What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5097749?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5097749?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5097749?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5097749?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11632589-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5097749?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5097749?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5097749?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5097749?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11632589-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

23 Kauri Road, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5097749 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The applicant claimed the rent increase was unaffordable and they were not given a fair opportunity to dispute the increase.

When the tenancy began in 2017, the rent was set at $290.00. This was subsequently increased to $320.00, and increased further $563.00 on 24 January 2025.

The Tenant submitted they did not dispute the market rent but rather the high rent increase since the tenancy commenced and the limited opportunities to negotiate this. They were also forced to move out for 8 weeks due to house renovations. Upon returning, the tenant was advised of the new rent increase. The renovations included a new roof, carpet, kitchen, and bathroom.

Although the tenant acknowledged the market rent may justify this, they expressed their concern about affordability and felt that better communication could have alleviated the situation. The tenant remains in the property and highlighted the lack of suitable rental alternatives in the area. No evidence was provided by the Tenant.

The landlord submitted the rent increase was part of a broader portfolio-wide rent review, not tied to the renovations. Accommodation costs were covered while the tenant was displaced, and the Tenant returned by the end of August 2024.

The last rent increase occurred in 2019, prior to COVID-19. With rent reviews scheduled for June, the landlord aimed to align rents with market rates, based on Tenancy Services data. Notices were sent in mid-November 2024, with a 60- day period to dispute the increase. No dispute was received from the Tenant.

The Landlord provided the letter they sent to the Tenant advising of the increase and offering an opportunity for the Tenants to respond and the market rate from Tenancy Services. This showed that the lower quartile of market rent for two bedrooms in the same area was $563.00. The law

In order to determine if a rent increase is too high, the tenant must prove on the balance of probabilities that the rent exceeds market rent by a “substantial amount”. The term 'substantial' is not defined in the RTA, but it is the opposite of ‘minor’ or ‘insignificant’. Some earlier Tribunal cases suggested a 'rule of thumb' of 10% over market rent. However, a rule of thumb based on a specific percentage has no legal status and is not appropriate where rents rise at a rate significantly above income inflation.

In considering the evidence, notably the Tenancy Services data for similar properties, I find the rent increase was reasonable because it reflected the lower quartile of median rents. The tenant did not dispute the market rent however market rent determines if a rent increase is too high. Additionally, I consider the tenant was given ample opportunity to contest the increase, as outlined in the notices sent by the landlord in mid-November 2024.

For these reasons the Tenants application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The applicant claimed the rent increase was unaffordable and they were not given a fair opportunity to dispute the increase.

When the tenancy began in 2017, the rent was set at $290.00. This was subsequently increased to $320.00, and increased further $563.00 on 24 January 2025.

For these reasons the Tenants application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5097749 — Tenancy dispute at 23 Kauri Road, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5097749 — Tenancy dispute at 23 Kauri Road, Waikanae, Waikanae 5036

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Property management

Frequently asked questions