What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5464681 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] (aka Changxia Wei) must pay [The tenant/s] $708.00 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5464681?

Compensation: Moving Out Costs: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5464681?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5464681?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13763686-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5464681 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] (aka Changxia Wei) must pay [The tenant/s] $708.00 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 5464681?

Compensation: Moving Out Costs: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5464681?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5464681?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13763686-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

31 Hume Street, Alicetown, Lower Hutt 5010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5464681 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5464681 — net $708.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond refund	$530.00	Bond refund
Compensation: Moving out costs	$150.00	Moving out costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$708.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$708.00

Only the applicant attended the video hearing. The landlord gave notice that she would not be attending.

The tenant has applied for her bond, compensation and the filing fee. Background

The landlord advertised for a person to rent a room and facilities at 31 Hume Street, Alicetown, Lower Hutt. The applicant was shown the premises and agreed to tenant the property. The landlord also used one bedroom at the property. The applicant was told that apart from her there were other renters. There was one who had his own bathroom and used the kitchen. There was another person occupying a bedroom who would use a shared bathroom.

The applicant was not told that the landlord rented a room for BnB guests. This meant that the tenant was having to share facilities, including the bathroom with strangers.

The landlord received a bond of $530.00 from the applicant. The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre.

The landlord provided the tenant with a flatmate agreement.

Was the applicant a flatmate or tenant?

Section 5(1)(n) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the RTA is excluded in cases 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.

When determining whether the RTA is excluded from a tenancy, the Tribunal considers the substance of the agreement between the parties rather than the labels they have applied.

‘Principally as a place of residence by the landlord’ refers to area of the premises used by the landlord, not the amount of time the landlord spends at the premises or whether the landlord has another home elsewhere. If the landlord used 60% of the premises and the renters used 40% of the premises, then the premises would be principally use by the landlord.

In the present case the premises was principally used by renters and BnB guests. The area of the premises used by the landlord was small in comparison and therefore the exclusion under s.5(n) does not apply. The applicant was a tenant, not the landlord’s flatmate or boarder. The landlord was required to comply with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 regarding what is included in a tenancy agreement, lodging the bond, complying with Healthy Homes Standards. The landlord should have disclosed to the applicant that other bedrooms and shared facilities would be used by BnB guests.

From the evidence I am satisfied that the landlord failed to inform the tenant that she could encounter strangers using her shared bathroom at any time.

I accept that the arrangement for the tenant was unsatisfactory and that she had to leave the tenancy because the landlord did not fully inform her of the nature of the premises.

I have therefore ordered that the landlord refund the bond, pay moving costs of $150.00 and the filing fee.

The respondent is warned that she must meet the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by providing a tenancy agreement that complies with the provisions of the Act. She must provide information about Healthy Homes Standards. She is not a flatmate. She is a landlord. She must lodge a bond. She may be fined if she does not comply with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 in any case in future.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5464681 — net $708.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond refund	$530.00	Bond refund
Compensation: Moving out costs	$150.00	Moving out costs
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$708.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$708.00

Order

[The landlord/s] (aka Changxia Wei) must pay [The tenant/s] $708.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below: DescriptionTenant Bond refund $530.00 Compensation: Moving out costs $150.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $708.00

Reasons

Only the applicant attended the video hearing. The landlord gave notice that she would not be attending.
The tenant has applied for her bond, compensation and the filing fee. Background
The landlord advertised for a person to rent a room and facilities at 31 Hume Street, Alicetown, Lower Hutt. The applicant was shown the premises and agreed to tenant the property. The landlord also used one bedroom at the property. The applicant was told that apart from her there were other renters. There was one who had his own bathroom and used the kitchen. There was another person occupying a bedroom who would use a shared bathroom.
The applicant was not told that the landlord rented a room for BnB guests. This meant that the tenant was having to share facilities, including the bathroom with strangers.
The landlord received a bond of $530.00 from the applicant. The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre.
The landlord provided the tenant with a flatmate agreement.

Was the applicant a flatmate or tenant?

Section 5(1)(n) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the RTA is excluded in cases 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.
When determining whether the RTA is excluded from a tenancy, the Tribunal considers the substance of the agreement between the parties rather than the labels they have applied.
‘Principally as a place of residence by the landlord’ refers to area of the premises used by the landlord, not the amount of time the landlord spends at the premises or whether the landlord has another home elsewhere. If the landlord used 60% of the premises and the renters used 40% of the premises, then the premises would be principally use by the landlord.
In the present case the premises was principally used by renters and BnB guests. The area of the premises used by the landlord was small in comparison and therefore the exclusion under s.5(n) does not apply. The applicant was a tenant, not the landlord’s flatmate or boarder. The landlord was required to comply with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 regarding what is included in a tenancy agreement, lodging the bond, complying with Healthy Homes Standards. The landlord should have disclosed to the applicant that other bedrooms and shared facilities would be used by BnB guests.
From the evidence I am satisfied that the landlord failed to inform the tenant that she could encounter strangers using her shared bathroom at any time.
I accept that the arrangement for the tenant was unsatisfactory and that she had to leave the tenancy because the landlord did not fully inform her of the nature of the premises.
I have therefore ordered that the landlord refund the bond, pay moving costs of $150.00 and the filing fee.
The respondent is warned that she must meet the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by providing a tenancy agreement that complies with the provisions of the Act. She must provide information about Healthy Homes Standards. She is not a flatmate. She is a landlord. She must lodge a bond. She may be fined if she does not comply with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 in any case in future.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5464681 — Tenancy dispute at 31 Hume Street, Alicetown, Lower Hutt 5010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5464681 — Tenancy dispute at 31 Hume Street, Alicetown, Lower Hutt 5010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the applicant a flatmate or tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the applicant a flatmate or tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions