Granny flats on the list of illegal premises, is this a solution? loophole potential?

[mrsaneperson]

There has been an update to adjudicators B Stephenson earlier decision of Nov 2016, ruling section 137 the return of all rents should not apply . Here is the updated outcome from May 2017, and a fine of $2000 was imposed on the landlord for consent breach but no order for refund of all rent:

https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/122812156.pdf

[Perry]

Inequitable Incumbency

This bit was interesting.


Both were newish immigrants.

But the law of the RTA as it related to the LL was worthy of mention. The law as it related to tenants escaped any reference.

Something long suspected, despite the otherwise remarkably balanced jurisprudence of the decision.

[sidinz]

It's still a case of the TT drawing a long bow. The 'landlord' thought he was sharing premises with the 'tenants' and that therefore the RTA didn't apply but the TT decided that there were two separate lots of premises on the section. That decision is what basically forced the breach of consent and indeed, the breach of the 'landlord's' TA (subletting).

[Perry]

The interpretation did not seem unreasonable, given the behaviour of the head tenant / LL.

Of course, there would be less of this sort of thing if the gNats had not allowed unbridled immigration to place such pressure on Auckland's housing and infrastructure.