What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4760439?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4760439?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4760439?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4760439?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10226962-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4760439?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4760439?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4760439?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4760439?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10226962-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

211 St Leger Road, Kihikihi, RD 5, Te Awamutu 3875 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4760439 — Exemplary damages

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Nigel Grassam and Robert Biddiscombe attended the hearing today.
Nigel Grassam (the applicant) chose to leave the hearing before it ended.
Before he left, Nigel Grassam told me that he had uploaded his bank statements to the file. After the hearing, I made enquiries, and it was confirmed that these had been deleted from the file by Tribunal staff due to privacy concerns (as the statements contained all the applicant’s transactions).
The bank statements have now been added to the file and emailed to both parties. I have taken them into account in making this decision.

What have the tenants applied for?

The named tenants have made an application to the Tribunal seeking:- a. refund of the bond paid for a tenancy at the above address, and b. the refund of payments of $25.00 per week that they say they made to the landlord for 5 years, that were not rent but intended to be held by the landlord as a deposit towards purchase of the property, and c. for the Tribunal to enforce the law that the landlord must lodge the bond.
The amount claimed is $8,900 in total. Details of the tenancy
The applicant today provided a tenancy agreement recording a tenancy between Robert Biddiscombe, Megan Purcell, and another person (“CM”), starting on 11 October 2014, with a bond of $1,600.00 and at weekly rent of $400.00.
The tenancy agreement is signed by the above three parties.
The applicant and the landlord agreed in the hearing that Nigel Grassam was also a tenant. He lived at the premises and bank statements show that he paid rent from his bank account for part of the term of the tenancy.
The landlord agrees that the bond of $1,600.00 was paid by the tenants together with three weeks of rent in advance. This is verified by a bank statement which shows a payment of $2,800.00 from Megan Purcell to the landlord before the tenancy started.
I point out that a landlord cannot legally require any more than two weeks rent in advance; section 23 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenancy ended sometime in May, June, or July 2020. Neither the landlord or the applicant has evidence to show, or could remember, exactly when.
The parties agree that the tenancy ended because the landlord gave the tenants notice to end the tenancy on the grounds that he intended to sell the premises.
The first covid-lockdown happened from 26 March 2020 until 13 May 2020 and the landlord remembers the tenants moving out sometime soon after that. The applicant agreed with this.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre?

The tenants say that the landlord did not lodge the bond at the Bond Centre as he is required to do.
The law requires that a landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages (like a fine) up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Exemplary damages are only awarded where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally; section 109(3) RTA.
The landlord admits that he did not lodge the bond. This is a breach of s19 RTA. If he is still acting as a landlord of residential premises, he must be careful to always lodge any payment of a bond within the time required. Bond money belongs to tenants and must be held securely by the independent Bond Centre.
The landlord said that, as it was a long time ago (2014), he cannot exactly recall the circumstances. He noted that the ‘Bond lodgement form’ supplied in evidence is not signed by the tenants and that the original of this is still held by them (the applicant had it with him in the hearing). The landlord said that he may not have lodged the bond because the form was never signed, and he then forgot about it.
I am unable to award exemplary damages in this case. This is because there is a time limit in the law. An application for exemplary damages (a fine) for failing to lodge the bond cannot be made if more than 12 months have passed since the tenancy terminated; s109(2)(a) RTA.

Should the bond be refunded to the tenants?

The tenants say that the bond should be refunded to them. Their bank statements prove rent payments were made from the start of the tenancy up until 1 December 2015, with one additional payment of $250.00 on 19 December 2016.
Not all payments are for exactly $400.00. Some are for less than that. Three payments of $450.00 were made on 10, 17 and 24 November 2015.
There is no evidence from the tenants of any payments of rent or any other amount after 19 December 2016.
The landlord says that he has records of rent payments from the start of the tenancy through until 30 March 2020. He did not have these records with him today but had made a note that he referred to.
The landlord kept the bond of $1,600.00 in his bank account. He says that he remembers having a conversation with the tenants to the effect that he would not require them to pay rent during the covid-19 lockdown, and that he would keep the bond instead. Both parties knew that the tenants were moving out once the lockdown had been lifted.
I am satisfied that the tenants lived at the premises until at least the end of the covid-19 lockdown which ended on 13 May 2020.
The landlord says that he did not receive any rent from the tenants after 30 March 2020. I find it likely that this last payment was for rent up to 5 April 2020.
I find it to be more probable than not that the tenants lived at the premises without paying rent for the period from 6 April to at least 13 May 2020.
This is a period of 5 weeks and 3 days.
The bond was equivalent to 4 weeks of rent at $400.00 per week.
On the evidence, the tenants owed the landlord rent of at least the amount of the bond for the last 5 weeks or more of the tenancy.
I do not order a refund of the bond.

Should the tenants be awarded compensation for additional payments made?

The applicant says that the tenants paid the landlord an additional $25.00 per week for 5 years and that this was not rent but was intended to be held by the landlord as a deposit towards purchase of the property.
The landlord agrees that:- a. The tenants did pay $425.00 per week from 14 September 2016 until 30 March 2020, and b. That he and the tenants did talk, many times, about the possibility of the tenants buying the tenancy premises. This did not work out (partly because the property could not be subdivided which was part of the intention).
The landlord says that the $425.00 payments were made by WINZ on behalf of CM and were for rent. He says that the tenants offered to pay more rent because of an increase in the number of people living at the house.
I dismiss this claim and do not award compensation because:- a. Any agreement about the sale of land must be in writing. The applicant agrees that there was no written agreement about a proposed purchase, and b. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to make a finding about any agreement about the sale and purchase of land. So, even if there had been evidence to prove an agreement for sale and purchase, I could not make a decision about it. Filing fee and suppression of names
The tenants have proved that the landlord did not lodge the bond but have been unsuccessful in their other claims.
I do not award the filing fee or suppress either the landlord or tenant names.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Nigel Grassam and Robert Biddiscombe attended the hearing today.
Nigel Grassam (the applicant) chose to leave the hearing before it ended.
Before he left, Nigel Grassam told me that he had uploaded his bank statements to the file. After the hearing, I made enquiries, and it was confirmed that these had been deleted from the file by Tribunal staff due to privacy concerns (as the statements contained all the applicant’s transactions).
The bank statements have now been added to the file and emailed to both parties. I have taken them into account in making this decision.

What have the tenants applied for?

The named tenants have made an application to the Tribunal seeking:- a. refund of the bond paid for a tenancy at the above address, and b. the refund of payments of $25.00 per week that they say they made to the landlord for 5 years, that were not rent but intended to be held by the landlord as a deposit towards purchase of the property, and c. for the Tribunal to enforce the law that the landlord must lodge the bond.
The amount claimed is $8,900 in total. Details of the tenancy
The applicant today provided a tenancy agreement recording a tenancy between Robert Biddiscombe, Megan Purcell, and another person (“CM”), starting on 11 October 2014, with a bond of $1,600.00 and at weekly rent of $400.00.
The tenancy agreement is signed by the above three parties.
The applicant and the landlord agreed in the hearing that Nigel Grassam was also a tenant. He lived at the premises and bank statements show that he paid rent from his bank account for part of the term of the tenancy.
The landlord agrees that the bond of $1,600.00 was paid by the tenants together with three weeks of rent in advance. This is verified by a bank statement which shows a payment of $2,800.00 from Megan Purcell to the landlord before the tenancy started.
I point out that a landlord cannot legally require any more than two weeks rent in advance; section 23 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenancy ended sometime in May, June, or July 2020. Neither the landlord or the applicant has evidence to show, or could remember, exactly when.
The parties agree that the tenancy ended because the landlord gave the tenants notice to end the tenancy on the grounds that he intended to sell the premises.
The first covid-lockdown happened from 26 March 2020 until 13 May 2020 and the landlord remembers the tenants moving out sometime soon after that. The applicant agreed with this.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre?

The tenants say that the landlord did not lodge the bond at the Bond Centre as he is required to do.
The law requires that a landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages (like a fine) up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Exemplary damages are only awarded where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally; section 109(3) RTA.
The landlord admits that he did not lodge the bond. This is a breach of s19 RTA. If he is still acting as a landlord of residential premises, he must be careful to always lodge any payment of a bond within the time required. Bond money belongs to tenants and must be held securely by the independent Bond Centre.
The landlord said that, as it was a long time ago (2014), he cannot exactly recall the circumstances. He noted that the ‘Bond lodgement form’ supplied in evidence is not signed by the tenants and that the original of this is still held by them (the applicant had it with him in the hearing). The landlord said that he may not have lodged the bond because the form was never signed, and he then forgot about it.
I am unable to award exemplary damages in this case. This is because there is a time limit in the law. An application for exemplary damages (a fine) for failing to lodge the bond cannot be made if more than 12 months have passed since the tenancy terminated; s109(2)(a) RTA.

Should the bond be refunded to the tenants?

The tenants say that the bond should be refunded to them. Their bank statements prove rent payments were made from the start of the tenancy up until 1 December 2015, with one additional payment of $250.00 on 19 December 2016.
Not all payments are for exactly $400.00. Some are for less than that. Three payments of $450.00 were made on 10, 17 and 24 November 2015.
There is no evidence from the tenants of any payments of rent or any other amount after 19 December 2016.
The landlord says that he has records of rent payments from the start of the tenancy through until 30 March 2020. He did not have these records with him today but had made a note that he referred to.
The landlord kept the bond of $1,600.00 in his bank account. He says that he remembers having a conversation with the tenants to the effect that he would not require them to pay rent during the covid-19 lockdown, and that he would keep the bond instead. Both parties knew that the tenants were moving out once the lockdown had been lifted.
I am satisfied that the tenants lived at the premises until at least the end of the covid-19 lockdown which ended on 13 May 2020.
The landlord says that he did not receive any rent from the tenants after 30 March 2020. I find it likely that this last payment was for rent up to 5 April 2020.
I find it to be more probable than not that the tenants lived at the premises without paying rent for the period from 6 April to at least 13 May 2020.
This is a period of 5 weeks and 3 days.
The bond was equivalent to 4 weeks of rent at $400.00 per week.
On the evidence, the tenants owed the landlord rent of at least the amount of the bond for the last 5 weeks or more of the tenancy.
I do not order a refund of the bond.

Should the tenants be awarded compensation for additional payments made?

The applicant says that the tenants paid the landlord an additional $25.00 per week for 5 years and that this was not rent but was intended to be held by the landlord as a deposit towards purchase of the property.
The landlord agrees that:- a. The tenants did pay $425.00 per week from 14 September 2016 until 30 March 2020, and b. That he and the tenants did talk, many times, about the possibility of the tenants buying the tenancy premises. This did not work out (partly because the property could not be subdivided which was part of the intention).
The landlord says that the $425.00 payments were made by WINZ on behalf of CM and were for rent. He says that the tenants offered to pay more rent because of an increase in the number of people living at the house.
I dismiss this claim and do not award compensation because:- a. Any agreement about the sale of land must be in writing. The applicant agrees that there was no written agreement about a proposed purchase, and b. The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to make a finding about any agreement about the sale and purchase of land. So, even if there had been evidence to prove an agreement for sale and purchase, I could not make a decision about it. Filing fee and suppression of names
The tenants have proved that the landlord did not lodge the bond but have been unsuccessful in their other claims.
I do not award the filing fee or suppress either the landlord or tenant names.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4760439 — Exemplary damages at 211 St Leger Road, Kihikihi, RD 5, Te Awamutu 3875

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4760439 — Exemplary damages at 211 St Leger Road, Kihikihi, RD 5, Te Awamutu 3875

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What have the tenants applied for?

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre?

Should the bond be refunded to the tenants?

Should the tenants be awarded compensation for additional payments made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What have the tenants applied for?

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre?

Should the bond be refunded to the tenants?

Should the tenants be awarded compensation for additional payments made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions