.
[The applicant/s] was one of three tenants who jointly entered into a fixed term tenancy with the landlord starting from 22 February 2024 with the term due to end on 21 February 2025.
Difficulties arose between the tenants and [The applicant/s] moved out of the flat in the first week of June 2024. In early July, there was a flood in the flat caused by an overflowing bath. The landlord says there was significant damage including to the downstairs flat below and that the tenancy ended on 11 July 2024.
The tenancy has ended and [The applicant/s] has applied to the Tribunal for the return of $800.00 from the landlord which was the amount she contributed towards a total bond of $2,400.00.
The landlord agrees that all rent has been paid to 11 July 2024. [The applicant/s] advises that she continued to pay her one-third share of the rent through until this date although she had moved out in early June because she understood that this was her responsibility under the tenancy agreement.
The landlord has been refunded the full bond after making an application to the Bond Centre. He first asked [The applicant/s] to consent to this but she did not agree. She says that she did not have the opportunity to contest his application to the Bond Centre. 1 These proceedings give her the opportunity to present her views.
The essence of [The applicant/s]’s submission is that she understood it had been agreed with the landlord that she could move out of the flat because of safety and welfare concerns and that she did all that she could responsibly do to facilitate another tenant being found to take over from her. She was not living at the property when the flood damage occurred and says she was not included in communication about the ending of the tenancy. In her view, she should not lose her part of the bond as she has met her responsibilities and was not living at the premises when the flood and damage occurred.
The landlord does not agree that the part of the bond paid by [The applicant/s] should be returned to her. He says that the tenancy ended only five months into the fixed term, that the flood happened during the tenancy and has caused damage and cost to him, and that new tenants only move in on 26 October 2024. By this time, he says he will have lost just over 15 weeks of rent which equates to more than $9,000.00.

What is the law that applies?

A fixed term tenancy is a binding legal contract to pay rent until the end of the term, and a tenant cannot remove themselves from that liability unless the landlord agrees, or the Tribunal releases them.
The tenancy agreement includes a clause explaining the law and process for “Lease Breaks”; see clause 12 of ‘Additional Terms & Conditions’. This includes:- a. The landlord may grant or decline any request to vacate early, b. The tenant may also apply to the Tribunal for release under section 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), 1 The Bond Centre (Tenancy Services) manages bond refunds. c. If the landlord consents to early release, they may charge reasonable costs, and the tenant is liable for rent and other matters until they have been formally released.
Tenants are jointly and severally liable to the landlord for any debt arising out of the tenancy agreement; see clause 5 of ‘Terms & Conditions for Agreement’.
“Joint and several” liability means that all tenants are liable for the debt and actions of any other tenant and that the landlord has the option to seek payment of any debt or compensation from one or more of those tenants. Similarly, a bond is held as security over the debts and liability of any, and all, tenants. My decision
After hearing and considering the evidence from both parties, my decision is that:- a. [The applicant/s] remains jointly liable under the tenancy with the other two tenants because she was not released from liability by the landlord. i. The ‘Application for early release on fixed term tenancy’ document she signed on 7 June 2024 is not an agreement by the landlord to release her from the tenancy. The document specifically says that it is an “application” for early release and that the landlord does not have to grant this. ii. The text from the agent on 5 June 2024 was not a promise that she would be released or was released from the tenancy. It said that one of the remaining tenants (“K”) was “keen to find new flatmates and sign a new tenancy. The owner is going to let her try this so we’ll give a week ...”. iii. The landlord said he was not happy with the proposed new tenants, so a new tenancy was not entered into. A landlord retains the right to reject proposed tenants. b. I am satisfied that it is more probable than not that the landlord is entitled to compensation of at least the amount of the full bond of $2,400.00 made up of lost rent and loss from the bathroom flood. i. I accept the oral evidence from both parties that a bathroom flood occurred during the tenancy and was due to the carelessness of one of the remaining tenants. ii. I accept the landlord’s oral evidence that the flood caused significant damage that is covered by insurance. Tenants are liable for at least the amount of any insurance excess. The tenancy agreement discloses an excess of $750.00. iii. The premises have been untenanted for over 15 weeks, and it is more probable than not that the landlord is entitled to compensation from the tenants for some or all of the lost rent over this period either as a consequence of the flood damage or the early ending of the tenancy.
The Tenancy Tribunal must make its decisions in accordance with the law, in the interests of justice and as efficiently as possible; see s65 RTA.
The landlord agrees that if the tenant’s application is dismissed then he will not pursue her for further compensation including for lost rent or the insurance excess. I have recorded this in the order today.
This decision applies the law on the evidence available today and is in the interests of justice and efficiency.
The tenant’s claim is dismissed.
The filing fees remain as paid.
The landlord has succeeded so is entitled to have his name suppressed from the published order, as sought.
The tenant has not succeeded, however with the consent of the landlord, I also suppress her name. I am satisfied she acted responsibly and reasonably, and it would prejudice her future renting prospects if her name were not suppressed.

Order

The tenant’s application for partial refund of the bond is dismissed.
The landlord agrees not to make any further claim or application against [The applicant/s] relating to this tenancy.

Reasons

[The applicant/s] and [The respondent/s] attended the hearing held by video/telephone. The tenant’s father also attended.
[The applicant/s] was one of three tenants who jointly entered into a fixed term tenancy with the landlord starting from 22 February 2024 with the term due to end on 21 February 2025.
Difficulties arose between the tenants and [The applicant/s] moved out of the flat in the first week of June 2024. In early July, there was a flood in the flat caused by an overflowing bath. The landlord says there was significant damage including to the downstairs flat below and that the tenancy ended on 11 July 2024.
The tenancy has ended and [The applicant/s] has applied to the Tribunal for the return of $800.00 from the landlord which was the amount she contributed towards a total bond of $2,400.00.
The landlord agrees that all rent has been paid to 11 July 2024. [The applicant/s] advises that she continued to pay her one-third share of the rent through until this date although she had moved out in early June because she understood that this was her responsibility under the tenancy agreement.
The landlord has been refunded the full bond after making an application to the Bond Centre. He first asked [The applicant/s] to consent to this but she did not agree. She says that she did not have the opportunity to contest his application to the Bond Centre. 1 These proceedings give her the opportunity to present her views.
The essence of [The applicant/s]’s submission is that she understood it had been agreed with the landlord that she could move out of the flat because of safety and welfare concerns and that she did all that she could responsibly do to facilitate another tenant being found to take over from her. She was not living at the property when the flood damage occurred and says she was not included in communication about the ending of the tenancy. In her view, she should not lose her part of the bond as she has met her responsibilities and was not living at the premises when the flood and damage occurred.
The landlord does not agree that the part of the bond paid by [The applicant/s] should be returned to her. He says that the tenancy ended only five months into the fixed term, that the flood happened during the tenancy and has caused damage and cost to him, and that new tenants only move in on 26 October 2024. By this time, he says he will have lost just over 15 weeks of rent which equates to more than $9,000.00.

What is the law that applies?

A fixed term tenancy is a binding legal contract to pay rent until the end of the term, and a tenant cannot remove themselves from that liability unless the landlord agrees, or the Tribunal releases them.
The tenancy agreement includes a clause explaining the law and process for “Lease Breaks”; see clause 12 of ‘Additional Terms & Conditions’. This includes:- a. The landlord may grant or decline any request to vacate early, b. The tenant may also apply to the Tribunal for release under section 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), 1 The Bond Centre (Tenancy Services) manages bond refunds. c. If the landlord consents to early release, they may charge reasonable costs, and the tenant is liable for rent and other matters until they have been formally released.
Tenants are jointly and severally liable to the landlord for any debt arising out of the tenancy agreement; see clause 5 of ‘Terms & Conditions for Agreement’.
“Joint and several” liability means that all tenants are liable for the debt and actions of any other tenant and that the landlord has the option to seek payment of any debt or compensation from one or more of those tenants. Similarly, a bond is held as security over the debts and liability of any, and all, tenants. My decision
After hearing and considering the evidence from both parties, my decision is that:- a. [The applicant/s] remains jointly liable under the tenancy with the other two tenants because she was not released from liability by the landlord. i. The ‘Application for early release on fixed term tenancy’ document she signed on 7 June 2024 is not an agreement by the landlord to release her from the tenancy. The document specifically says that it is an “application” for early release and that the landlord does not have to grant this. ii. The text from the agent on 5 June 2024 was not a promise that she would be released or was released from the tenancy. It said that one of the remaining tenants (“K”) was “keen to find new flatmates and sign a new tenancy. The owner is going to let her try this so we’ll give a week ...”. iii. The landlord said he was not happy with the proposed new tenants, so a new tenancy was not entered into. A landlord retains the right to reject proposed tenants. b. I am satisfied that it is more probable than not that the landlord is entitled to compensation of at least the amount of the full bond of $2,400.00 made up of lost rent and loss from the bathroom flood. i. I accept the oral evidence from both parties that a bathroom flood occurred during the tenancy and was due to the carelessness of one of the remaining tenants. ii. I accept the landlord’s oral evidence that the flood caused significant damage that is covered by insurance. Tenants are liable for at least the amount of any insurance excess. The tenancy agreement discloses an excess of $750.00. iii. The premises have been untenanted for over 15 weeks, and it is more probable than not that the landlord is entitled to compensation from the tenants for some or all of the lost rent over this period either as a consequence of the flood damage or the early ending of the tenancy.
The Tenancy Tribunal must make its decisions in accordance with the law, in the interests of justice and as efficiently as possible; see s65 RTA.
The landlord agrees that if the tenant’s application is dismissed then he will not pursue her for further compensation including for lost rent or the insurance excess. I have recorded this in the order today.
This decision applies the law on the evidence available today and is in the interests of justice and efficiency.
The tenant’s claim is dismissed.
The filing fees remain as paid.
The landlord has succeeded so is entitled to have his name suppressed from the published order, as sought.
The tenant has not succeeded, however with the consent of the landlord, I also suppress her name. I am satisfied she acted responsibly and reasonably, and it would prejudice her future renting prospects if her name were not suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4991015 — Property damage

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4991015 — Property damage

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is the law that applies?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is the law that applies?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions