What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4809436?

The tribunal order states: Kiri Stewart must pay Paragon Property Management Limited $469.68

How much money was awarded in case 4809436?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $449.24 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4809436?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4809436?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10101066-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4809436?

The tribunal order states: Kiri Stewart must pay Paragon Property Management Limited $469.68

How much money was awarded in case 4809436?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $449.24 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4809436?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4809436?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10101066-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 2, 11 Ashdown Place, Pahurehure, Papakura Tenancy Tribunal Case 4809436 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4809436 — net $469.68 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 16.2.2024	$449.24	Water rates to 16.2.2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$469.68
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$469.68

Ms Carter attended the hearing by teleconference on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 682, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail. Ms Carter said the tenant was aware of the hearing date. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in her absence.

The landlord has applied for termination and possession, rent arrears and outgoings.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. Rent arrears

The landlord claimed the tenant owes $1,020.00 in rent arrears to 20 March 2024 and provided two different rent summaries for the tenancy. Ms Carter said the first rent summary was prepared by the owner, prior to the property managers taking over. In the first rent summary, there was a payment of $2,040.00 made by the tenant on 21 January 2024. The first rent summary ended at the end of the rent period to 1 February 2024 and indicated that the arrears owing to 1 February 2024 was $1,020. However, below that figure in red was a different amount of arrears owing of $2,040.00.

Ms Carter said the second rent summary was prepared by her firm and said the tenant’s payment of $2,040.00 on 21 January 2024, reflected in the first rent summary, could not be included in her second rent summary, as it would have not reconciled with the correct amount of rent arrears owing. However, she said the end arrears total from the owner’s first rent summary had been carried over into her rent summary. I note though from the second rent summary that the rent periods have changed from the first rent summary and the relevant overlapping rent period only went to 31 January 2024 and not 1 February 2024, meaning that the new rent summary may not have accounted for at least one day’s rent.

Given the issues with the differences between the two rent summaries provided and that the second rent summary purports to take over from the first rent summary but misses some information from the first rent summary and then changes the rent period dates, I do not find the rent summaries to be reliable evidence. As such, I cannot make any findings as to the amount of rent arrears owing and dismiss this claim. Termination

The landlord’s claim for termination was based on the tenant being more than 21 days in arrears. I note in the second rent summary that the tenant has been in arrears most recently since around 7 March 2024, making it 12 days from the date the tenant last went into arrears to the date of hearing on 19 March 2024, according to the second rent summary. To satisfy the requirements of section 55(1)(a) RTA, the landlord has to prove the tenant was at least 21 days in arrears at the time of their application on 15 February 2024, which would mean the tenant should have been in arrears on 25 January 2024. In the first rent summary a tenant payment of $2,040.00 on 21 January 2024 returned the arrears balance to zero. The first rent summary indicated the next rent payment after this was not due until 1 February 2024. So according to the first rent summary, the tenant was not in arrears as at 25 January 2024.

The second rent summary showed the tenant was in arrears as at 25 January 2024, but the rent period dates had been changed in the second rent summary and the tenant payment on 21 January 2024 of $2,040.00 was not reflected there.

As such, with the conflicting rent summaries provided, I find there is insufficient evidence to prove the tenant was in arrears at least 21 days before the landlord’s application or even at the date of hearing. Therefore, the landlord’s claim for termination and possession is dismissed. Water rates

The landlord has claimed for payment of water rates of $449.24 to 16 February 2024. The landlord provided a number of water company invoices for the tenancy period that totalled $449.24. Ms Carter said she gives the water company invoices to the tenant and that the tenant is responsible for paying these, despite the owner’s name being on the water company invoices. She said the water company will not agree to have the invoices in the tenant’s name, only that of the owner. She clarified the water bills are only for this tenant. As such, I find that the landlord has proved that the tenant owes the landlord $449.24 for water rates to 16 February 2024. Filing fee

Because Paragon Property Management Limited has been partly successful with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4809436 — net $469.68 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 16.2.2024	$449.24	Water rates to 16.2.2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$469.68
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$469.68

Order

Kiri Stewart must pay Paragon Property Management Limited $469.68 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Ms Carter attended the hearing by teleconference on behalf of the landlord. The phone number for the tenant, the last three digits being 682, was called twice. Both calls went to voicemail. Ms Carter said the tenant was aware of the hearing date. As the tenant was served, the hearing proceeded in her absence.
The landlord has applied for termination and possession, rent arrears and outgoings.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. Rent arrears
The landlord claimed the tenant owes $1,020.00 in rent arrears to 20 March 2024 and provided two different rent summaries for the tenancy. Ms Carter said the first rent summary was prepared by the owner, prior to the property managers taking over. In the first rent summary, there was a payment of $2,040.00 made by the tenant on 21 January 2024. The first rent summary ended at the end of the rent period to 1 February 2024 and indicated that the arrears owing to 1 February 2024 was $1,020. However, below that figure in red was a different amount of arrears owing of $2,040.00.
Ms Carter said the second rent summary was prepared by her firm and said the tenant’s payment of $2,040.00 on 21 January 2024, reflected in the first rent summary, could not be included in her second rent summary, as it would have not reconciled with the correct amount of rent arrears owing. However, she said the end arrears total from the owner’s first rent summary had been carried over into her rent summary. I note though from the second rent summary that the rent periods have changed from the first rent summary and the relevant overlapping rent period only went to 31 January 2024 and not 1 February 2024, meaning that the new rent summary may not have accounted for at least one day’s rent.
Given the issues with the differences between the two rent summaries provided and that the second rent summary purports to take over from the first rent summary but misses some information from the first rent summary and then changes the rent period dates, I do not find the rent summaries to be reliable evidence. As such, I cannot make any findings as to the amount of rent arrears owing and dismiss this claim. Termination
The landlord’s claim for termination was based on the tenant being more than 21 days in arrears. I note in the second rent summary that the tenant has been in arrears most recently since around 7 March 2024, making it 12 days from the date the tenant last went into arrears to the date of hearing on 19 March 2024, according to the second rent summary. To satisfy the requirements of section 55(1)(a) RTA, the landlord has to prove the tenant was at least 21 days in arrears at the time of their application on 15 February 2024, which would mean the tenant should have been in arrears on 25 January 2024. In the first rent summary a tenant payment of $2,040.00 on 21 January 2024 returned the arrears balance to zero. The first rent summary indicated the next rent payment after this was not due until 1 February 2024. So according to the first rent summary, the tenant was not in arrears as at 25 January 2024.
The second rent summary showed the tenant was in arrears as at 25 January 2024, but the rent period dates had been changed in the second rent summary and the tenant payment on 21 January 2024 of $2,040.00 was not reflected there.
As such, with the conflicting rent summaries provided, I find there is insufficient evidence to prove the tenant was in arrears at least 21 days before the landlord’s application or even at the date of hearing. Therefore, the landlord’s claim for termination and possession is dismissed. Water rates
The landlord has claimed for payment of water rates of $449.24 to 16 February 2024. The landlord provided a number of water company invoices for the tenancy period that totalled $449.24. Ms Carter said she gives the water company invoices to the tenant and that the tenant is responsible for paying these, despite the owner’s name being on the water company invoices. She said the water company will not agree to have the invoices in the tenant’s name, only that of the owner. She clarified the water bills are only for this tenant. As such, I find that the landlord has proved that the tenant owes the landlord $449.24 for water rates to 16 February 2024. Filing fee
Because Paragon Property Management Limited has been partly successful with the claim I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4809436 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 11 Ashdown Place, Pahurehure, Papakura

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4809436 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Flat 2, 11 Ashdown Place, Pahurehure, Papakura

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions