42 day notice

[brentn]

Hi all
A friend of mine gave his tenants 42 days notice last week as his son is going to move in. It's a property I've been interested in for a long time, so I asked if he would consider selling it to me instead, which he has tentatively agreed to. Would he now have to notify the tenants that it is being sold rather than a family member moving in, with the 42 day notice starting again or still being 42 days from last week?
thanks
Brent

[spaceman]

No....original 42 days stand


Cheers
Spaceman

[artemis]

My understanding is tenants have a case to take to the Tenancy Tribunal if a family member does not move in, where this was the reason for the 42 days notice. That doesn't mean the case will succeed if the TT takes the change in circs into account. Safest is to explain to the tenant, cancel the 42 days notice and replace it with either a 90 day notice (or earlier if decided by the TT); or notify tenant in writing place is on the market, wait until there is an unconditional agreement giving vacant possession then issue 42 days notice.

All above assuming a periodic tenancy.

Or offer a payment to leave early.

[Keys]

My understanding is that the decision which instigated the 42 day notification in the first place is the important one.

[Rosco]

Hi,
I'm not great on tenancy law, so hopefully someone else will add some more or correct me.

Who owns the property? If a Company, then I'm not sure they can do the 42 days, as the company doesn't have a son.

Ross

[brentn]

Thanks to everyone for the responses, I talked to my friend about sticking with his son moving in as initially planned for and we can discuss me potentially purchasing it at a later date as nobody is in any rush (although Ross' response has me thinking I need to call him back to warn him of potential risk if not owned in his name)
Cheers Brent

[Rosco]

Thanks to everyone for the responses, I talked to my friend about sticking with his son moving in as initially planned for and we can discuss me potentially purchasing it at a later date as nobody is in any rush (although Ross' response has me thinking I need to call him back to warn him of potential risk if not owned in his name)
Cheers Brent

You will need to check that before relying on my tenancy advice! As I put, I'm not great on it and I would ask someone else!

[eri]

will be interesting to see how this pans out

should the proposed new laws give terry even more power to screw the owner?

Former bankrupt tycoon Terry Serepisos is taking a $35,000 harassment claim out on the property owner who just can't get the former TV star out of his house.
Matthew Ryan's long-running stoush with Serepisos is heading to the Tenancy Tribunal this week with Ryan trying to force Serepisos out of his Miramar home.
But Serepisos is claiming that Ryan - whose repeated efforts to evict Serepisos included a foiled attempt to lure him out of the house while he changed the locks - is harassing him and should stump up $35,000 in compensation.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-pos...ing-harassment