What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5071348?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Ellen Marie Winship-Walker and Angelo-

How much money was awarded in case 5071348?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5071348?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5071348?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11219379-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5071348?

The tribunal order states: The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Ellen Marie Winship-Walker and Angelo-

How much money was awarded in case 5071348?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5071348?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5071348?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11219379-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

5 McPhail Street, Birkdale, Auckland 0626 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5071348 — Healthy homes

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended by video. The landlord attended by telephone.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 21 February 2026.

The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

There has been an unforeseen change in the tenant's circumstances. The living environment for the tenants has changed. The tenants had displayed flags (LGBTQ, Transgender, Palestinian, Tino Rangatiratanga) inside the premises, but visible to outside the premises. The landlord requested that the flags be removed. The tenants felt that the request by the landlord meant that they could not decorate their home with the flags being symbols of groups that they support. They said that they felt uncomfortable living at this residence.

The landlord said that she preferred for the flags to be taken down because she was concerned about the risk to the property with the Palestinian flag being visible to the public. She said that she was aware of damage to other property in response to people displaying the Palestinian flag. The landlord had arranged for wall hooks to be installed so that the flags could be hung inside, but this did not occur.

On 29 October 2024 the tenants asked to end the tenancy early. The landlord agreed and the premises was advertised for rent on 31 October 2024. The tenants paid $500.00 to the landlord for advertising costs.

The tenants moved out and started a new tenancy on 26 November 2024. At the date of hearing the premises has not been relet and the tenants have continued to pay rent.

The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. They have experienced financial difficulties from paying two lots of rent as well as issues with vehicles and a stolen passport. One of the tenants was off work due to an injury from falling down the stairs at the premises.

The landlord would suffer hardship if the term were reduced. The landlord is a trust which had recently spent money on improving the premises to comply with the Healthy Homes standards. The trust owns another tenanted property.

I find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship.

Where the Tribunal reduces a fixed-term tenancy, it may order the tenant to pay the landlord reasonable compensation for any resulting loss. See section 66(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant has paid $500.00 which I consider is reasonable compensation for the landlord.

The tenancy is to end on 11 December 2024. I have taken account of the landlord advertising the premises for two weeks at a weekly rate for rent that was more than the tenants were contracted to pay. This may have delayed the re-tenanting of the premises.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant attended by video. The landlord attended by telephone.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 21 February 2026.

The tenants moved out and started a new tenancy on 26 November 2024. At the date of hearing the premises has not been relet and the tenants have continued to pay rent.

I find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship.

Where the Tribunal reduces a fixed-term tenancy, it may order the tenant to pay the landlord reasonable compensation for any resulting loss. See section 66(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant has paid $500.00 which I consider is reasonable compensation for the landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5071348 — Healthy homes at 5 McPhail Street, Birkdale, Auckland 0626

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5071348 — Healthy homes at 5 McPhail Street, Birkdale, Auckland 0626

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions