• Login:
Welcome, Register Here
follow PropertyTalk on facebook follow PropertyTalk on twitter Newsletter follow PropertyTalk on LinkedIn follow PropertyTalk on facebook
Page 19 of 29 FirstFirst ... 9 17 18 19 20 21 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 289
  1. #181

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nice View Post
    The tenant made decisions about the use of the room where her actions would clearly lead to damage to the carpet and curtains. This damage was willful in the sense that The Tenant adopted a way of life that led to inevitable damage to the premises. I am satisfied that it is reasonable to view her actions as intentional and therefore find her liable for the damage.
    This is a remarkable outcome, by defining intent/willful in this way they've filled in the missing piece of the Osaki puzzle, this is important in the respect that rather than make a determination that is right or wrong by societal standards they've judged it on cause & effect.

  2. #182
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Bay Of Plenty, NZ
    Posts
    3,604

    Default Tenant Liability, Intervention Sought from Politicians

    An interesting development in the continuining saga of tenants responsibilities and Court decisions.

    http://www.landlords.co.nz/article/5...+of+landlords+
    Patience is a virtue.

  3. #183
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    May be some hope yet.
    My blog. From personal experience.
    http://statehousinginnz.wordpress.com/

  4. #184
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,080

    Default

    Well done. Looks like it is about the wording (along with evidence, of course) to present your case that will be vital. I will seventh the request for the tenancy tribunal number. Thanks
    www.PropertyMinder.co.nz
    # Property Management
    # Ad Hoc Tenancy Services / Rental Inspections / Terminations and Notices

  5. #185
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Wellington
    Posts
    518

    Default

    Tenancy case number is 4043000, but not yet up on their web site.

  6. #186
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    147

    Default

    Not sure how to cross-post to a specific entry on a thread, but I just posted this on the "Interesting TT decisions" thread:

    --------------

    There was a howl of protest when the original story broke concerning the following TT decision (#4015340)


    While I accept that the tenant has intentionally breached the agreement by allowing a dogs onto the property the landlord has not established that the tenant intended to damage the carpet
    However, I just found TT decision 15/01347/WN, which seems to completely contradict that decision's reasoning.

    The key paragraph (5) of this decision seems to be as follows, but it's definitely worth reading the whole thing:


    It would have been known to the tenants that this damage was occurring on an ongoing basisbut they continued to allow it to happen. They made a decision to overlook the damage thatwas being done to serve the purpose of keeping their animals inside.

  7. #187
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    3,000

    Default

    No one wants tenants to be financially ruined through an accidental mistake

    Why not?
    If they drive their uninsured rusty Datsun into the side of my Rolls Royce they can be financially ruined.
    Why not if they trash my house?

  8. #188
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    1,663

    Default

    They wouldn't be financially ruined - their contents insurance will come with liability cover.
    My blog. From personal experience.
    http://statehousinginnz.wordpress.com/

  9. #189
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    3,000

    Default

    Tenant looks confused: "What's contents insurance?"

  10. #190
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Cyberspace
    Posts
    5,737

    Default

    ^^ A new breakfast cerial?


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 13-02-2018, 12:10 PM
  2. Environment Court judge rules on Wellington view-blocking fence
    By PTWhatAGreatForum in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 22-07-2016, 09:14 AM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-03-2016, 03:32 PM
  4. Landlords ignorant of upcoming LVR rules
    By muppet in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-11-2015, 04:53 PM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-06-2013, 04:54 PM
  6. Landlords are liable - New File Share Law
    By klauster in forum Property Investment (NZ)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 16-08-2011, 09:18 AM
  7. Family Court rules on tenancy
    By Glenn in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-12-2007, 09:56 PM
  8. Landlords Court Fees Slashed
    By Glenn in forum Finance, legal and tax (NZ)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14-06-2006, 06:49 PM
  9. New rules for landlords Oct 19 2005
    By muppet in forum Regions News (UK)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 19-10-2005, 09:17 PM
  10. Landlords win court dispute to charge tenants for water
    By larrymiles in forum Tenant Stuff (NZ)
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-11-2003, 06:35 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •