Can a Permitted Sleepout be Rented as a seperate tenancy under new rules

[John the builder]

your link didn't work?
..........but Big Wal has offered this one on another thread
https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search.../109826883.pdf'

The RTA isnt the answer it is the cause.......... the recent changes have empowered the Tenancy services to run the complaint on the tenants behalf and seem keen to do so..............

[Lighthouse]

Go to https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/TT/
Type the application number in the Application Field.

or

https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/TT/abstract.html?id=4087239

Personaly, I think they should pursue these matters in many cases. Nasty garage conversions are not good.
I was wondering how far back claims could be made if the property had been noncompliant/ illegal through many sets of tenants?

[Perry]

$510 per week for a converted garage. Wow!

[John the builder]

Personaly, I think they should pursue these matters in many cases. Nasty garage conversions are not good.
I was wondering how far back claims could be made if the property had been noncompliant/ illegal through many sets of tenants?

then make the powers related to the conditions

the council already have the power to enforce insanitary what do they need more?

the way the law is written the LL has to prove his innocence and is guilty and required to refund for a technical offence

[Bluekiwi]

Has someone got confirmation, not sure if I missed it anywhere in this threat.

Whether a "Permitted Self Contained Sleep" can be rented out under the current rules.
With permitted toilets and kitchen and sink.
Just no oven.

Under a separate tenancy.

[Lighthouse]

It seems to me that Anderson rulings are in mass production with all adjudicators now following the same playbook.

Reason 15 in the first pdf from this https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search...tml?id=4072105 has some far reaching and scary implications for landlords or those acting as agents. This ruling seems to imply that even if the appropriate compliance is eventually obtained any past breaches are still live and running.

Essentially, nasty contingent liabilities now exist for those who currently or have previously rented dwellings or parts of dwellings that could be deemed unlawful. These liabilities will usually be triggered by the tenant, possibly at the end of a long tenancy.

[John the builder]

The key to this is unlawful and what that means.

these decisions assume that a lack of approval is therefore unlawful

in the link here the problem is the assumption that a downstairs that the tenant rented and tried to sublet was unlawful when this is arguable and even if it needed a consent the question is does this make the space unlawful or just unapproved.

I say the later and as long as it is not insanitary iot is not unlawful because the building act says you can not use an insanitary space (this insanitary situation is therefore unlawful.?)

[steeneveld]

A tenancy cannot be legal if cooking and baking facilities are not provided. Its something to do with 1940s law, and I know because I lost a TT decision because only 1 type was supplied.

[Perry]

The rules about kitchen arrangements seem to be lacking in consistency and/or clarity. They may also have changed, over the years.

My parents built a granny flat at the back of their house for my grandmother. I understand that it was about 30 square metres and 100% legitimate.

There was what I'll call a cubicle, with a sink and small sink bench, room for an electric kettle and toaster, plus some cupboards.

Grandma had one of those mini portable oven things and two hotplates for cooking, on a shelf. As I vaguely understand it, the absence of an oven/stove of the 'normal' size determined that it was a minor ancillary dwelling. It also shared a wash house with the main dwelling.

After grandma died, the granny flat was let sporadically. Sometimes family; sometimes friends in between houses. Or relationships! No separate electricity metering so some figure was arrived at that was an all-inclusive rent amount.

[nano]

https://www.rented.co.nz/unlawful-dwellings/

Types of unlawful dwellings:

1. Dwelling constructed without a building consent of any kind
2. Dwelling had a building consent but not approved for human residence e.g. garage
3. Dwelling has a building consent for permanent human residence but does not have code of compliance for being rented separately e.g. granny flat
4. Building consent for permanant human habitation but owner has added facilities such as a kitchenette
5. Dwelling has consent but the owner has added extra rooms so part of dwelling is unlawful e.g. House that had an outside deck that has been closed in by adding walls

[nano]

http://www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/housing-property/tenancy/residential-tenancies-amendment-bill/unlawful-residential-premises-questions

[nano]

No. 3 consented granny flat - separate dwelling from the main house - Is there a way to get a code of compliance from the city council then? All granny flats do not have the code of compliance anyway because 'granny flat' was built for the purpose of having 'family member'. Isn't it? If it is possible , what would city council require for the granny flat to have code of compliance to be rented out separately?

Another question is that many landlords are not aware of this new law is going to pass soon?
Why is the market so quiet?
I would expect that all 'unlawful' including consented granny flat owners would be in the position to sell the property?
Is this one way of the government trying to cool down the property market?
But, I do not see many granny flats are on the market.
What is happening at the moment? and What will happen when the bill passes?

[nano]

Another question about all granny flats:
Does owner have to live in the main property?
If it does, granny flats cannot be sold to investors who are not going to live in the house?