What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5281604 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5281604?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5281604?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5281604?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12319783-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5281604 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5281604?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5281604?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5281604?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12319783-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

10 Kea Street, Frankton, Hamilton 3204 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5281604 — Boarding House

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by video conference.
The applicant rented a room from the respondent in June 2023 and lived in the home with the respondent and another boarder in the three bedroom house.
The home is owned by the respondent and is her place of residence. The home including the kitchen and living area is fully furnished by the respondent and for the use of all occupants. The utilities are in the name of the respondent and the other occupants contribute towards the cost.
There is no signed agreement between the parties. The applicant provided a copy of the email communication from the respondent at the commencement of the arrangement which includes some terms of the arrangement and records “I look forward to living with you.”
The applicant moved out in June 2025.
The applicant has applied for a bond refund.
The respondent claims that the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) does not apply in this situation pursuant to section 5(1)(n) as the premises are her home.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction?

The Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine any dispute that exists between a landlord and a tenant and relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies. See section 77(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
In considering whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction I must ask: Are these premises a boarding house? If not, are these premises excluded by section 5(1)(n)?

Are these premises a boarding house?

The applicant stated that the only criteria she could find on the tenancy services website that might fit her situation was a boarding house so in her application beside the question “What type of tenancy is this?” she recorded “Boarding House”
A boarding house is defined in section 66B of the RTA as a residential tenancy containing 1 or more boarding rooms along with communal facilities and occupied or intended to be occupied by at least 6 tenants at any one time. A boarding house tenancy is a tenancy that is intended to, or does in fact, last for 28 days or more and the tenant is granted exclusive rights to occupy particular sleeping quarters in the boarding house, and is granted shared use of facilities of the boarding house.
There is no evidence that these premises were intended to be occupied by more than 6 people. The parties agreed that it is a 3 bedroom house and the respondent occupies one room.
The respondent stated that the premises are not occupied by more than six people and there is no intention of this.
Therefore, I find that the premises are not a boarding house. Are these premises excluded by section 5(1)(n) RTA?
Section 5 of the Act states that it does not apply in certain cases; one of these is 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. See section 5(1)(n) RTA.
There is no dispute that these premises are the respondent’s home and principally her place of residence. The arrangement in place clearly indicates a boarding arrangement as the respondent lives in the home and provides the home furnished with utilities.
The parties have not entered into a signed agreement and therefore have not contracted back in to the RTA.
Therefore, I find that this is excluded by section 5(1)(n) RTA. There is no jurisdiction to hear this claim and the matter is dismissed. Suppression
The applicant is seeking suppression of identifying details in any publication of this order. If a party has wholly or substantially succeeded in the proceedings the Tribunal must make the order 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. Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The applicant has not been successful in these proceedings, therefore, the application for name suppression is declined.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by video conference.
The applicant rented a room from the respondent in June 2023 and lived in the home with the respondent and another boarder in the three bedroom house.
The home is owned by the respondent and is her place of residence. The home including the kitchen and living area is fully furnished by the respondent and for the use of all occupants. The utilities are in the name of the respondent and the other occupants contribute towards the cost.
There is no signed agreement between the parties. The applicant provided a copy of the email communication from the respondent at the commencement of the arrangement which includes some terms of the arrangement and records “I look forward to living with you.”
The applicant moved out in June 2025.
The applicant has applied for a bond refund.
The respondent claims that the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) does not apply in this situation pursuant to section 5(1)(n) as the premises are her home.

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction?

The Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine any dispute that exists between a landlord and a tenant and relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies. See section 77(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
In considering whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction I must ask: Are these premises a boarding house? If not, are these premises excluded by section 5(1)(n)?

Are these premises a boarding house?

The applicant stated that the only criteria she could find on the tenancy services website that might fit her situation was a boarding house so in her application beside the question “What type of tenancy is this?” she recorded “Boarding House”
A boarding house is defined in section 66B of the RTA as a residential tenancy containing 1 or more boarding rooms along with communal facilities and occupied or intended to be occupied by at least 6 tenants at any one time. A boarding house tenancy is a tenancy that is intended to, or does in fact, last for 28 days or more and the tenant is granted exclusive rights to occupy particular sleeping quarters in the boarding house, and is granted shared use of facilities of the boarding house.
There is no evidence that these premises were intended to be occupied by more than 6 people. The parties agreed that it is a 3 bedroom house and the respondent occupies one room.
The respondent stated that the premises are not occupied by more than six people and there is no intention of this.
Therefore, I find that the premises are not a boarding house. Are these premises excluded by section 5(1)(n) RTA?
Section 5 of the Act states that it does not apply in certain cases; one of these is 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. See section 5(1)(n) RTA.
There is no dispute that these premises are the respondent’s home and principally her place of residence. The arrangement in place clearly indicates a boarding arrangement as the respondent lives in the home and provides the home furnished with utilities.
The parties have not entered into a signed agreement and therefore have not contracted back in to the RTA.
Therefore, I find that this is excluded by section 5(1)(n) RTA. There is no jurisdiction to hear this claim and the matter is dismissed. Suppression
The applicant is seeking suppression of identifying details in any publication of this order. If a party has wholly or substantially succeeded in the proceedings the Tribunal must make the order 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. Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The applicant has not been successful in these proceedings, therefore, the application for name suppression is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5281604 — Boarding House at 10 Kea Street, Frankton, Hamilton 3204

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5281604 — Boarding House at 10 Kea Street, Frankton, Hamilton 3204

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction?

Are these premises a boarding house?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

Does the Tribunal have jurisdiction?

Are these premises a boarding house?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.