What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4993793?

The tribunal order states: The claim is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4993793?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4993793?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4993793?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10901971-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4993793?

The tribunal order states: The claim is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4993793?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4993793?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4993793?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10901971-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3B Worcester Street, Wilton, Wellington 6012 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4993793 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing by phone.

The tenants have applied for a reduction in their fixed term tenancy.

The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.

There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances b. the change was unforeseen c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.

Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term.

The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case. The present case

In the present case the tenants came to New Zealand without contracts for work. Raphaël had the offer of work, but nothing was certain. They signed up for a fixed term tenancy with the landlord. The job offer did not work out. In order to get work they have moved out of Wellington. They have attempted to assign the tenancy but without success. They have a person subletting with the landlord’s approval paying half the rent.

Has there been a change of circumstances? The change of circumstances the tenants are relying on is that they have had to move from Wellington to find work. The landlord stated that he believed there had not been a change of circumstances for the tenants because they rented the property without employment in Wellington and that fact remains true today. The landlord is correct. The tenant’s entered into a fixed term tenancy without the ability to pay unless the offer of employment became a contract for employment. They left Wellington without the ability to pay rent because the offer of employment did materialize. It is unlikely that the tenants could succeed on a reduction of the fixed term based on the change of circumstances. The tenants would also be unsuccessful on the second test – thew change is unforeseeable.

In determining if a change is unforeseen, the Tribunal considers whether the change is of the type that would be unforeseen. It is not a test that simply checks whether the tenants thought the change was possible. The withdrawl of a job offer is not an unforeseen change of circumstances. An offer of employment does not have certainty until it becomes a contract and therefore the tenants; should have foreseen that uncertainty when signing up for a fixed term.

The request for a reduction of the fixed term cannot be granted. Note:

I have indicated to the parties that the landlord should accept an assignment for a family to move into the property. The landlord has limited the number of occupants in the three-bedroom house to two. Therefore a market rent assessment could be based on a two bedroom house, not three. The tenants are paying $895.00 per week for two people to occupy the property. Tenancy Services bonds show market rent for an upper quartile two-bedroom house in Wilton is $660.00. An upper quartile three-bedroom house is $888.00. A medium quartile three-bedroom house is $700.00.

Order

The claim is dismissed.

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing by phone.
The tenants have applied for a reduction in their fixed term tenancy.
The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances b. the change was unforeseen c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term.
The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case. The present case
In the present case the tenants came to New Zealand without contracts for work. Raphaël had the offer of work, but nothing was certain. They signed up for a fixed term tenancy with the landlord. The job offer did not work out. In order to get work they have moved out of Wellington. They have attempted to assign the tenancy but without success. They have a person subletting with the landlord’s approval paying half the rent.
Has there been a change of circumstances? The change of circumstances the tenants are relying on is that they have had to move from Wellington to find work. The landlord stated that he believed there had not been a change of circumstances for the tenants because they rented the property without employment in Wellington and that fact remains true today. The landlord is correct. The tenant’s entered into a fixed term tenancy without the ability to pay unless the offer of employment became a contract for employment. They left Wellington without the ability to pay rent because the offer of employment did materialize. It is unlikely that the tenants could succeed on a reduction of the fixed term based on the change of circumstances. The tenants would also be unsuccessful on the second test – thew change is unforeseeable.
In determining if a change is unforeseen, the Tribunal considers whether the change is of the type that would be unforeseen. It is not a test that simply checks whether the tenants thought the change was possible. The withdrawl of a job offer is not an unforeseen change of circumstances. An offer of employment does not have certainty until it becomes a contract and therefore the tenants; should have foreseen that uncertainty when signing up for a fixed term.
The request for a reduction of the fixed term cannot be granted. Note:
I have indicated to the parties that the landlord should accept an assignment for a family to move into the property. The landlord has limited the number of occupants in the three-bedroom house to two. Therefore a market rent assessment could be based on a two bedroom house, not three. The tenants are paying $895.00 per week for two people to occupy the property. Tenancy Services bonds show market rent for an upper quartile two-bedroom house in Wilton is $660.00. An upper quartile three-bedroom house is $888.00. A medium quartile three-bedroom house is $700.00.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4993793 — Tenancy dispute at 3B Worcester Street, Wilton, Wellington 6012

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4993793 — Tenancy dispute at 3B Worcester Street, Wilton, Wellington 6012

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions