How much money was awarded in case 5439973?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439973?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439973?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13378943-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5439973?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5439973?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5439973?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13378943-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5439973 — State of repair

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5439973 about?

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

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
The tenant’s application for an Order reducing the term of the tenancy is dismissed.
By consent: a. the landlord will continue its efforts to find new tenants for the tenancy; b. once it does, the tenancy may be ended by the landlord giving the tenant not less than 21 days’ notice in writing.
The above Orders are without prejudice to s.44A RTA.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by videoconference. The tenant and his support person attended by phone.
The tenant applied for an Order reducing the term of this tenancy which is for a fixed term from 21 November 2025 to 21 December 2026.
The application also raised concerns about the rent payable for the tenancy as well as the habitability and maintenance of the premises.
The Tribunal can undertake a market rent assessment. However, in the case of a fixed term tenancy that cannot happen on an application made more than 3 months after the start of the tenancy. Also, there is no evidential basis on which the Tribunal could assess a market rent for these premises.
The landlord’s evidence is that there is a current Healthy Homes compliance assessment for the premises. The tenant does not wish to pursue claims about the state of repair of the premises or Healthy Homes compliance. He really raises those issues as part of his view that he is being required to pay more for the premises than he should, which is an unsustainable amount for him.
The Tribunal is able to make an Order reducing the term of a fixed term tenancy. To consider making an Order like that, the Tribunal would need to be satisfied that because of an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances, the severe hardship which he would suffer if the term of the tenancy wasn’t reduced, would be greater than the hardship the landlord would suffer if it was. 1
Here, the tenant does not really identify any unforeseen change in his circumstances. It is the case that he has found the premises difficult and uncomfortable to live in and believes he is paying more rent than is fair for the property. He says he has seen equivalent properties for less weekly rent.
That does not meet the criteria for ordering a reduction in the fixed term.
The landlord cannot ignore the tenants wish to end the tenancy before the end of the fixed term. It has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to mitigate the losses that would be caused. 2
Recently, by agreement, the landlord has been advertising for other tenants. IT has had interested tenants but has the problem that because the tenant has not been able to say when he can move out, the landlord cannot tell prospective tenants when they can move in.
That is a difficult catch-22 situation for both parties. It risks an ongoing deadlock.
Because it is the tenant wanting to change the terms of the existing agreement, it is really up to him to commit to a vacate period, so the landlord can find new tenants and he can be released from the fixed term he agreed to.
After some discussion the tenant agreed that he could commit to vacating on 21 days’ notice. 1 S.66(1) RTA 2 S.49 RTA
That is an appropriate way forward.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

The tenant’s application for an Order reducing the term of the tenancy is dismissed.

By consent: a. the landlord will continue its efforts to find new tenants for the tenancy; b. once it does, the tenancy may be ended by the landlord giving the tenant not less than 21 days’ notice in writing.

The above Orders are without prejudice to s.44A RTA.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by videoconference. The tenant and his support person attended by phone.

The tenant applied for an Order reducing the term of this tenancy which is for a fixed term from 21 November 2025 to 21 December 2026.

The application also raised concerns about the rent payable for the tenancy as well as the habitability and maintenance of the premises.

The Tribunal can undertake a market rent assessment. However, in the case of a fixed term tenancy that cannot happen on an application made more than 3 months after the start of the tenancy. Also, there is no evidential basis on which the Tribunal could assess a market rent for these premises.

The landlord’s evidence is that there is a current Healthy Homes compliance assessment for the premises. The tenant does not wish to pursue claims about the state of repair of the premises or Healthy Homes compliance. He really raises those issues as part of his view that he is being required to pay more for the premises than he should, which is an unsustainable amount for him.

The Tribunal is able to make an Order reducing the term of a fixed term tenancy. To consider making an Order like that, the Tribunal would need to be satisfied that because of an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances, the severe hardship which he would suffer if the term of the tenancy wasn’t reduced, would be greater than the hardship the landlord would suffer if it was. 1

Here, the tenant does not really identify any unforeseen change in his circumstances. It is the case that he has found the premises difficult and uncomfortable to live in and believes he is paying more rent than is fair for the property. He says he has seen equivalent properties for less weekly rent.

That does not meet the criteria for ordering a reduction in the fixed term.

The landlord cannot ignore the tenants wish to end the tenancy before the end of the fixed term. It has an obligation to take all reasonable steps to mitigate the losses that would be caused. 2

Recently, by agreement, the landlord has been advertising for other tenants. IT has had interested tenants but has the problem that because the tenant has not been able to say when he can move out, the landlord cannot tell prospective tenants when they can move in.

That is a difficult catch-22 situation for both parties. It risks an ongoing deadlock.

Because it is the tenant wanting to change the terms of the existing agreement, it is really up to him to commit to a vacate period, so the landlord can find new tenants and he can be released from the fixed term he agreed to.

After some discussion the tenant agreed that he could commit to vacating on 21 days’ notice. 1 S.66(1) RTA 2 S.49 RTA

That is an appropriate way forward.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439973 — State of repair

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5439973 — State of repair

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Key findings

Frequently asked questions