Unlawful tenancies back in Tribunal scope

Landlords worried about full rent refunds to tenants due to non-consented work can take hope from a new High Court ruling that challenges the precedent.

Tuesday, October 16th 2018

Over the last 18 months, a High Court judgment issued in 2013 has been creating nightmares for landlords – since it was cited as authority in the now-notorious Vic Inglis case.

Inglis is a Dunedin landlord who was ordered to refund $10,000 to a former tenant on a legal technicality relating to previously unknown non-consented work on the property.

The Tenancy Tribunal adjudicator in the case looked to the High Court ruling in the Anderson v FM Custodians case.

This ruling determined that unconsented premises don’t meet the definition of “residential premises” under the Residential Tenancies Act – and that means they are regarded as “unlawful tenancies” and not within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal.

Even though the Tribunal’s order in the Inglis case was overturned by the Dunedin District Court, anecdotally it has led to an increase in the amount of rent clawback claims at Tribunal level.

It also highlighted the uncertainty created by the FM Custodians ruling which has, reportedly, led to a number of full rent refunds to tenants in “unlawful tenancy” situations.

But a new High Court ruling, which disagrees with the FM Custodians decision, means the situation is changing, delegates at the weekend’s NZ Property Investors Federation conference were told.

NZPIF executive officer Andrew King said that the judge in the recent High Court decision found it to be ridiculous that unconsented premises should not fall within the domain of the Tribunal – and said they should.

That leaves the Tribunal with two different High Court rulings on unconsented properties to choose from, he said.

“I don’t know which way the Tribunal is going to go but I am pretty sure they are going to go the right way because it makes sense as the first High Court ruling is absurd.’

In her conference presentation, Tenancy Tribunal chief adjudicator Melissa Poole then confirmed the new decision [on the Patel and Weir case] gives the Tribunal the room to say the High Court disagrees on this issue.

She says the Tribunal prefers Justice Cook’s opinion that says they do have jurisdiction which enables them to look at the nature of the breach.

“For about three weeks we were all really excited, because we finally thought we were on dry ground and we could go back to applying RTA as it’s supposed to be applied.”

Unfortunately, two weeks ago Poole got notice that the case is being appealed to the Court of Appeal which means it’s not over yet.

In the meantime, the Tribunal has a decision which says they can continue to exercise their jurisdiction under the Act, she said.

“We can say ‘landlord you are in breach of Section 45 here’ and order compensation, exemplary damages, or whatever.

“But I’m not going to order the entirety of the rent to be paid back unless it was one of those situations where, and this is a real example, the landlord had rented out a shipping container with no plumbing.

“The electricity was in the form of an internal extension cord, and the roof leaked so that when it rained the water was running down the extension cord. Those are the situations where actually the rent should be awarded back.”

Poole added they will have to see what the Court of Appeal does. “But, at this stage, it looks as though the situation will return to normal and we will have the full scope of the RTA back to deal with these sorts of situations.”

Read more:

Tribunal refund decision anti-landlord 

Rent case reversal good news for industry 


No comments yet

Heartland Bank - Online 6.69
Unity 6.99
SBS FirstHome Combo 7.05
ICBC 7.05
China Construction Bank 7.09
Co-operative Bank - First Home Special 7.09
Wairarapa Building Society 7.15
ANZ Special 7.24
Westpac Special 7.29
ASB Bank 7.29
BNZ - Classic 7.29
Unity First Home Buyer special 6.45
Heartland Bank - Online 6.45
TSB Special 6.75
China Construction Bank 6.75
ANZ Special 6.79
Unity 6.85
BNZ - Classic 6.85
ICBC 6.85
ASB Bank 6.85
Wairarapa Building Society 6.85
Westpac Special 6.89
Westpac Special 6.39
China Construction Bank 6.40
ICBC 6.49
BNZ - Classic 6.55
ASB Bank 6.55
SBS Bank Special 6.59
Kiwibank Special 6.59
AIA - Go Home Loans 6.69
Co-operative Bank - Owner Occ 6.75
TSB Special 6.79
Westpac 6.99
SBS FirstHome Combo 6.19
AIA - Back My Build 6.19
ANZ Blueprint to Build 7.39
Credit Union Auckland 7.70
ICBC 7.85
Heartland Bank - Online 7.99
Pepper Money Essential 8.29
Co-operative Bank - Owner Occ 8.40
Co-operative Bank - Standard 8.40
First Credit Union Standard 8.50
Kiwibank 8.50

More Stories

BREAKING: OCR 5.50% - Monetary Policy remains restrictive

Wednesday, February 28th 2024

BREAKING: OCR 5.50% - Monetary Policy remains restrictive

The Monetary Policy Committee today agreed to hold the Official Cash Rate (OCR) at 5.50%.

Sales dive to new depths – lending at low DTIs

Wednesday, February 21st 2024

Sales dive to new depths – lending at low DTIs

House sales have plunged to their second lowest level in about 40 years, only 2% up on January’s sales last year, which were the lowest since 1983.

DTIs will have no significant impact on house prices immediately

Tuesday, January 23rd 2024

DTIs will have no significant impact on house prices immediately

The Reserve Bank doesn't expect its proposed DTI restrictions to have a significant impact on house prices in the short-term.

RBNZ gives details of new lending rules

Tuesday, January 23rd 2024

RBNZ gives details of new lending rules

The Reserve Bank has reveled its proposed debt-to-income (DTI) restrictions alongside plans to loosen loan to value ratios (LVR) for residential lending.