What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4664329?

The tribunal order states: Simon Wendell Lawrence must pay Naadia Elizabeth Te Moananui and Duke

How much money was awarded in case 4664329?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Overpaid Rent: $289.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664329?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664329?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9577705-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4664329?

The tribunal order states: Simon Wendell Lawrence must pay Naadia Elizabeth Te Moananui and Duke

How much money was awarded in case 4664329?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Overpaid Rent: $289.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4664329?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4664329?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9577705-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 School Road, Kakanui, RD 14O, Oamaru 9495 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4664329 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664329 — net $1,178.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond refund	$869.00	Bond refund
Overpaid rent	$289.00	Overpaid rent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,178.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,178.44

The hearing was held by teleconference on 6 October 2023. Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenants claim refund of the bond, exemplary damages for non-lodgement of the bond and over paid rent following the end of the tenancy. Refund of the bond

The bond is the tenant’s money and must be returned to them unless they agree that it may be paid to the landlord to cover compensation or rental arrears or the landlord is able to prove on application to the Tribunal that compensation should be paid to the landlord.

Where a tenant applies to the Tribunal for a refund of the bond and the landlord seeks payment of the bond in whole or in part, the landlord must file an application with the Tribunal setting out the landlord’s counterclaim (see section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)).

I explained the above legal requirement to the parties at the hearing. The law is clear and requires the landlord to file their own application should they wish to make claims against the bond. In this case, despite the landlord claiming that he has valid claims for the bond he has not filed a cross application with the Tribunal for the bond.

Given the landlord had not filed a cross application seeking payment of the bond, and the tenants have not agreed to pay any compensation, I cannot consider any claims the landlord has. Accordingly, the bond of $869.00 must be returned in full to the tenants. Non-lodgement of the bond

The RTA makes it clear that where any person pays to the landlord, or to any other person on behalf of the landlord, any amount by way of bond, the landlord shall within 23 working days after the payment is made lodge the bond with the Bond Centre (see section 19 RTA). The failure to do that is an unlawful act, for which exemplary damages can be awarded. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A RTA.

The landlord confirmed that the bond had not been paid to the Bond Centre. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

All landlords must ensure they are aware of and comply with all the obligations of a landlord.

The landlord explained that his accountant had paid the bond directly into his bank account and that it was an oversight on his part that the bond had not been paid to Bond Centre.

Landlords are required to lodge the bond within 23 days of payment. In this case I have not awarded exemplary damages as I am not satisfied the failure to lodge the bond was intentional. However, the Tribunal takes this matter seriously and urges the landlord to ensure that he lodges the bond within the 23 day period in the future. In light of this, I have dismissed the tenants’ claim for exemplary damages. Overpaid rent

On the evidence produced, I find the tenants’ claim for overpaid rent proved. Filing fee

As the tenants have substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the other party to reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4664329 — net $1,178.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond refund	$869.00	Bond refund
Overpaid rent	$289.00	Overpaid rent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,178.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,178.44

Order

Simon Wendell Lawrence must pay Naadia Elizabeth Te Moananui and Duke Daniels $1,178.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The hearing was held by teleconference on 6 October 2023. Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants claim refund of the bond, exemplary damages for non-lodgement of the bond and over paid rent following the end of the tenancy. Refund of the bond
The bond is the tenant’s money and must be returned to them unless they agree that it may be paid to the landlord to cover compensation or rental arrears or the landlord is able to prove on application to the Tribunal that compensation should be paid to the landlord.
Where a tenant applies to the Tribunal for a refund of the bond and the landlord seeks payment of the bond in whole or in part, the landlord must file an application with the Tribunal setting out the landlord’s counterclaim (see section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA)).
I explained the above legal requirement to the parties at the hearing. The law is clear and requires the landlord to file their own application should they wish to make claims against the bond. In this case, despite the landlord claiming that he has valid claims for the bond he has not filed a cross application with the Tribunal for the bond.
Given the landlord had not filed a cross application seeking payment of the bond, and the tenants have not agreed to pay any compensation, I cannot consider any claims the landlord has. Accordingly, the bond of $869.00 must be returned in full to the tenants. Non-lodgement of the bond
The RTA makes it clear that where any person pays to the landlord, or to any other person on behalf of the landlord, any amount by way of bond, the landlord shall within 23 working days after the payment is made lodge the bond with the Bond Centre (see section 19 RTA). The failure to do that is an unlawful act, for which exemplary damages can be awarded. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A RTA.
The landlord confirmed that the bond had not been paid to the Bond Centre. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
All landlords must ensure they are aware of and comply with all the obligations of a landlord.
The landlord explained that his accountant had paid the bond directly into his bank account and that it was an oversight on his part that the bond had not been paid to Bond Centre.
Landlords are required to lodge the bond within 23 days of payment. In this case I have not awarded exemplary damages as I am not satisfied the failure to lodge the bond was intentional. However, the Tribunal takes this matter seriously and urges the landlord to ensure that he lodges the bond within the 23 day period in the future. In light of this, I have dismissed the tenants’ claim for exemplary damages. Overpaid rent
On the evidence produced, I find the tenants’ claim for overpaid rent proved. Filing fee
As the tenants have substantially succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the other party to reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664329 — Tenancy dispute at 8 School Road, Kakanui, RD 14O, Oamaru 9495

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4664329 — Tenancy dispute at 8 School Road, Kakanui, RD 14O, Oamaru 9495

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions