What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926334?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4926334?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926334?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926334?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10851893-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4926334?

The tribunal order states: The application for rehearing is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4926334?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4926334?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4926334?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10851893-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

27 Peter Street, Caversham, Dunedin 9012 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4926334 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing and did not respond when telephoned on the number ending in 373.

On 26 July 2024 the Tribunal made an order for termination, possession, rent arrears and bond refund.

On 2 August 2024, the tenant applied for a rehearing on the grounds that they 1) had not received notice of the hearing were not aware of the hearing and that 2) they believed they had a payment plan in place to work towards payment of the rental arrears.

Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.

Usually, the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing, or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing if it could have affected the outcome.

The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons, Cindy Maria Taueki has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

I would have reasons to dismiss this application on the basis that the tenant did not attend the hearing and this was the tenant’s application to prove. For completeness, I have considered the tenant’s grounds for rehearing.

The first ground advanced was that the tenant failed to receive proper notice of the hearing. However, the notice of hearing was sent to the tenant’s address for service in the tenancy agreement (email, phone and physical address). The email and phone number used, also matches the email and phone number that the tenant has recorded in the rehearing application.

Therefore, I am not satisfied that the tenant did not receive effective notice of the hearing.

The second ground advanced was that there was a payment plan in place, and therefore I did not have all the information at the hearing. The tenant has not provided any evidence that there was a payment plan, and the landlord has advised that there was no such payment plan.

Therefore, I am not convinced that I did not have all relevant information for the hearing.

There is no evidence that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred. The application is rehearing is dismissed and my Order dated 26 July 2024 stands. R Harvey-Lane 23 September 2024

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing and did not respond when telephoned on the number ending in 373.

On 26 July 2024 the Tribunal made an order for termination, possession, rent arrears and bond refund.

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

For the following reasons, Cindy Maria Taueki has failed to establish the grounds for a rehearing.

Therefore, I am not satisfied that the tenant did not receive effective notice of the hearing.

Therefore, I am not convinced that I did not have all relevant information for the hearing.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926334 — Rent arrears at 27 Peter Street, Caversham, Dunedin 9012

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4926334 — Rent arrears at 27 Peter Street, Caversham, Dunedin 9012

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice occurred?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions