What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4691371?

The tribunal order states: Service on the tenant is dispensed with, pursuant to section 91B(2)(c)

How much money was awarded in case 4691371?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4691371?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4691371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9615326-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4691371?

The tribunal order states: Service on the tenant is dispensed with, pursuant to section 91B(2)(c)

How much money was awarded in case 4691371?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4691371?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4691371?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9615326-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 1B, 37 Federal Street, Auckland Central, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 4691371 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Ms McLennan attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 294, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail.

The tenant left the property more than two months before the landlord filed their application. Service upon the tenant did not meet the requirements of section 91A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). The landlord said they have attempted to email the tenant, without success and had no response from the emergency contact person for the tenant on the Tenancy Agreement. The landlord said the tenant has returned to China. The application and Notice of Hearing were emailed to the tenant.

Based on the landlord’s evidence, I am satisfied that all reasonable efforts have been made by the landlord to locate and serve the tenant. Thus, I dispense with the requirement for service and proceed as if the notice has been served on the tenant in accordance with the RTA, pursuant to section 91B(2)(c) RTA.

The landlord said the tenant left the property on 1 July 2022. The landlord’s application was not filed until 21 September 2023, as they said they did not decide what to do about the situation over that time.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the application fee.

The landlord provided activity reports, which were ledgers for rent payments made each month by the tenant but did not provide a detailed rent summary covering rent periods, dates rent was paid and due, amounts paid and a running arrears balance over the tenancy period. The activity reports did not clearly show how the rent arrears total claimed was reached.

The landlord was asked 4 days before the hearing to provide a detailed rent summary as per the template on the Tenancy Services website, covering the above outlined details, but did not provide a rent summary prior to the hearing.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

I find the landlord has provided insufficient evidence to prove the claim for rent arrears on the balance of probabilities and therefore this claim is dismissed.

As the landlord has not proved the claim for rent arrears, the claim for refund of the bond also must fail. Therefore, the claim for refund of the bond is dismissed.

As the landlord has not been successful with the claim, I do not award the filing fee reimbursement to the landlord.

During the hearing, the landlord requested suppression.

Section 95A(4) RTA provides that the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.

The landlord did not provide evidence during the hearing to show that their interests outweigh the public interest in not publishing their name. Therefore, I do not grant suppression to the landlord.

Reasons

Ms McLennan attended the hearing on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 294, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the application fee.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

I find the landlord has provided insufficient evidence to prove the claim for rent arrears on the balance of probabilities and therefore this claim is dismissed.

As the landlord has not proved the claim for rent arrears, the claim for refund of the bond also must fail. Therefore, the claim for refund of the bond is dismissed.

As the landlord has not been successful with the claim, I do not award the filing fee reimbursement to the landlord.

During the hearing, the landlord requested suppression.

The landlord did not provide evidence during the hearing to show that their interests outweigh the public interest in not publishing their name. Therefore, I do not grant suppression to the landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4691371 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1B, 37 Federal Street, Auckland Central, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4691371 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 1B, 37 Federal Street, Auckland Central, Auckland

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