What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4744069?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4744069?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4744069?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4744069?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9863740-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4744069?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4744069?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4744069?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4744069?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9863740-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

55 Aarts Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4744069 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.

The tenant applied for compensation in relation to a lengthy tenancy at 55 Aarts Avenue, Manurewa.

While this tenancy began in 2018, the tenant’s family have had a connection with the premises back to 2002 as the tenant’s late mother had the tenancy from 2002 until 2018.

On 2 May 2021 there was a fire at the premises and the tenant was relocated. At the time the intention was for the premises to be repaired and for the tenancy to continue. While the tenant was living in alternate accommodation there was another fire at the premises.

The landlord states that after the second fire the decision was made to demolish the premises and build a new home. The tenant thought that she would return to live in the new home when it was completed.

It seems that there must have been a miscommunication at some stage. The landlord says that when the new home was completed the tenant was not eligible to return there because it was now a three-bedroom home and due to her circumstances, the tenant was only eligible for a two-bedroom home. This is disputed by the tenant, but no evidence was produced.

At the hearing the tenant referred to a written and verbal agreement that she would be the tenant of the new premises. No written agreement was produced for the hearing.

The landlord produced a document titled, Agreement to transfer for business initiated reasons.

That document is signed by the tenant and states that by signing the document she agrees to a transfer to a second property and voluntarily relinquishes the tenancy at the first property on the commencement of the tenancy on the second property. While the second property is not named in the document, I am satisfied that the tenant was transferred to a second property and that is where she is currently living.

The tenant has referred to the fact that her children’s whenua (placenta) have been buried at the property and the ashes of her parents and son were scattered there also. I accept that the tenant has a deep and extremely significant attachment to the property.

The tenant does not seek to return to the property and instead seeks compensation for the trauma that she has suffered because she is no longer living at the premises.

After considering the evidence I see no breach by the landlord of the Residential Tenancies Act. There is also no evidence of a binding agreement that the tenant would return to the premises after the new home was built.

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

I conclude that the tenant has not proven her claim and therefore it is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.

The tenant applied for compensation in relation to a lengthy tenancy at 55 Aarts Avenue, Manurewa.

While this tenancy began in 2018, the tenant’s family have had a connection with the premises back to 2002 as the tenant’s late mother had the tenancy from 2002 until 2018.

At the hearing the tenant referred to a written and verbal agreement that she would be the tenant of the new premises. No written agreement was produced for the hearing.

The landlord produced a document titled, Agreement to transfer for business initiated reasons.

The tenant does not seek to return to the property and instead seeks compensation for the trauma that she has suffered because she is no longer living at the premises.

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

I conclude that the tenant has not proven her claim and therefore it is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4744069 — Tenancy dispute at 55 Aarts Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4744069 — Tenancy dispute at 55 Aarts Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Frequently asked questions