What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4681370?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4681370?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4681370?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4681370?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10016481-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4681370?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4681370?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4681370?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4681370?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10016481-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

4B Stephanie Close, Glenfield, Auckland 0629 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4681370 — Tenancy dispute

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant (applicant) attended the hearing by remote teleconference. An attempt to contact the landlord on the telephone number provided was unsuccessful. The hearing proceeded in her absence.
The tenant is seeking a refund on rent he paid in advance along with compensation for petrol and takeaway meals.
The dwelling is a two-story house – two bedrooms, kitchen and lounge upstairs and two bedrooms downstairs.
The ground floor level has a garage to which the landlord installed a small kitchen. This included a stove, fridge, cupboards, and a sink. The tenant says that a couple lived in one of the bedrooms downstairs. The other room downstairs was available for someone to live in.
Due to a lack of space the tenant agreed with the landlord that he would sleep on the landlord’s couch in the upstairs living area.
The tenant occupied the upstairs area and had use of the upstairs facilities. The tenant would have used the kitchen upstairs had he stayed longer than a day or two. The owner also used the upstairs kitchen.
The tenant says that his intention was to stay there no longer than one month.
The tenant understood this arrangement to be a flatmate situation. This is because they all had shared use of the premises. The weekly ‘rent’ amount of $140.00 included power, water and internet.
The tenant did not pay a bond. He did not pay any deposit. He only paid one week in advance of $140.00. The tenant found out about the room via a Facebook Marketplace page ‘Shiraz – Short term renting’.
On 29 July 2023 the landlord text the tenant asking if he would consider living in the lounge if it was for only short term. The text message confirmed that it would be a ‘cheaper price and all other things included’.
On 2 August 2023 the landlord text the tenant asking if he had the air conditioner on all night. She stated in her text that ‘this is not a hotel sorry’. The landlord, in a series of unusual and bizarre text messages asked the tenant to move out and suggested that he move to a nearby backpackers. She threatened to call the police if he did not come back to uplift his belongings.
The tenant says that he needed to provide two weeks’ notice to move out. This was advised to the tenant verbally when he came to look at the place. There was nothing in writing to confirm what the arrangements were.
The tenant did not sign a Tenancy Agreement.

Was there a tenancy agreement?

It is possible for a tenancy agreement to have been reached even when a written tenancy agreement has not been signed. Although Section 13 of the RTA states that all tenancy agreements must be in writing and signed, Section 13C provides that no tenancy agreement shall be unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing.
In order to determine whether a contract (residential tenancy agreement) existed the following matters need to be considered: a. the making of an offer; b. the fact of acceptance of an offer so that an agreement has been reached; c. consideration; d. Intention to create legal relations; e. The requirement of certainty – whether the terms are sufficiently certain for the parties to be legally bound.
What matters is if the contract was sufficiently formed during the exchange of text messages between the tenant and the landlord. I need to be satisfied that the terms were sufficiently formed to create a binding contract.
Having carefully reviewed all of the evidence in detail, and having heard the tenant’s submissions during the hearing, I consider that there was not a binding agreement. The evidence provided by the tenant does not clearly set out the details of the tenancy. The arrangements made between the landlord and the tenant were either made verbally or by text message.
In my view the arrangement lacks the required contractual terms.
While I sympathise with the tenant and the difficult situation he found himself in I am satisfied on the evidence that he has no grounds for the claims filed with his application.
I consider that my interpretation of the evidence accords with Section 85 of the RTA which provides that:
It follows that the tenant’s claim for compensation must be dismissed.
Because the tenant has been unsuccessful in his application I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant (applicant) attended the hearing by remote teleconference. An attempt to contact the landlord on the telephone number provided was unsuccessful. The hearing proceeded in her absence.
The tenant is seeking a refund on rent he paid in advance along with compensation for petrol and takeaway meals.
The dwelling is a two-story house – two bedrooms, kitchen and lounge upstairs and two bedrooms downstairs.
The ground floor level has a garage to which the landlord installed a small kitchen. This included a stove, fridge, cupboards, and a sink. The tenant says that a couple lived in one of the bedrooms downstairs. The other room downstairs was available for someone to live in.
Due to a lack of space the tenant agreed with the landlord that he would sleep on the landlord’s couch in the upstairs living area.
The tenant occupied the upstairs area and had use of the upstairs facilities. The tenant would have used the kitchen upstairs had he stayed longer than a day or two. The owner also used the upstairs kitchen.
The tenant says that his intention was to stay there no longer than one month.
The tenant understood this arrangement to be a flatmate situation. This is because they all had shared use of the premises. The weekly ‘rent’ amount of $140.00 included power, water and internet.
The tenant did not pay a bond. He did not pay any deposit. He only paid one week in advance of $140.00. The tenant found out about the room via a Facebook Marketplace page ‘Shiraz – Short term renting’.
On 29 July 2023 the landlord text the tenant asking if he would consider living in the lounge if it was for only short term. The text message confirmed that it would be a ‘cheaper price and all other things included’.
On 2 August 2023 the landlord text the tenant asking if he had the air conditioner on all night. She stated in her text that ‘this is not a hotel sorry’. The landlord, in a series of unusual and bizarre text messages asked the tenant to move out and suggested that he move to a nearby backpackers. She threatened to call the police if he did not come back to uplift his belongings.
The tenant says that he needed to provide two weeks’ notice to move out. This was advised to the tenant verbally when he came to look at the place. There was nothing in writing to confirm what the arrangements were.
The tenant did not sign a Tenancy Agreement.

Was there a tenancy agreement?

It is possible for a tenancy agreement to have been reached even when a written tenancy agreement has not been signed. Although Section 13 of the RTA states that all tenancy agreements must be in writing and signed, Section 13C provides that no tenancy agreement shall be unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing.
In order to determine whether a contract (residential tenancy agreement) existed the following matters need to be considered: a. the making of an offer; b. the fact of acceptance of an offer so that an agreement has been reached; c. consideration; d. Intention to create legal relations; e. The requirement of certainty – whether the terms are sufficiently certain for the parties to be legally bound.
What matters is if the contract was sufficiently formed during the exchange of text messages between the tenant and the landlord. I need to be satisfied that the terms were sufficiently formed to create a binding contract.
Having carefully reviewed all of the evidence in detail, and having heard the tenant’s submissions during the hearing, I consider that there was not a binding agreement. The evidence provided by the tenant does not clearly set out the details of the tenancy. The arrangements made between the landlord and the tenant were either made verbally or by text message.
In my view the arrangement lacks the required contractual terms.
While I sympathise with the tenant and the difficult situation he found himself in I am satisfied on the evidence that he has no grounds for the claims filed with his application.
I consider that my interpretation of the evidence accords with Section 85 of the RTA which provides that:
It follows that the tenant’s claim for compensation must be dismissed.
Because the tenant has been unsuccessful in his application I do not reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4681370 — Tenancy dispute at 4B Stephanie Close, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4681370 — Tenancy dispute at 4B Stephanie Close, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was there a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Was there a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions