"Address for Service" S(2) Interpretation

[Keys]

I find it interesting that you have tenants who you wouldn't want knowing where you live...why do you rent to them then?

Some of us own/manage rentals which cater to that type of tenant.

[BlamBlam]

I did get your point, what I was saying is that in order for the tenant to serve you notice on a fax they would also have to get access to a fax machine.

I just would have thought it would be best to make it easier for a bad tenant to leave than put up barrirers. Are you doing it now or seeking permission from TS?

I find it interesting that you have tenants who you wouldn't want knowing where you live...why do you rent to them then?

I assure you my questions are intended as a means of understanding as opposed to being confrontational. I just find it fascinating that there is sometimes such an aprehensive approach to dealing with tenants. Is this common?

[xris]

I've thought about this more and am now beginning to doubt my own position - slightly. keys may have a point but I need to think it through a bit more, for my own satisfaction if nothing else.

Thanks for your comment cube. However, and although you indicated this anyway, I would not give any serious credence to what is on the back of the standard TA. It is put there by TS, and TS is, on the whole, stupid.

xris

[cube]

On the back of the Tenancy Agreement from DBH, there is an Outline of the Provisions of the RTA (1986), including

The address for service is an address in New Zealand where notices and other documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted by you, or on your behalf, even after the tenancy has ended. It is good if your address for service is different from your tenancy address. The address for service cannot be a post office box.

Although an Outline of Provisions is not statute, it does make the intention of the Act clear.

I'm with xris on this one.

cube

[xris]

I disagree xris. The word "address" is not defined. We have "postal address's" "residential address's" "e-mail adress's" and so on.

I would agree, which is why I believe this point may need to be clarified in the new RTA, which I understand from Glenn it may not be.

What is written into the Act is that an address for service must be provided so that documents may be served.

Nowhere does it say "physical address"

(It doesn't say that. It says an address for service must be provided where documents can be served, not so that documents can be served. A very important difference.)

That is true, but you need to look at exactly what is said:

'...an address at which notrices and other documents relating to the tenancy may be accepted by or on behalf of the landlord or tenant...'

Unless you are from Lilliput how to you envisage squeezing into your post box to accept a document?

Also, I would suspect that there is some sort of standard acceptance that an address for service is a physical address and so does not need to be further clarified. Please note that the definition of address for service on p4 was inserted later in 1996. Seeing as it was deemed necessary to clarify its meaning only 11 years ago, I find it odd that no mention of a physical address was made then. Presumably this is because in law it is accepted that an address for service is a physical address. If there was any doubt then 1996 and the clarification made would have been an obvious time to make that point clear.

Also, emails did not exist in 1986 when the act was passed. As far as I know, in these situations the meaning at the time is used, not any later change of meanong, which should put an end to this idea that an email address can be an address for service.

Also, when this act was drawn up

What is written into the Act is that a fax number is sufficient to deliver documents.

My position is: a fax number is an address for service.

True, but absolutely not.

I believe you are confusing the issues, which I thought I had earlier addressed.

Just because a document can be sent to a fax number and be deemed as having been received, does not make it an address for service.

An example...

A TT summons is served on a landlord. It can be sent to the fax number. But there must also be an address for service on the Tenancy agreement, whether of not it is used for the delivery of the summons.

And a fax number is not an address, it is a number. But then neither is an email address an address, it too is a number, despite the common use of the term address (hence my repeated comment that clarification may now be needed in 2007). I do not believe this needs further debate. because I think it is quite clear. An address for service and the manner in which documents can be delivered or two seperate issues.

I will be placing my fax number and P.O. Box on all documents in futute and defend it.

I also put my box number with my address for service, and it is usually used to send documents to. (But see my point immediately above).

I would be interested if anyone has had the address for service issue dealt with at the TT.

xris

[Keys]

The latest Canterbury Property Investors blurb mentioned that an E-Mail address could now be used as an Address for Service.

It was a one liner and no background was given.

Anyone no more information?

This was what prompted me to start my line of questioning.

I rang the CPIA and it was an unsubstantiated position.

[Keys]

Hello keys,

I will attempt to give an answer to your point.

At the beginning of the Act we can see that an address for service is defined as an address where documents can be delivered. (Top of p4)

s 136 does indeed allow documents relating to a tenancy to be delivered by fax.

However, that does not make a fax number an address for service, for the simple reason that a fax number is not an address.

And so, because you need to give an address for service you need to give an address (and a fax number is not an address).

xris

I disagree xris. The word "address" is not defined. We have "postal address's" "residential address's" "e-mail adress's" and so on.

What is written into the Act is that an address for service must be provided so that documents may be served.

Nowhere does it say "physical address"

What is written into the Act is that a fax number is sufficient to deliver documents.

My position is: a fax number is an address for service.

I will be placing my fax number and P.O. Box on all documents in futute and defend it.

[xris]

Hello SOG,

I have not, nor do I want to, plough through the act you have kindly referred us to.

However, having had a 120 second glimpse of it I think you have missed the point by confusing the intention of the act and what it does.

My opinion is that all this act does is to say that in certain circumstances information transmitted by electronic means, eg by fax or email, may be deemed as having a legal status, or in our example, as having been served. It simply clarifies for us that email messages to and from a tenant or landlord can have a legal standing, just as the 1990's RTA amendments to s.136 clarified that fax transmitted information could be used if it related to the tenancy.

It does not say that an email address can be used as an address for service.

I hope my opinion is clearly stated and please forgive my dramatic colouring - I just like being a bit of a drama monarch for a change.

xris

[Son of G]

Now that I've had some time to do some research, see the tail end of this thread:
http://www.propertytalk.com/forum/sh...?t=7070&page=2
And for the Act, is the Electronic Transactions Act 2002 and can be found here:
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/brows...jump=a2002-035

[Son of G]

There is an act that states that if both parties agree then electronic communication can be used instead of hardcopy. That means that an emaill adress can be used to serve documents if you agree and the sender agrees.

I can not rember the name of the act for my quick reply.

[xris]

The latest Canterbury Property Investors blurb mentioned that an E-Mail address could now be used as an Address for Service.

It was a one liner and no background was given.

Anyone no more information?

I think it's wrong.

xris

[hawkeye]

The latest Canterbury Property Investors blurb mentioned that an E-Mail address could now be used as an Address for Service.

It was a one liner and no background was given.

Anyone no more information?

[xris]

Hello blamblam,

I also do not believe that a tenant's lack of access to a fax machine alters keys reasoning, but I also agree with your implication that a fax number should not, or could not, be an address for service.

Hello keys,

I will attempt to give an answer to your point.

At the beginning of the Act we can see that an address for service is defined as an address where documents can be delivered. (Top of p4)

s 136 does indeed allow documents relating to a tenancy to be delivered by fax.

However, that does not make a fax number an address for service, for the simple reason that a fax number is not an address.

And so, because you need to give an address for service you need to give an address (and a fax number is not an address).

You can therefore give a fax number where/by which documents can be served on you or delivered to you but you must also supply an address for service, which must be a physical address, not a box number of fax number.

I accept that since the Act camein, and since its amendments in the 1990's, email has come into play, and this needs to be more clearly defined, as will hopefully happen in the new RTA.

But this is why I believe we cannot use a fax number as an address for service.

Documents can be served to a fax number, but that is not an address for service. The Act requires that you provide an address for service, and an address is an address, so that is what we have to do.

xris

[Keys]

How could only providing a fax number as an address for service be of use if the tenant does not have access to a fax machine?

I don't believe my point is being made. I would not accept a tenant's fax number as an address for service. On the other hand, there are some tenants who I don't want knowing where I live. Therefore I would supply the tenant with my fax number as the "Address for Service" and a P.O. Box number if they chose to post anything to me.

When I get a reply from Tenancy Services to my OIA request I'll put it on here.

[BlamBlam]

How could only providing a fax number as an address for service be of use if the tenant does not have access to a fax machine?