What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4657889?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4657889?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4657889?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4657889?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9593719-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4657889?

The tribunal order states: No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression

How much money was awarded in case 4657889?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4657889?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4657889?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9593719-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

27B Kingsway Crescent, Forest Lake, Hamilton 3200 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4657889 — Property damage

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The 90-day notice issued on 03 August 2023 to terminate the tenancy on 05 November 2023 is invalid.

Reasons

Mr Coyle appeared. Mr Berryman and Mr Gillard appeared for the landlord.
The tenancy commenced on 01 September 2015. On 03 August 2023, the landlord served a 90-day notice to terminate the tenancy on 05 November 2023., based on the landlord’s intention to conduct extensive alterations, refurbishments, and repairs (The “Work”), and that it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work was being undertaken.
On 16 August 2023, the tenant filed an application challenging the notice submitting that it was invalid as the intended works did not in fact require the tenant to vacate the property.
The notice was served by email before 5pm on 03 August 2023 and allows for more than 90 days. There are no issues with service.
The matter was initially scheduled for a hearing on 29 September 2023. Unfortunately, the Tribunal was unable to hear the matter, and it was rescheduled for 01 November 2023. Law
Section 51(2) of the Act provides: (2) A landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 90 days’ notice if— (a)the premises are to be put on the market by the owner within 90 days after the termination date for the purposes of sale or other disposition: or (b)the owner is required, under an unconditional agreement for the sale of the premises, to give the purchaser vacant possession; or (c)the landlord is not the owner of the premises and the landlord’s interest in the premises is due to end; or (d)the landlord or owner has acquired the premises to facilitate the use of nearby land for a business activity and— (i)that fact is clearly stated in the tenancy agreement; and (ii)the premises are required to be vacant of residential tenants to facilitate that use; or (e)the premises are to be converted into commercial premises for at least 90 days by the landlord or owner; or (f)extensive alterations, refurbishment, repairs, or redevelopment of the premises are to be carried out by the landlord or owner, and— (i)it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work is undertaken; and (ii)the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date: or (g)the premises are to be demolished and the demolition is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date. (2A)In subsection (2)(f) and (g), taking a material step means applying for regulatory consent, seeking engineering or other professional advice, or taking any other significant step. Discussion
The property was built in the 1970’s, comprises two bedrooms, lounge / dining room, laundry / entrance., kitchen, toilet, and bathroom. The lounge / dining room and both bedrooms are carpeted, which show general signs of wear and tear commensurate with its age.
The landlord provided the tenant with a document titled “Extensive Refurbishment – Scope of Work.” (The “Scope”).
The Scope of Work is summarised as follows: “Property to be extensively renovated with new floor coverings, full paint (all areas required) kitchen upgrade, bathroom work – ceiling in shower area, modified. New window treatments and underfloor work to proof for future.”
The landlord plans to replace the carpet, paint the interior of the property, replace the curtains, replace the laundry floor, which serves as the entrance to the property, and replace the kitchen sink. They admit uncertainty about the extent of the other work referred too, which they state can be determined when they have possession of the property. Besides the laundry floor, no other investigations, quotes, or estimates have been obtained.
In the Scope, the landlord states “The owner would prefer to wait until the tenant has vacated to have a clear access and movement throughout the property. It also allows for secondary quotes to be sourced to ensure competitive pricing.”
In the Scope’s summary the landlord states “A renovation of this nature is easier to conduct when the property is vacant. Quotes can be obtained, and assessments made when the property is empty and all areas, walls, floors, cupboards are free from obstruction and can visually inspected to ensure thorough review of the property. The owner would like to perform the bulk of the work with help from specialist contractors were required. Hence quotes have not been sought at this stage as it would be invasive for the tenant as two quotes may be requested for each component. The owner does not like to go to the properties while they are tenanted and prefers to access only once vacant.”
Mr Gillard is the owner mentioned in the Scope. The Scope has been prepared by the landlord. Mr Gillard states he would like the property to be empty so that he can do some work on it, and then sell it. It appears Mr Gillard seeks vacant possession to determine the exact nature and extent of any work required before the property is offered for sale. In the circumstances a notice under section 51(2)(a) may have been more appropriate.
The tenant states that during the tenancy, the landlord replaced the vinyl flooring in the bathroom, kitchen, and toilet. The landlord also replaced the toilet, and all this work was completed in one day. This fact is not contested. The tenant believes that painting and replacement of the carpet, and the kitchen sink could all be completed with him remaining. The tenant also argues there is insufficient detail concerning the extent of work intended to the bathroom, and any other work in the kitchen. Regarding the laundry floor, which the tenant acknowledged was used to access the property, he suggested that temporary access would not be difficult to arrange. Decision
The provision in section 51(2)(f) is conjunctive; all three limbs must be met. The planned works must be extensive and not reasonably practicable with the tenant in residence, and the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken within 90 days after the termination.
Whether the work is extensive and not reasonably practicable with the tenant in residence will require an objective assessment of the evidence. After hearing from both parties and reviewing the evidence provided, I acknowledge the landlord’s intention to conduct some form of remedial / renovation work before disposing of the property. However, I accept the tenant’s argument that the clearly identified work can be conducted with him remaining, and that the other proposed work lacks sufficient certainty regarding its nature or extent. Based on the available evidence, I cannot be satisfied that the work is sufficiently extensive, and therefore requires the tenant to vacate the property. In this case the first and second limbs are not met. I find that the notice is invalid. The tenant’s application is granted.
Neither party seeks name suppression, and there is no order for reimbursement of the filing fee.

Order

No application for suppression has been made in this case and no suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.
The 90-day notice issued on 03 August 2023 to terminate the tenancy on 05 November 2023 is invalid.

Reasons

Mr Coyle appeared. Mr Berryman and Mr Gillard appeared for the landlord.
The tenancy commenced on 01 September 2015. On 03 August 2023, the landlord served a 90-day notice to terminate the tenancy on 05 November 2023., based on the landlord’s intention to conduct extensive alterations, refurbishments, and repairs (The “Work”), and that it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work was being undertaken.
On 16 August 2023, the tenant filed an application challenging the notice submitting that it was invalid as the intended works did not in fact require the tenant to vacate the property.
The notice was served by email before 5pm on 03 August 2023 and allows for more than 90 days. There are no issues with service.
The matter was initially scheduled for a hearing on 29 September 2023. Unfortunately, the Tribunal was unable to hear the matter, and it was rescheduled for 01 November 2023. Law
Section 51(2) of the Act provides: (2) A landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 90 days’ notice if— (a)the premises are to be put on the market by the owner within 90 days after the termination date for the purposes of sale or other disposition: or (b)the owner is required, under an unconditional agreement for the sale of the premises, to give the purchaser vacant possession; or (c)the landlord is not the owner of the premises and the landlord’s interest in the premises is due to end; or (d)the landlord or owner has acquired the premises to facilitate the use of nearby land for a business activity and— (i)that fact is clearly stated in the tenancy agreement; and (ii)the premises are required to be vacant of residential tenants to facilitate that use; or (e)the premises are to be converted into commercial premises for at least 90 days by the landlord or owner; or (f)extensive alterations, refurbishment, repairs, or redevelopment of the premises are to be carried out by the landlord or owner, and— (i)it would not be reasonably practicable for the tenant to remain in occupation while the work is undertaken; and (ii)the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date: or (g)the premises are to be demolished and the demolition is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken, within 90 days after the termination date. (2A)In subsection (2)(f) and (g), taking a material step means applying for regulatory consent, seeking engineering or other professional advice, or taking any other significant step. Discussion
The property was built in the 1970’s, comprises two bedrooms, lounge / dining room, laundry / entrance., kitchen, toilet, and bathroom. The lounge / dining room and both bedrooms are carpeted, which show general signs of wear and tear commensurate with its age.
The landlord provided the tenant with a document titled “Extensive Refurbishment – Scope of Work.” (The “Scope”).
The Scope of Work is summarised as follows: “Property to be extensively renovated with new floor coverings, full paint (all areas required) kitchen upgrade, bathroom work – ceiling in shower area, modified. New window treatments and underfloor work to proof for future.”
The landlord plans to replace the carpet, paint the interior of the property, replace the curtains, replace the laundry floor, which serves as the entrance to the property, and replace the kitchen sink. They admit uncertainty about the extent of the other work referred too, which they state can be determined when they have possession of the property. Besides the laundry floor, no other investigations, quotes, or estimates have been obtained.
In the Scope, the landlord states “The owner would prefer to wait until the tenant has vacated to have a clear access and movement throughout the property. It also allows for secondary quotes to be sourced to ensure competitive pricing.”
In the Scope’s summary the landlord states “A renovation of this nature is easier to conduct when the property is vacant. Quotes can be obtained, and assessments made when the property is empty and all areas, walls, floors, cupboards are free from obstruction and can visually inspected to ensure thorough review of the property. The owner would like to perform the bulk of the work with help from specialist contractors were required. Hence quotes have not been sought at this stage as it would be invasive for the tenant as two quotes may be requested for each component. The owner does not like to go to the properties while they are tenanted and prefers to access only once vacant.”
Mr Gillard is the owner mentioned in the Scope. The Scope has been prepared by the landlord. Mr Gillard states he would like the property to be empty so that he can do some work on it, and then sell it. It appears Mr Gillard seeks vacant possession to determine the exact nature and extent of any work required before the property is offered for sale. In the circumstances a notice under section 51(2)(a) may have been more appropriate.
The tenant states that during the tenancy, the landlord replaced the vinyl flooring in the bathroom, kitchen, and toilet. The landlord also replaced the toilet, and all this work was completed in one day. This fact is not contested. The tenant believes that painting and replacement of the carpet, and the kitchen sink could all be completed with him remaining. The tenant also argues there is insufficient detail concerning the extent of work intended to the bathroom, and any other work in the kitchen. Regarding the laundry floor, which the tenant acknowledged was used to access the property, he suggested that temporary access would not be difficult to arrange. Decision
The provision in section 51(2)(f) is conjunctive; all three limbs must be met. The planned works must be extensive and not reasonably practicable with the tenant in residence, and the work is to begin, or material steps towards it are to be taken within 90 days after the termination.
Whether the work is extensive and not reasonably practicable with the tenant in residence will require an objective assessment of the evidence. After hearing from both parties and reviewing the evidence provided, I acknowledge the landlord’s intention to conduct some form of remedial / renovation work before disposing of the property. However, I accept the tenant’s argument that the clearly identified work can be conducted with him remaining, and that the other proposed work lacks sufficient certainty regarding its nature or extent. Based on the available evidence, I cannot be satisfied that the work is sufficiently extensive, and therefore requires the tenant to vacate the property. In this case the first and second limbs are not met. I find that the notice is invalid. The tenant’s application is granted.
Neither party seeks name suppression, and there is no order for reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4657889 — Property damage at 27B Kingsway Crescent, Forest Lake, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4657889 — Property damage at 27B Kingsway Crescent, Forest Lake, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions