What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5008289?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Dayna Richardson at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street,

How much money was awarded in case 5008289?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,473.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5008289?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5008289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10896312-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5008289?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Dayna Richardson at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street,

How much money was awarded in case 5008289?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,473.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5008289?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5008289?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10896312-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street, Christchurch Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5008289 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5008289 — net $1,500.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 04/10/2024	$1,473.57	Rent arrears (to 04/10/2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,500.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,500.57

The tenancy of Dayna Richardson at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street, Christchurch Central, Christchurch 8011 is terminated, and possession is granted to Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle, at 11:59pm on Friday 4 October 2024.

Dayna Richardson must pay Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle $1,500.57 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations and reimbursement of the filing fee.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.

The tenant has breached their obligations by: a. Continuing to allow her guests to block the car parking spaces of other tenants by parking out the front of her rental premise or doing so herself.; and b. Being continually in rent arrears since 27 August 2024 and still in $1,250.71 arrears at the date of the hearing.

The landlord confirmed it has tried to support the tenant by encouraging her to get a flatmate and to go to WINZ for support. The flatmate that was signed up, and approved by WINZ, decided not to move in and the tenant has had her WINZ appointments moved several times and could not confirm today that WINZ would pay the arrears.

The tenant sought a conditional termination to give her more time to clear the rent arrears, but the property owners have confirmed to the property manager that thy have a mortgage to pay and have been under financial duress having to carry the mortgage without regular rent coming in. As such, they are unable to give the tenant any more time to clear the rent arrears.

The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 4 September 2024 in relation to the rent arrears and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. She has still not remedied that breach.

The landlord gave the tenant a further 14-day notice on 12 September 2024 for parking in the complex in the way of others. The tenant has not remedied the breach, as there was a further instance of the same conduct complained of by another tenant yesterday.

I find that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, because I am not satisfied that the tenant can or will pay the rent arrears in a timeframe required by the property owners, and this ongoing rent breach is causing the property owners financial duress. I am also not satisfied the tenant is taking the parking breaches in the complex seriously as she appears not to have cautioned her visitors not to park outside her rental premise as it causes other tenants not to be able to access their carparks. This conduct continues to cause disruption to the other tenants’ quiet enjoyment of the carparking spaces they pay rent to use.

The tenancy is terminated, and possession granted to the landlord from 11:59pm on Friday 4 October 2024. Reimbursement of filing fee

Because Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5008289 — net $1,500.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (to 04/10/2024	$1,473.57	Rent arrears (to 04/10/2024
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,500.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,500.57

Order

The tenancy of Dayna Richardson at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street, Christchurch Central, Christchurch 8011 is terminated, and possession is granted to Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle, at 11:59pm on Friday 4 October 2024.
Dayna Richardson must pay Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle $1,500.57 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations and reimbursement of the filing fee.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The tenant has breached their obligations by: a. Continuing to allow her guests to block the car parking spaces of other tenants by parking out the front of her rental premise or doing so herself.; and b. Being continually in rent arrears since 27 August 2024 and still in $1,250.71 arrears at the date of the hearing.
The landlord confirmed it has tried to support the tenant by encouraging her to get a flatmate and to go to WINZ for support. The flatmate that was signed up, and approved by WINZ, decided not to move in and the tenant has had her WINZ appointments moved several times and could not confirm today that WINZ would pay the arrears.
The tenant sought a conditional termination to give her more time to clear the rent arrears, but the property owners have confirmed to the property manager that thy have a mortgage to pay and have been under financial duress having to carry the mortgage without regular rent coming in. As such, they are unable to give the tenant any more time to clear the rent arrears.
The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant on 4 September 2024 in relation to the rent arrears and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. She has still not remedied that breach.
The landlord gave the tenant a further 14-day notice on 12 September 2024 for parking in the complex in the way of others. The tenant has not remedied the breach, as there was a further instance of the same conduct complained of by another tenant yesterday.
I find that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, because I am not satisfied that the tenant can or will pay the rent arrears in a timeframe required by the property owners, and this ongoing rent breach is causing the property owners financial duress. I am also not satisfied the tenant is taking the parking breaches in the complex seriously as she appears not to have cautioned her visitors not to park outside her rental premise as it causes other tenants not to be able to access their carparks. This conduct continues to cause disruption to the other tenants’ quiet enjoyment of the carparking spaces they pay rent to use.
The tenancy is terminated, and possession granted to the landlord from 11:59pm on Friday 4 October 2024. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because Layton Holdings Limited T/As Quinovic Property Management As Agent For Danny Ashkettle has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5008289 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street, Christchurch Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5008289 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 3, 258 Armagh Street, Christchurch Central,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions