What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5152832?

The tribunal order states: Ms Petersons application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5152832?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5152832?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5152832?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11758735-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5152832?

The tribunal order states: Ms Petersons application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5152832?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5152832?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5152832?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11758735-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

16 Riverhead Lane, Mataura, Mataura 9712 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5152832 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Reasons

There are cross applications set down before me today for half a day.

The application filed by Ms Peterson is for a $1000,000.00 claim against the landlord for alleged breaches of the Residential Tenancy Act, including failure to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards.

Ms Peterson contacted the Tribunal half an hour before its commencement confirming the phone number to be connected on. She failed to make herself available and did not attend the hearing at the scheduled time, See sections 78(1)(i) and 92(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Three attempts were made to telephone her and there was no answer. An attempt was made to also contact Ms Soper, the actual named tenant. She also failed to answer the phone.

As a result, the application is dismissed. However, I note, that Ms Peterson is in fact the mother of the named tenant in this tenancy. Therefore, there would arguably be a jurisdiction issue to be determined if the case proceeded. Whilst Mr McEwan stated she was, as he believed, the guarantor by promising to pay the rent, this is not stipulated in the tenancy agreement.

However, I am not required to determine the application given the failure of the applicant Ms Peterson to attend the hearing. The failure to attends requires me to strike out the application she filed.

Mr McEwan filed an application against the tenant Ms Soper seeking costs for unlawful use of the premises, allegations of Methamphetamine use, rent arrears and other costs.

Mr McEwan claimed for costs in relation to monies he advanced to the tenant for her to fix and remedy issues in the home that were never carried out.

Given the fact that neither Ms Peterson not Ms Soper made themselves available, and the belief that Mr McEwan has that regardless of the outcome of the tribunal he would not receive payment, he withdrew his application.

In relation to the bond, I wish to record that I was advised that WINZ paid a bond on behalf of the tenant Ms Soper direct. This was on the basis that the tenant and Mr McEwan had an agreement that she would use this money herself to make the necessary repairs and maintenance to the property. Again, the evidence is that the repairs were not carried out. This is not the purpose to the bond. The bond is a payment made to the bond centre that protects both parties.

Given the above, this brings the two applications in relation to this tenancy to an end.

Reasons

There are cross applications set down before me today for half a day.

Mr McEwan filed an application against the tenant Ms Soper seeking costs for unlawful use of the premises, allegations of Methamphetamine use, rent arrears and other costs.

Mr McEwan claimed for costs in relation to monies he advanced to the tenant for her to fix and remedy issues in the home that were never carried out.

Given the above, this brings the two applications in relation to this tenancy to an end.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5152832 — Rent arrears at 16 Riverhead Lane, Mataura, Mataura 9712

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5152832 — Rent arrears at 16 Riverhead Lane, Mataura, Mataura 9712

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions