Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 4774900 — Rent arrears at 59 McFadzean Drive, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600
Decided 19 Jan 2024 · Published 19 Jan 2024 · Application 4774900
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
Order
- The tenancy of Jinglin Li, Tian Xia, Chuanze Zhao, Cao Li and Zhiqiang Guo at 59 McFadzean Drive, Blockhouse Bay, Auckland 0600 is terminated, and possession is granted to Weiguo Wang, at 11.59 pm, Friday, 23 February 2024.
- Jinglin Li, Tian Xia, Chuanze Zhao, Cao Li and Zhiqiang Guo must pay Weiguo Wang $12,120.44 immediately, being rent arrears to 23 February 2024, and filing fee reimbursement. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to 23 February 2024$19,500.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total award$19,520.44 Bond (the landlord did not lodge bond with the Bond Centre) $7,400.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$12,120.44
Reasons
- There are five tenants in the tenancy agreement. The agreement is fixed between 25 February 2023 and 23 February 2024.
- The hearing is via telephone conference.
- Mr Weiquo Wang, the landlord, is based in New Zealand. He participated in the hearing from a remote location in New Zealand.
- Mr Tian Xia and Chuanze Zhao, two of the five tenants, are now based in China. They participated in the hearing from China.
- I would like to note that Mr. Tian Xia joined the hearing 20 minutes before it concluded at 3 pm. The delay was due to confusion regarding the availability of his contact number in China.
- The remaining three tenants did not attend the hearing. Mr Chuanze Zhao informed me he had not been in contact with the remaining three tenants and did not have their contact details. Mr Tian Xia did not offer any information about the remaining three tenants either.
- I informed Mr Tian Xia and Mr Chuanze Zhao all tenants in the tenancy agreement are equally liable for the outcome of this hearing.
- On 11 January 2024, the landlord filed an expedited termination application, which was declined on the same day. Subsequently, the landlord applied for termination of the tenancy on the grounds of abandonment. Rent was in arrears when Mr Weiquo Wang filed his expedited termination application.
- Mr Weiquo Wang also sought compensation for water arrears and property damage to be included in the application in the hearing. However, I declined to hear additional issues not included in the application because the tenants were unprepared.
- For the same reason, Mr Tian Xia and Chuanze Zhao’s complaint alleging that the landlord failed to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre was also not heard, as the hearing was specifically about Mr. Weiquo Wang's application for termination based on the tenants abandoning the property.
- I informed both parties that they could file separate applications with the Tribunal if desired.
Should the tenancy be terminated?
- During the hearing, Mr. Chuanze Zhao and Mr. Tian Xia stated that they had arranged with Mr. Weiquo Wang to end the fixed-term tenancy early on 17 November 2023. Mr Tian Xia and Mr Chuanze Zhao added that they and Mr Jinglin Li had paid $8,900 as part of the agreement, but the remaining tenants had disappeared without paying the agreed-upon amount.
- Mr Weiquo Wang confirmed the existence of a conditional early termination agreement but stated that the tenants had failed to fulfil the condition by not paying the agreed-upon compensation amount in full. Mr Tian Xia claimed that the agreed amount was $13,800, while Mr Weiquo Wang could not recall the agreed amount but mentioned that it was between $14,000 and $15,000.
- Despite the difference in the agreed-upon amount, the issue was that the tenants did not satisfy the condition of being released from the fixed-term tenancy early. Therefore, the fixed-term tenancy continued to run.
- Mr Weiquo Wang did not dispute receiving $8,900 from Mr Chuanze Zhao, Mr Tian Xia, and Mr Jinglin Li. However, since the tenant did not satisfy the early termination condition, he considered the money to be an early payment of rent.
- Regarding the abandonment, Mr. Chuanze Zhao stated that he intended to return to New Zealand on 15 th February 2024. However, no supporting evidence was provided to back his claim. Mr. Tian Xia did not indicate any intention to return to New Zealand during the hearing.
- Because 17 November 2023 was the date of early termination had the tenants satisfied the early termination condition, Mr Weiguo Wang was aware (or ought to have been aware) that the tenant had no intention of returning to New Zealand and therefore had abandoned the premises.
How much does the tenant owe?
- Mr Weiguo Wang provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy on 23 February 2024. The landlord did not lodge bond with the Bond Centre
- I indicated to Mr Chuanze Zhao and Mr Tian Xia I was not prepared to deal with their complaint without a formal application.
- I had concerns about how Mr Weiguo Wang manages his rental property and if he took advantage of students from China who most likely do not know their legal rights under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). Filing fee
- Because Mr Weiguo Wang has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Name suppression
- Although Mr Weiquo Wang's application was successful in its entirety, I have decided to decline his application for suppression under section 95A(1) of the RTA for the following reasons: a. Mr Weiquo Wang failed to disclose in his application for abandonment that he received a sum of $8,900 as part of the early termination of the tenancy condition. b. In his application, Mr Weiquo Wang did not disclose that he received a bond of $7,400. c. There is a knowledge imbalance, as well as a power imbalance, between Mr Weiquo Wang and vulnerable students from China, who are often unaware of their legal rights under the Act.