How much money was awarded in case 5238853?

Consent Order Award: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5238853?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5238853?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11924233-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5238853?

Consent Order Award: $2,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5238853?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5238853?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11924233-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5238853 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5238853 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5238853. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Consent order award	$2,000.00		Consent order award
Bond		$2,000.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name (including [the owner]) and the tenant’s name and identifying details.

The tenant’s claims are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

BY CONSENT – [The tenant/s] agree to pay [The landlord/s] $1500 from the Bond to settle claims for outstanding rent, cleaning and rubbish removal. It is agreed that the remainder of the bond ($500) will be returned to the tenants.

BY CONSENT - The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $1,500.00 [The tenant/s]: $500.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. [Tenant 1] attended for the tenants. [Landlord 1] attended with another representative of [the property management company].

The Tribunal must deal with several applications bought by the tenant.

First, the tenant says the [landlord 1] has breached a suppression order previously made by the Tribunal. The alleged breach of a suppression order is a criminal matter and falls outside the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal. The claim is dismissed.

The tenant says that the [landlord 1] has breached the Privacy Act 2020. Claims under the Privacy Act 2020 also fall outside the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal. This claim is dismissed.

The tenant says that he wants [landlord 1] removed as a landlord generally due to her conduct. This is not an order the Tenancy Tribunal can make. This claim is dismissed.

I am also not satisfied that [landlord 1] personally, as an employee of [the property management company] is a landlord within the definition set out in the RTA (section 2 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)).

The tenant seeks the return of the bond of $2,000.

The landlord has a claim relating to the bond but at the time of the hearing they had not lodged an application (as per section 22B RTA). The tenant and landlord however wanted to see if they could resolve this issue at the hearing between them rather than have a need to return to the Tribunal.

The landlord and tenant agreed for the landlord to be paid $1,500 out of the bond to settle claims relating to rent arrears, cleaning and rubbish removal. The tenant is to have the remaining $500 returned to them. Suppression

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 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 (s 95 RTA).

The landlord has been wholly successful in defeating the tenant’s claims and has had some success in relation to the bond which was a negotiated outcome. I am satisfied the landlord has been substantially successful and therefore award the landlord name suppression.

In the present case, the tenant was not wholly or substantially successful in his own application which was flawed from a jurisdiction point of view. However, he negotiated an agreed final outcome relating to the landlord’s pending claim in relation to the bond. It is in the public interest that parties can resolve their disputes. It is expedient for the Tribunal to assist with this where it is able rather than send the parties to a confidential mediation. I therefore also award the tenant name suppression.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5238853. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Consent order award	$2,000.00		Consent order award
Bond		$2,000.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name (including [the owner]) and the tenant’s name and identifying details.

The tenant’s claims are dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

BY CONSENT - The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: [The landlord/s]: $1,500.00 [The tenant/s]: $500.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. [Tenant 1] attended for the tenants. [Landlord 1] attended with another representative of [the property management company].

The Tribunal must deal with several applications bought by the tenant.

The tenant says that the [landlord 1] has breached the Privacy Act 2020. Claims under the Privacy Act 2020 also fall outside the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal. This claim is dismissed.

The tenant says that he wants [landlord 1] removed as a landlord generally due to her conduct. This is not an order the Tenancy Tribunal can make. This claim is dismissed.

The tenant seeks the return of the bond of $2,000.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5238853 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5238853 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions