What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4983289?

The tribunal order states: By way of declaration, the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over

How much money was awarded in case 4983289?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4983289?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4983289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10983140-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4983289?

The tribunal order states: By way of declaration, the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over

How much money was awarded in case 4983289?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4983289?

The primary dispute was Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4983289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10983140-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

6 Aronui Terrace, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4983289 — Boarding House

Order

By way of declaration, the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over this dispute.
The application is struck out.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was conducted via video/teleconference.
This hearing was convened to initially consider jurisdiction.
At the hearing I advised the parties of my decision, therefore this order is to explain my reasoning.
The background to this situation is the owner purchased the three-bedroom house in May 2024 and listed her spare rooms on Airbnb from then. The applicant here was the first such guest (with his partner), staying between 27 May 2024 and 10 June 2024. That Airbnb agreement was replaced by a new, separate agreement between the parties for a renewed stay after 10 June 2024. This commenced 11 June 2024.
The terms of that agreement were captured in an email. The usual terms regarding commencement, rent and bond were included, as were details regarding the shared, communal living arrangement. House rules were to be established. An end date of the arrangement on 22 September 2024 was agreed as a prior Airbnb booking had been accepted from that date.
The applicant left the premises on or around 17 August 2024. The form of exit, and the subsequent retention by the landlord of the $900.00 (three weeks rent) bond is the dispute that requires resolution.

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction?

The Tribunal’s general jurisdiction, under s77(1) of the RTA is to: “...determine in accordance with this Act any dispute that— (a)exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b)relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time.”
Section 2 RTA provides that a “landlord” and “tenant” are respectively grantor and grantee of a tenancy. “...tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment...” rent, means any money, goods, services, or other valuable consideration in the nature of rent to be paid or supplied under a tenancy agreement by the tenant; but does not include any sum of money payable or paid by way of bond”
Section 5 of the RTA details exclusions to the RTA. Section 5(n) specifically excludes arrangements where the premises are being used for residence by the landlord or family. This section envisages the exclusion from the Act of owners of a home renting out their spare rooms in a flatmate or boarding type situation.
Such an exception does not apply is the if the premise is a boarding house. A boarding house is defined in section 66B of the RTA as residential premises containing one or more boarding rooms along with facilities for communal use by the tenants of the boarding house that is occupied, or intended by the landlord to be occupied, by at least six tenants at any one time. In this case it is not a boarding house situation as there was no intention or actuality of the landlord having six other flatmates/boarders/guests at any one time.
A ‘flatmate’ resides in the premises by way of a licence from the owner of the premises.
In Musson v Dobrisek & Ors DC Lower Hutt CIV-2006-032-36, 5 May 2006, Judge Broadmore considered the definition of a flatmate. He states (at para [22]: By ‘flatmates’ I understand a co-operative arrangement whereby, in a functional sense, all occupants are on the same footing in that they have exclusive occupation of their own rooms and shared use and occupation of common areas such as kitchens.
As discussed at the hearing, having considered this situation I am satisfied that it clearly falls within the exception detailed in s 5(n) of the RTA. This is the landlord’s home, and she rented out a spare room to the tenant to reside in for a period. Accordingly, this was a boarding or flatmate arrangement, which is not one the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction over.
Therefore, if the tenant wishes to progress his claim, he needs to file an application in the Disputes Tribunal.

Order

By way of declaration, the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction over this dispute.
The application is struck out.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was conducted via video/teleconference.
This hearing was convened to initially consider jurisdiction.
At the hearing I advised the parties of my decision, therefore this order is to explain my reasoning.
The background to this situation is the owner purchased the three-bedroom house in May 2024 and listed her spare rooms on Airbnb from then. The applicant here was the first such guest (with his partner), staying between 27 May 2024 and 10 June 2024. That Airbnb agreement was replaced by a new, separate agreement between the parties for a renewed stay after 10 June 2024. This commenced 11 June 2024.
The terms of that agreement were captured in an email. The usual terms regarding commencement, rent and bond were included, as were details regarding the shared, communal living arrangement. House rules were to be established. An end date of the arrangement on 22 September 2024 was agreed as a prior Airbnb booking had been accepted from that date.
The applicant left the premises on or around 17 August 2024. The form of exit, and the subsequent retention by the landlord of the $900.00 (three weeks rent) bond is the dispute that requires resolution.

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction?

The Tribunal’s general jurisdiction, under s77(1) of the RTA is to: “...determine in accordance with this Act any dispute that— (a)exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b)relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time.”
Section 2 RTA provides that a “landlord” and “tenant” are respectively grantor and grantee of a tenancy. “...tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment...” rent, means any money, goods, services, or other valuable consideration in the nature of rent to be paid or supplied under a tenancy agreement by the tenant; but does not include any sum of money payable or paid by way of bond”
Section 5 of the RTA details exclusions to the RTA. Section 5(n) specifically excludes arrangements where the premises are being used for residence by the landlord or family. This section envisages the exclusion from the Act of owners of a home renting out their spare rooms in a flatmate or boarding type situation.
Such an exception does not apply is the if the premise is a boarding house. A boarding house is defined in section 66B of the RTA as residential premises containing one or more boarding rooms along with facilities for communal use by the tenants of the boarding house that is occupied, or intended by the landlord to be occupied, by at least six tenants at any one time. In this case it is not a boarding house situation as there was no intention or actuality of the landlord having six other flatmates/boarders/guests at any one time.
A ‘flatmate’ resides in the premises by way of a licence from the owner of the premises.
In Musson v Dobrisek & Ors DC Lower Hutt CIV-2006-032-36, 5 May 2006, Judge Broadmore considered the definition of a flatmate. He states (at para [22]: By ‘flatmates’ I understand a co-operative arrangement whereby, in a functional sense, all occupants are on the same footing in that they have exclusive occupation of their own rooms and shared use and occupation of common areas such as kitchens.
As discussed at the hearing, having considered this situation I am satisfied that it clearly falls within the exception detailed in s 5(n) of the RTA. This is the landlord’s home, and she rented out a spare room to the tenant to reside in for a period. Accordingly, this was a boarding or flatmate arrangement, which is not one the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction over.
Therefore, if the tenant wishes to progress his claim, he needs to file an application in the Disputes Tribunal.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4983289 — Boarding House at 6 Aronui Terrace, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4983289 — Boarding House at 6 Aronui Terrace, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions