Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 4806718 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat B, 90 Norton Road, Frankton, Hamilton 3204
Decided 3 Apr 2024 · Published 3 Apr 2024 · Application 4806718
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
Order
- The tenancy of Elizabeth Ounsworth and David Gyde at Unit/Flat B, 90 Norton Road, Frankton, Hamilton 3204 is terminated, and possession is granted to Whittaker Family Trust Limited (Cooney Law & Richelle Whittaker), at 11.59 pm on Wednesday 3 April 2024.
- Elizabeth Ounsworth and David Gyde must pay Whittaker Family Trust Limited (Cooney Law & Richelle Whittaker) $9,880.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,170.00 to Whittaker Family Trust Limited immediately.
Reasons
- The hearing was held by teleconference. Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond.
- Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy is terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
- The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing, as ordered above.
- As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim, I must order the other party to reimburse the filing fee. Suppression order
- Section 95A of the RTA provides that the Tribunal must order suppression if the party applying for it has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceedings. The Tribunal may also, 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order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published (section 95A(4) RTA).
- The landlord has been wholly successful with the claim but does not seek name suppression.
- The tenants seek name suppression as they believe they may be disadvantaged for future rentals and for safety reasons.
- In order to grant name suppression, the Tribunal must “have regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest”. I accept that as the arrears are significant it would be in the tenants’ interest that their names are not published. On the other hand, I consider it would be in the public interest to be aware of the tenants’ rent history arrears. It is a legitimate interest for any of the tenants’ potential future landlords. Nor am I satisfied that there would be any potential or imminent threat of harm to the tenants should their names be published. In this case, I find the public interest outweighs the interests of the tenants. I decline suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details.