How much money was awarded in case 9049064?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9049064?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9049064?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10021431-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 9049064?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9049064?

The primary dispute was Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9049064?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10021431-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Auckland, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 9049064 — Unit Titles

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9049064 about?

The tribunal order states: The applicant must file and serve the following documents within 5 working

Order

The applicant must file and serve the following documents within 5 working days of the date of this hearing: (a) A copy of the terms of engagement between the applicant and its solicitors relating to this application. (b) An affidavit from either the Body Corporate or the solicitors acting for the Body Corporate deposing as to whether or not the Body Corporate will be required to pay the legal costs that have been rendered and are now claimed, regardless of the outcome of the hearing before the Tribunal for those costs to be paid (and therefore addressing Rule 9.1(i) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Client Care rules). (c) A copy of the two recent emails the Body Corporate’s solicitors have received from the respondent. (d) An updated claim document that sets out the costs that are claimed, including whether the filing fee is still being claimed. 1 1 It appears the respondent may have already paid this.

These documents should be filed by emailing them to remote.tenancy@justice.govt.nz . The respondent should be emailed the documents at the same time.

This matter is to be set down for a further hearing.

Reasons

Only the Body Corporate attended the hearing. The respondent did not answer phones calls placed to her phone. During the course of the hearing, the applicant provided an email address for the respondent and this was added to the Tribunal’s contact details for the respondent. The claim

The Body corporate was initially claiming special levies, interest and costs. A letter of demand for those claims was sent to the respondent in October last year. When the claims were not met, the Body Corporate filed this claim. On 8 February 2024, the respondent paid the bulk of the levies claimed, plus interest, but not any of the costs.

The applicant claims that the following sums remain owing: Outstanding levies 2 Section 124 costs including GST and disbursements

04 5,759.49 Appearance at the hearing on 29.2.24 ($265.00 per hour x 2 hours approximately, plus GST) 3

50 Application filing fee500.00

Included in the materials was an earlier invoice rendered by the Body Corporate’s lawyers to the Body Corporate in the sum of $4,168.75, dated 7 November 2023. Mrs MacGregor advised the Tribunal that that invoice had not been sent to the Body Corporate and had not been paid. She advised that it was now replaced by the second invoice, only recently sent to the Body Corporate, claiming the sum of $5,759.49. 2 Instalment Levy 3/3 (Period 25/01/2024 - 25/05/2024) 3 It is noted the time consumed at the hearing on that date was around one hour

The Tribunal considers that it is required to consider the Rule 9.2 factors set out in the Client Care Rules in deciding whether the fees in this case are reasonable. This approach has been made clear by recent District Court authority which is binding on the Tribunal and is consistent with High Court authority on the point. (See Exuberant Ltd v Quinovic Management Limited). 4

During the hearing, it became clear that the Tribunal did not have before it all relevant documents necessary to assist it in reaching a determination on this issue. The relevance of the documents ordered above was discussed during the course of the hearing and these documents are sought so that the Tribunal has all relevant information in order to be able to determine this matter.

The Tribunal needs to be satisfied that the costs invoice that is being claimed will be paid by the Body Corporate, regardless of the outcome of its application for costs in this matter. The reasons for that are set out in the Client Care rules.

Order

The applicant must file and serve the following documents within 5 working days of the date of this hearing: (a) A copy of the terms of engagement between the applicant and its solicitors relating to this application. (b) An affidavit from either the Body Corporate or the solicitors acting for the Body Corporate deposing as to whether or not the Body Corporate will be required to pay the legal costs that have been rendered and are now claimed, regardless of the outcome of the hearing before the Tribunal for those costs to be paid (and therefore addressing Rule 9.1(i) of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act (Lawyers: Conduct and Client Care) Rules 2008 (the Client Care rules). (c) A copy of the two recent emails the Body Corporate’s solicitors have received from the respondent. (d) An updated claim document that sets out the costs that are claimed, including whether the filing fee is still being claimed. 1 1 It appears the respondent may have already paid this.
These documents should be filed by emailing them to remote.tenancy@justice.govt.nz . The respondent should be emailed the documents at the same time.
This matter is to be set down for a further hearing.

Reasons

Only the Body Corporate attended the hearing. The respondent did not answer phones calls placed to her phone. During the course of the hearing, the applicant provided an email address for the respondent and this was added to the Tribunal’s contact details for the respondent. The claim
The Body corporate was initially claiming special levies, interest and costs. A letter of demand for those claims was sent to the respondent in October last year. When the claims were not met, the Body Corporate filed this claim. On 8 February 2024, the respondent paid the bulk of the levies claimed, plus interest, but not any of the costs.
The applicant claims that the following sums remain owing: Outstanding levies 2 Section 124 costs including GST and disbursements
04 5,759.49 Appearance at the hearing on 29.2.24 ($265.00 per hour x 2 hours approximately, plus GST) 3
50 Application filing fee500.00
Included in the materials was an earlier invoice rendered by the Body Corporate’s lawyers to the Body Corporate in the sum of $4,168.75, dated 7 November 2023. Mrs MacGregor advised the Tribunal that that invoice had not been sent to the Body Corporate and had not been paid. She advised that it was now replaced by the second invoice, only recently sent to the Body Corporate, claiming the sum of $5,759.49. 2 Instalment Levy 3/3 (Period 25/01/2024 - 25/05/2024) 3 It is noted the time consumed at the hearing on that date was around one hour
The Tribunal considers that it is required to consider the Rule 9.2 factors set out in the Client Care Rules in deciding whether the fees in this case are reasonable. This approach has been made clear by recent District Court authority which is binding on the Tribunal and is consistent with High Court authority on the point. (See Exuberant Ltd v Quinovic Management Limited). 4
During the hearing, it became clear that the Tribunal did not have before it all relevant documents necessary to assist it in reaching a determination on this issue. The relevance of the documents ordered above was discussed during the course of the hearing and these documents are sought so that the Tribunal has all relevant information in order to be able to determine this matter.
The Tribunal needs to be satisfied that the costs invoice that is being claimed will be paid by the Body Corporate, regardless of the outcome of its application for costs in this matter. The reasons for that are set out in the Client Care rules.

Tenancy Tribunal case 9049064 — Unit Titles in Auckland, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 9049064 — Unit Titles in Auckland, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions