What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4768180?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4768180?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4768180?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4768180?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10094098-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4768180?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4768180?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4768180?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4768180?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10094098-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room 203, Unit/Flat A, 541 Innes Road, Mairehau, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4768180 — State of repair

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This was a boarding house tenancy. The tenant made a range of complaints against the landlord and claimed $250,000. The claim was reduced to $100,000 before the hearing to bring it within the financial jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
The applicant is required to establish the claims to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. That means that the applicant must identify the landlord’s obligation (under the Residential Tenancies Act or the Tenancy Agreement), provide evidence to establish the breach and the loss suffered as a result of the breach.
The Tribunal is an adjudicative body. It is not a forum for general complaint. Many of the tenant’s complaints were of a general nature regarding the professional conduct of the landlord.
The actual claims related to: a. Lack of driers at the premises in breach of cl 20 of the Tenancy Agreement. b. Failure to provide adequate kitchen appliances and utensils. c. Failure to address an electrical issue at the premises between 3 and 6 November 2023. d. Failure to respond to a complaint about water being turned off at the premises on 20 November 2023. e. An improper or retaliatory notice to terminate the tenancy. f. The tenant also claimed that he had been “bullied” by another resident at the premises. That complaint was not included in the application, but I have considered it as both parties provided oral evidence on the issue.
Part 2A of the RTA relates to Boarding House Tenancies. A landlord must provide the facilities at the premises in a reasonably clean condition, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The landlord must also ensure that the tenant always has access to its room and bathroom facilities and ensure the tenant has access to other facilities at reasonable hours. See sections 66I(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A landlord must not interfere with the supply of water, gas, electricity, telephone of other service to the premises, except where the interference is necessary to avoid danger to any person or to enable maintenance or repairs to be carried out. See section 66J(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant claimed that there were no driers, inadequate kitchen appliances and utensils. The tenant did not provide corroborative evidence of its complaints. The landlord disputed the claims and gave oral evidence of the availability of driers at the complex.
The tenant also claims that the landlord failed to repair an electrical issue over the weekend on 3 to 6 November 2023. He said that the entire second floor of the building had no power over the weekend. He said he reported it to the landlord who did nothing until the following Monday afternoon. Again, he did not provide any corroborative evidence to support his claims. The landlord says that he became aware of an electrical issue one Monday morning and discovered a single fuse had flicked on the switchboard and he re-set it immediately to resolve the issue.
The tenant claims to have sent a text the director of the landlord regarding the electrical issue. The landlord said that it has a 24 hour call out number available to tenants for urgent issues and there was no record the tenant calling that to report an electrical fault.
The tenant also claimed that there was an issue with water supply to the premises on 20 November 2023. He says that he reported that to the landlord but received no reply. In any event the water was restored within an hour.
On 23 November 2023, the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 21 December 2023. The tenant claims the notice was unfairly issued and was discriminatory.
A landlord of a Boarding House Tenancy may terminate the tenancy on 28 days’ notice if no reason is given. See s66U(1)(c) RTA. The landlord was entitled to issue a no cause notice to terminate the tenancy. The only issue is whether the notice was retaliatory.
For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
It was not clear from the application or the tenant’s submissions at the hearing, whether he was claiming that the notice was retaliatory. His focus was on it being “unfair”, on no reasons being given for termination and on him being treated differently to another tenant who, he claims, was destructive and bullying.
This is lay Tribunal, so I have considered the tenant’s claim as if it included an application for the termination notice to be declared retaliatory.
The tenant claims he was bullied by another tenant and that tenant damaged the premises but still resides at the property. The tenant says that is unfair. I heard an audio recording of a conversation between the two tenants. Both use unfortunate and inflammatory language.
The landlord says that it received several complaints about this tenant from others. It says the position became untenable, so it issued the 28-day notice to terminate the tenancy, as it was entitled to do.
There is no direct evidence that that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. Nor can any inference of such motivation be drawn from the evidence.
The tenant has not established its claims. Even if the landlord was found to have breached its obligations, there is no basis for an award of damages anywhere close to the amounts sought by the tenant.
All claims by the tenant are dismissed.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This was a boarding house tenancy. The tenant made a range of complaints against the landlord and claimed $250,000. The claim was reduced to $100,000 before the hearing to bring it within the financial jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
The applicant is required to establish the claims to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. That means that the applicant must identify the landlord’s obligation (under the Residential Tenancies Act or the Tenancy Agreement), provide evidence to establish the breach and the loss suffered as a result of the breach.
The Tribunal is an adjudicative body. It is not a forum for general complaint. Many of the tenant’s complaints were of a general nature regarding the professional conduct of the landlord.
The actual claims related to: a. Lack of driers at the premises in breach of cl 20 of the Tenancy Agreement. b. Failure to provide adequate kitchen appliances and utensils. c. Failure to address an electrical issue at the premises between 3 and 6 November 2023. d. Failure to respond to a complaint about water being turned off at the premises on 20 November 2023. e. An improper or retaliatory notice to terminate the tenancy. f. The tenant also claimed that he had been “bullied” by another resident at the premises. That complaint was not included in the application, but I have considered it as both parties provided oral evidence on the issue.
Part 2A of the RTA relates to Boarding House Tenancies. A landlord must provide the facilities at the premises in a reasonably clean condition, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The landlord must also ensure that the tenant always has access to its room and bathroom facilities and ensure the tenant has access to other facilities at reasonable hours. See sections 66I(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A landlord must not interfere with the supply of water, gas, electricity, telephone of other service to the premises, except where the interference is necessary to avoid danger to any person or to enable maintenance or repairs to be carried out. See section 66J(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant claimed that there were no driers, inadequate kitchen appliances and utensils. The tenant did not provide corroborative evidence of its complaints. The landlord disputed the claims and gave oral evidence of the availability of driers at the complex.
The tenant also claims that the landlord failed to repair an electrical issue over the weekend on 3 to 6 November 2023. He said that the entire second floor of the building had no power over the weekend. He said he reported it to the landlord who did nothing until the following Monday afternoon. Again, he did not provide any corroborative evidence to support his claims. The landlord says that he became aware of an electrical issue one Monday morning and discovered a single fuse had flicked on the switchboard and he re-set it immediately to resolve the issue.
The tenant claims to have sent a text the director of the landlord regarding the electrical issue. The landlord said that it has a 24 hour call out number available to tenants for urgent issues and there was no record the tenant calling that to report an electrical fault.
The tenant also claimed that there was an issue with water supply to the premises on 20 November 2023. He says that he reported that to the landlord but received no reply. In any event the water was restored within an hour.
On 23 November 2023, the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 21 December 2023. The tenant claims the notice was unfairly issued and was discriminatory.
A landlord of a Boarding House Tenancy may terminate the tenancy on 28 days’ notice if no reason is given. See s66U(1)(c) RTA. The landlord was entitled to issue a no cause notice to terminate the tenancy. The only issue is whether the notice was retaliatory.
For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
It was not clear from the application or the tenant’s submissions at the hearing, whether he was claiming that the notice was retaliatory. His focus was on it being “unfair”, on no reasons being given for termination and on him being treated differently to another tenant who, he claims, was destructive and bullying.
This is lay Tribunal, so I have considered the tenant’s claim as if it included an application for the termination notice to be declared retaliatory.
The tenant claims he was bullied by another tenant and that tenant damaged the premises but still resides at the property. The tenant says that is unfair. I heard an audio recording of a conversation between the two tenants. Both use unfortunate and inflammatory language.
The landlord says that it received several complaints about this tenant from others. It says the position became untenable, so it issued the 28-day notice to terminate the tenancy, as it was entitled to do.
There is no direct evidence that that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. Nor can any inference of such motivation be drawn from the evidence.
The tenant has not established its claims. Even if the landlord was found to have breached its obligations, there is no basis for an award of damages anywhere close to the amounts sought by the tenant.
All claims by the tenant are dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4768180 — State of repair at Room 203, Unit/Flat A, 541 Innes Road, Mairehau,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4768180 — State of repair at Room 203, Unit/Flat A, 541 Innes Road, Mairehau,

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