What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4780184?

The tribunal order states: Ema Bryant must pay Kathleen Bartlett $83.30 immediately, as calculated in the

How much money was awarded in case 4780184?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $62.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4780184?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4780184?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10260071-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4780184?

The tribunal order states: Ema Bryant must pay Kathleen Bartlett $83.30 immediately, as calculated in the

How much money was awarded in case 4780184?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $62.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4780184?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4780184?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10260071-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

17 The Gardens Drive, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4780184 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4780184 — net $83.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 January 2024	$62.86	Rent arrears to 18 January 2024
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$83.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$83.30

Order

Ema Bryant must pay Kathleen Bartlett $83.30 immediately, as calculated in the table below.
The rest of the claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant Ms Bryant appeared with a support person.
The tenant sought reimbursement of overpaid rent and compensation for storage unit costs and cleaning. The landlord has applied for rent arrears.
The parties agreed that the tenancy began on 23 November 2023 but disputed what day the tenancy ended.
A Tenancy Tribunal hearing was conducted on 22 March 2024 solely to determine whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear these claims. The Tribunal found that there was jurisdiction and in that decision the end date of the tenancy was recorded as 23 January 2024.
The disputes surrounding the terms, content, or period of any tenancy agreement were not considered at the previous hearing and on this basis the claims from the parties about the disputed end date of the tenancy were heard.

Was there a tenancy agreement?

The landlord offered to rent the premises to the tenant for $750.00 per week. She provided a letter to WINZ detailing a fixed term tenancy for a year and the calculations of bond and rent in advance to support of the tenant’s application for assistance. This was declined.
The landlord subsequently offered the tenant two rooms at the lower rate of $650.00 per week reflecting that only two rooms would be for the tenant and the landlord would keep one room for herself and her children. The landlord also had a short-term periodic tenancy for herself in Auckland to support a sick child in hospital.
The tenant said she initially believed that the tenancy would be for a year and possibly up to 5 years as the landlord was thinking about moving. She agreed to the $650.00 per week with a room set aside for the landlord and the tenancy began on 23 November 2023.
No tenancy agreement was provided to the tenant.
There was clearly a tenancy and although it was not written down this does not invalidate it. See section 13C, Residential Tenancies Act 1986,RTA.

When did the tenancy end?

The tenant sought compensation for one week rent that she overpaid believing that the tenancy ended 9 January 2024 .She said a new tenant Lisa moved in on that day and started paying rent to the landlord.
The landlord disputes this and claims that the tenant left early, and they had agreed that the tenancy was to end on 23 January 2024.She said that the tenant had given her keys to another party. The other party had an agreement staring on 23 January and that’s when she was to move in and not before. She said that the next tenant had not started paying on 9 January 2024.
The landlord provided a written agreement from the tenant giving notice that she would be vacating the premises from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024. It confirmed the rental as $650.00 per week and that payment was made on 19 December. The agreement also stated that the tenant would pay $40.00 on the last week of the tenancy as she had already paid $610.00 towards the rent. Other provisions about inspections and new tenant visits were outlined. The tenant agreed to leave the house clean and tidy with the lawns done. The agreement was dated 21 December 2023 and signed by both parties.
The tenant said that the landlord stood over her and made her write this, and believed that she had to move out due to the landlord’s behaviour. There was no evidence was provided supporting either of these claims.
The landlord said that this agreement was provided by the tenant to allow her 5 weeks to find a new premises and because she found one earlier, she moved out on 9 January 2024, instead of the 23 January 2024, and stopped paying rent. She was claiming these rent arrears.
The landlord believed that the document dated 21 December confirmed that the tenant was going to vacate the premises on 23 January 2024.
This was a periodic tenancy, and a tenant is required to give 28 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. See section 51(2B) RTA.
The RTA prescribes what is required in a notice to terminate a tenancy in section 51(3)(a)-(d).This includes specifying the date that the tenant is to vacate. Section 51(4) states that a notice to terminate is not invalid because it fails to strictly comply with the requirements of subsection (3).
A notice must clearly state an intention to terminate tenancy on a particular date or on the expiry of a particular period.
The agreement states that the tenant ‘will be vacating the premises from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024’ and the landlord signed this. The tenant moved out on 9 January 2023 and believes her obligations to pay rent ended then because she gave notice terminating the tenancy on 21 December 2023.
The tenant also said that when she moved out another tenant moved in on the same day and started paying rent. The landlord said that she had not agreed to the tenant giving the keys to anyone else and had not received any rental payments from that date. She had an agreement with this person and their tenancy was not to start until 23 January 2024,being the date that the landlord believed they had agreed that the tenancy would end.
The RTA requires 28 days’ notice, and the tenant did not provide a particular date on which the tenancy would terminate, only a period of time.
I find that the tenants claim that she must only pay rent to 9 January fails because she did not then give 28 days’ notice.
The landlord cannot rely on the last date of the period given by the tenant as the date that the tenancy was going to end because it was agreed in the landlord own words that the tenant was vacating the tenancy in the period from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024.
I find that notice was given to end this tenancy on 21 December and the end of the tenancy, being 28 days later, is 18 January 2024.
Both parties agreed that the tenant was going to end during a specified period of time. A tenant cannot end a tenancy without giving notice. I find that document dated 21 December 2023 gave notice and the landlord agreed. Although the date was not given the period was defined and all parties agreed that the tenancy was coming to an end .
The tenant owes rent to 18 January 2024 at $650.00 per week is $5292.86.It was established that the tenant had not missed any rent payments during the tenancy and together with the last weeks rent had paid $5230.00 leaving a rent arrears balance of $62.86 to be paid to the landlord. Storage costs for the tenants’ belongings.
The tenant claimed she was forced to leave her tenancy early and had to store her belongings. She sought reimbursement for the cost of renting a storage unit being $80.00 per week .
The tenant provided copies of bank payments made for a storage unit, but no invoices or agreement, terms or conditions or address of the storage unit were provided.
The document dated 21 December 2023 showed an agreement to end the tenancy by both parties. As discussed, there was no evidence provided supporting the tenants claim that she had to end the tenancy early.
I do not find that the landlord is responsible for these costs and the claims are dismissed. Cleaning
The tenant claimed the cost of her deep cleaning the premises at the start of the tenancy. This amount was claimed at a professional rate of $50.00 per hour because she had cleaned professionally before.
The landlord said that she never asked for this and it was not needed.
The photos provided show the premises untidy but not unclean. The landlord said they were taken when they were transferring rooms over and her belongings were left out of one room to move into another one. She also provided photos of her clean and tidy home.
There was no itemised invoice for what cleaning was done, cleaning products purchased, or time taken.
No evidence was provided that the premises were dirty at the start of the tenancy or that the landlord had asked the tenant to deep clean the premises.
Due to lack of evidence this claim is dismissed.
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, 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 tenant requested suppression. I do not consider that she either wholly or substantially succeeded in the proceedings and therefore are entitled to it by right. Having weighted up the interest of the parties versus the public interest I do not consider it justified to order suppression. I decline to make any suppression orders.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in their claim and the filling fee is reimbursed.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4780184 — net $83.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 January 2024	$62.86	Rent arrears to 18 January 2024
Filing fee	$20.44	Filing fee
Net award	$83.30
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$83.30

Order

Ema Bryant must pay Kathleen Bartlett $83.30 immediately, as calculated in the table below.
The rest of the claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant Ms Bryant appeared with a support person.
The tenant sought reimbursement of overpaid rent and compensation for storage unit costs and cleaning. The landlord has applied for rent arrears.
The parties agreed that the tenancy began on 23 November 2023 but disputed what day the tenancy ended.
A Tenancy Tribunal hearing was conducted on 22 March 2024 solely to determine whether the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear these claims. The Tribunal found that there was jurisdiction and in that decision the end date of the tenancy was recorded as 23 January 2024.
The disputes surrounding the terms, content, or period of any tenancy agreement were not considered at the previous hearing and on this basis the claims from the parties about the disputed end date of the tenancy were heard.

Was there a tenancy agreement?

The landlord offered to rent the premises to the tenant for $750.00 per week. She provided a letter to WINZ detailing a fixed term tenancy for a year and the calculations of bond and rent in advance to support of the tenant’s application for assistance. This was declined.
The landlord subsequently offered the tenant two rooms at the lower rate of $650.00 per week reflecting that only two rooms would be for the tenant and the landlord would keep one room for herself and her children. The landlord also had a short-term periodic tenancy for herself in Auckland to support a sick child in hospital.
The tenant said she initially believed that the tenancy would be for a year and possibly up to 5 years as the landlord was thinking about moving. She agreed to the $650.00 per week with a room set aside for the landlord and the tenancy began on 23 November 2023.
No tenancy agreement was provided to the tenant.
There was clearly a tenancy and although it was not written down this does not invalidate it. See section 13C, Residential Tenancies Act 1986,RTA.

When did the tenancy end?

The tenant sought compensation for one week rent that she overpaid believing that the tenancy ended 9 January 2024 .She said a new tenant Lisa moved in on that day and started paying rent to the landlord.
The landlord disputes this and claims that the tenant left early, and they had agreed that the tenancy was to end on 23 January 2024.She said that the tenant had given her keys to another party. The other party had an agreement staring on 23 January and that’s when she was to move in and not before. She said that the next tenant had not started paying on 9 January 2024.
The landlord provided a written agreement from the tenant giving notice that she would be vacating the premises from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024. It confirmed the rental as $650.00 per week and that payment was made on 19 December. The agreement also stated that the tenant would pay $40.00 on the last week of the tenancy as she had already paid $610.00 towards the rent. Other provisions about inspections and new tenant visits were outlined. The tenant agreed to leave the house clean and tidy with the lawns done. The agreement was dated 21 December 2023 and signed by both parties.
The tenant said that the landlord stood over her and made her write this, and believed that she had to move out due to the landlord’s behaviour. There was no evidence was provided supporting either of these claims.
The landlord said that this agreement was provided by the tenant to allow her 5 weeks to find a new premises and because she found one earlier, she moved out on 9 January 2024, instead of the 23 January 2024, and stopped paying rent. She was claiming these rent arrears.
The landlord believed that the document dated 21 December confirmed that the tenant was going to vacate the premises on 23 January 2024.
This was a periodic tenancy, and a tenant is required to give 28 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy. See section 51(2B) RTA.
The RTA prescribes what is required in a notice to terminate a tenancy in section 51(3)(a)-(d).This includes specifying the date that the tenant is to vacate. Section 51(4) states that a notice to terminate is not invalid because it fails to strictly comply with the requirements of subsection (3).
A notice must clearly state an intention to terminate tenancy on a particular date or on the expiry of a particular period.
The agreement states that the tenant ‘will be vacating the premises from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024’ and the landlord signed this. The tenant moved out on 9 January 2023 and believes her obligations to pay rent ended then because she gave notice terminating the tenancy on 21 December 2023.
The tenant also said that when she moved out another tenant moved in on the same day and started paying rent. The landlord said that she had not agreed to the tenant giving the keys to anyone else and had not received any rental payments from that date. She had an agreement with this person and their tenancy was not to start until 23 January 2024,being the date that the landlord believed they had agreed that the tenancy would end.
The RTA requires 28 days’ notice, and the tenant did not provide a particular date on which the tenancy would terminate, only a period of time.
I find that the tenants claim that she must only pay rent to 9 January fails because she did not then give 28 days’ notice.
The landlord cannot rely on the last date of the period given by the tenant as the date that the tenancy was going to end because it was agreed in the landlord own words that the tenant was vacating the tenancy in the period from 21 December 2023 to 23 January 2024.
I find that notice was given to end this tenancy on 21 December and the end of the tenancy, being 28 days later, is 18 January 2024.
Both parties agreed that the tenant was going to end during a specified period of time. A tenant cannot end a tenancy without giving notice. I find that document dated 21 December 2023 gave notice and the landlord agreed. Although the date was not given the period was defined and all parties agreed that the tenancy was coming to an end .
The tenant owes rent to 18 January 2024 at $650.00 per week is $5292.86.It was established that the tenant had not missed any rent payments during the tenancy and together with the last weeks rent had paid $5230.00 leaving a rent arrears balance of $62.86 to be paid to the landlord. Storage costs for the tenants’ belongings.
The tenant claimed she was forced to leave her tenancy early and had to store her belongings. She sought reimbursement for the cost of renting a storage unit being $80.00 per week .
The tenant provided copies of bank payments made for a storage unit, but no invoices or agreement, terms or conditions or address of the storage unit were provided.
The document dated 21 December 2023 showed an agreement to end the tenancy by both parties. As discussed, there was no evidence provided supporting the tenants claim that she had to end the tenancy early.
I do not find that the landlord is responsible for these costs and the claims are dismissed. Cleaning
The tenant claimed the cost of her deep cleaning the premises at the start of the tenancy. This amount was claimed at a professional rate of $50.00 per hour because she had cleaned professionally before.
The landlord said that she never asked for this and it was not needed.
The photos provided show the premises untidy but not unclean. The landlord said they were taken when they were transferring rooms over and her belongings were left out of one room to move into another one. She also provided photos of her clean and tidy home.
There was no itemised invoice for what cleaning was done, cleaning products purchased, or time taken.
No evidence was provided that the premises were dirty at the start of the tenancy or that the landlord had asked the tenant to deep clean the premises.
Due to lack of evidence this claim is dismissed.
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, 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 tenant requested suppression. I do not consider that she either wholly or substantially succeeded in the proceedings and therefore are entitled to it by right. Having weighted up the interest of the parties versus the public interest I do not consider it justified to order suppression. I decline to make any suppression orders.
The landlord has substantially succeeded in their claim and the filling fee is reimbursed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4780184 — Rent arrears at 17 The Gardens Drive, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4780184 — Rent arrears at 17 The Gardens Drive, Papamoa Beach, Papamoa 3118

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was there a tenancy agreement?

When did the tenancy end?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was there a tenancy agreement?

When did the tenancy end?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions