Landlord 'ignorant of requirements of residential tenancies'

Wednesday, 8 May 2019

One of the tenants, Nathan Molver, says there was carpet moth larvae in the house.

A group of tenants took their landlord to the Tenancy Tribunal after he rented out sleepouts on the property and left the inhabitants to use the main house's kitchen.

But now the tribunal has handed them a bill.

The group of seven tenants rented a property on Waimairi Rd, Upper Riccarton, from James Truong until February 1 this year.

They said, when they took up the tenancy in February last year, there were two separate sleepouts on the premises, with tenants living in them.

* Christmas conflict between landlords and tenants

* Auckland landlord fined $6000 over leaky toilet and demanding extra rent**

Each sleepout had its own bathroom but the tenants had to access the tenants' house to use cooking facilities.

The tenants say there was no option but to let those living in the sleepouts use their kitchen.

The tenants said one of the sleepout tenants was an alcoholic who sexually harassed them and was verbally and physically intimidating. One of the sleepouts did not have a smoke alarm.

They sought a refund of the rent the sleepout tenants had paid – $16,640 – and $1000 compensation.They also asked for $119 compensation for the power used in the sleepout that was billed as part of the main house's account.

Truong filed a cross-application for rent arrears and work required to the garden, and also sought exemplary damages, claiming the tenants were running a business at the site, which they denied, had replaced tenants during the tenancy term and had another person living at the premises.

Truong argued the sleepout tenants had a choice – eat out or cook at some other place. He said the arrangements the sleepout tenants reached with the tenants of the main house was nothing to do with him.

The Tenancy Tribunal saw problems with the situation.

'How were those tenants meant to cook? To say they could eat out or cook elsewhere shows an ignorance of the requirements for residential tenancies,' the ruling said.

'Truong risks considerable sanction were the tenants of those tenancies to make an application against him.'

The tenants also said there were as a six-week period of renovations when they had one bathroom for seven people and their use of the kitchen was disrupted.

They said Truong would turn up with no notice. But he said he gave them pizza and $2400 compensation.

The tribunal said the tenants should pay the landlord $249.25 for garden work and rent arrears and the landlord should pay $119.96 for the power bill. Their claim for damages was dismissed.

'This is not an application by the sleepout tenants against the landlord for a failure to comply with the regulations. These tenants agreed to allow the sleepout tenants access to their kitchen facilities and took no action against the landlord.

'They then agreed to have one of the sleepouts incorporated into their tenancy. To then raise the issue of compensation once the tenancy ended is not convincing. And to claim the rent from the sleepouts is totally unrealistic and has no basis in law.'

The tenants were left owing the landlord $129.29.