If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Yes , formal complaint to the Principal Adjudicators office - its literally the only course of action for complaints against proceedings, but there are plenty more options if the adjudicator chooses to enforce legal rights against us. The adjudicator told me I cant apply for a re-hearing- it seems some of you who have replied have done exactly that?? But I can appeal any decision that was made in my absence for the tenant. Will have to see if they were awarded exemplary damages as they had no actual evidence. Lack of evidence was the very core of the adjudicators problem with my own application apparently. I will be doing some research into the law surrounding the following areas with relevant corresponding RTA clauses.
Exactly what can be discussed and awarded in a hearing- whether new items can be bought to the floor on the day.
Also , how to substantiate your rights to be heard without interruption or admonishment.
If you can insist on not having a certain adjudicator and on what grounds
Lastly, I wonder, if you moved the next tenant into the same filthy house and ended up back at TT, what would be the result when you pull out their prior ruling accepting the condition as reasonably clean and tidy! Still the landlords fault! This new law and current status of judgement will further reduce the likelihood of landlords paying up front to hand the property on to new tenants in good order. One tenants damages/mess will end up the next tenants problem and so on. Especially if the only recompense is anhuge excess for each occasion of damage .
The adjudicator told me I cant apply for a re-hearing
The adjudicator is wrong.
105 Rehearings
(1) The Tribunal shall in all proceedings have the power to order a rehearing of the whole or any part of the proceedings on the ground that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur.
(2) An application for a rehearing shall be lodged with the appropriate Registrar of the Tribunal within 5 working days after the date of the decision, or within such further time as the Tribunal may allow.
But I can appeal any decision that was made in my absence for the tenant.
An appeal goes to the District Court. A re-Hearing is still with the TTKK. Be aware that the grounds for both are quite narrow. Usually a senior KKK hears the re-Hearing appln. and, if successful, orders it back to the original Adjudicator (if available) with specific instructions on procedure to be observed by that Adjudicator.
Exactly what can be discussed and awarded in a hearing- whether new items can be bought to the floor on the day.
The Adjudicator has a free hand, almost:
85 Manner in which jurisdiction is to be exercised
(2) The Tribunal shall determine each dispute according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities.
Although not ideal practice, new items/evidence and weighing that against a section not detailed in the application can be done in the District Court, so indicating that it is acceptable in a lower court/tribunal..
Also , how to substantiate your rights to be heard without interruption or admonishment.
A right to be heard is not the same as a right to not be interrupted. I.e. An Adjudicator can interrupt at will, with no regard to manners or rudeness.
Lastly, I wonder, if you moved the next tenant into the same filthy house and ended up back at TT, what would be the result when you pull out their prior ruling accepting the condition as reasonably clean and tidy!
T'would be an interesting test case, but you'd have to persuade the new tenant to move in, first.
I applied for a re-hearing last year under the grounds that there was a miscarriage of justice as the tenant submitted new evidence at the hearing that the adjudicator took into consideration in her orders and that we were unprepared to defend ourselves against or given an opportunity to respond to.
I was awarded the re-hearing with a much more favorable outcome at the 2nd hearing.... It was Lower Hutt District Court too Fraser ! ....be interesting to see if it was the same adjudicator!
Had this happen to me too , the tenant presented evidence that had not being shown prior ,a photograph showing white spots all over a black leather couch; he claimed our painting had done this which was totally untrue. Adjudicator bought into the fabrication and he was allowed $1000 knocked off our expense damage claim against him. When the final outcome was delivered some weeks later i took the attitude of you win some you lose some.But Tenant still wasn't content with the win of the tricky court persuasion & wanted even more off our expense claim .He applied for a re-trial at District Court ,which was granted only because he said he had new evidence to present .At the court re-trial the Judge dismissed the even more flunky evidence & hearsay from a trio of his drinking buddies that had nothing to do with the tenancy. They all trotted off to the pub afterwards where i assume the ""buddies"" still received their reward in pints of liquid gold.
Last edited by mrsaneperson; 17-01-2017, 09:35 PM.
So have received the order finally and for those that are interested - no surprise but the adjudicator awarded the tenants compensation. I read through the order and some things are acceptable but there are at least 4 incorrect assumptions made by the adjudicator because of her inability to remain neutral.
Rotten flooring, wet insulation, health issues because of damp. The tenant claimed to have a builder look at these issues but there was no invoice or report or contractor provided. The adjudicator asked them if they were sick during the tenancy and could they produce doctors evidence - which they could not. They had no written evidence of complaints about cold, damp or rot the entire tenancy and only when I claimed against them was it brought up.
My claim was slammed through lack of physical evidence even though I had inspection reports showing no mould or rot on the ceilings or walls. So based on verbal evidence given by the tenants and guided by the adjudicator's obvious intentions - the tenants were compensated a weeks rent.
I believe the adjudicator has not performed her duty as an impartial referee. I really don't want to pay it out of principle but I have had no reply from the disputes tribunal about the way the case was handled and can not appeal a claim less than $1000. I would not take the risk of having to endure another sitting with the dragon lady by ways of a re-hearing so onwards and upwards! Next step will be to devise how not to have this adjudicator in the future.
Ms B Harvey by the way
Last edited by Perry; 03-02-2017, 04:59 PM.
Reason: formatting
There is a big difference between an Appeal and an application for a re-Hearing based on a miscarriage of justice. In my experience, a re-Hearing (if granted) will be utilising the same adjudicator, if available.
Your experience - bad as it was - is almost the norm in TT Kangaroo Kourts.
I believe the adjudicator has not performed her duty as an impartial referee. I really don't want to pay it out of principle but I have had no reply from the disputes tribunal about the way the case was handled and can not appeal a claim less than $1000.
I did actually take the next step, as it was over $1000. Only to have the judge say outright (yes, it was an actual judge) that it wasn't the done thing to overturn a colleague's findings unless there was a significant miscarriage of justice and that the 'modest' sum involved didn't reach that level. I was fuming because while to him, after a career of raking it in as a lawyer, it no doubt seemed like chicken feed, to me it was a significant amount!
So there you are, they would much rather see a miscarriage of justice than cause an adjudicator to lose face.
In answer to Frasers original question a definite yes, more so in recent times. Worse Im finding adjudicators prepared to take evidence not filed with application for a tenant yet decline same for a Landlord
My husband recently started turning up to hearings to observe how others are getting on. Boy do the Adjudicators hate any kind of audience or scrutiny.
My husband recently started turning up to hearings to observe how others are getting on. Boy do the Adjudicators hate any kind of audience or scrutiny.
Hmmmmmm.....I wonder why that is? Better still, he should take a dictaphone or notepad and dress like a journalist.
valid points but nothing compares to a human presence. A group of us started observing one Adjudicator who then used Sec 95(2) to stop such gatherings even for simple rent arrears cases. It took a complaint to the Principal Adjudicator to reinstate.
Comment