sharetrader
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 71 of 71
  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Wellington, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjauck View Post
    That article is pure and simple click bait from Stuff.
    A screaming inaccurate headline on a Hot button issue.
    The Landord with a dozen properties was well experienced and his two 2017 tribunal cases ended with sizeable payouts for himself. He admitted he stopped regularly inspections and with his portfolio of properties, why didn't he get an agent in to help?
    He claimed there were $25,000 in damages yet he applied only for $5040. Why only claim that if his recent cases gave him sizeable payouts?

    He did not just get $50 he got the bond as well. The article is click bait. An accurate headline would not have drawn in as many clicks.

    The Tenancy Tribunal decision has been posted online - 4214273. It is very detailed.

    Sizeable payouts in 2017 cases? For rent owed, rubbish removal and damage. I suppose there are different definitions of sizeable. Tenant could have paid the rent and cleaned up on vacating. $350 allowed for rubbish removal. That's a fair bit of rubbish.

  2. #62
    ShareTrader Legend Beagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    13,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artemis View Post
    The Tenancy Tribunal decision has been posted online - 4214273. It is very detailed.

    Sizeable payouts in 2017 cases? For rent owed, rubbish removal and damage. I suppose there are different definitions of sizeable. Tenant could have paid the rent and cleaned up on vacating. $350 allowed for rubbish removal. That's a fair bit of rubbish.
    9 cubic meter skip bin hire, (about par for when each of my kids moved out of the flat), but no allowance for the many hours of hard physical labour cleaning the flat and filling up the skip bin.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12286373
    Last edited by Beagle; 25-11-2019 at 02:27 PM.
    No butts, hold no mutts, (unless they're the furry variety).

  3. #63
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,832

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artemis View Post
    The Tenancy Tribunal decision has been posted online - 4214273. It is very detailed.

    Sizeable payouts in 2017 cases? For rent owed, rubbish removal and damage. I suppose there are different definitions of sizeable. Tenant could have paid the rent and cleaned up on vacating. $350 allowed for rubbish removal. That's a fair bit of rubbish.
    Sizable was the journalist’s word. According to the report he had been aware of the damage for some time. He did not take photos when the tenancy commenced and did not have a record of inspections. Did he not claim what he thought was the full cost of damage, because the flat needed refurbishment and he was going to renovate the property anyway? He stated he was going to renovate the bathroom and kitchen.

  4. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Wellington, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beagle View Post
    9 cubic meter skip bin hire, (about par for when each of my kids moved out of the flat), but no allowance for the many hours of hard physical labour cleaning the flat and filling up the skip bin.

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/...ectid=12286373
    Hi Beagle, yes agree about rubbish removal, but I was responding to bjauck referring to a previous (2017) Tenancy Tribunal decision for the same landlord, different property. Bjauck reckoned the landlord got a sizeable ** payout from the tenant. I thought it was modest in the circs - adjudicator awarded the landlord $350 for removing a trailer and ute load of rubbish left behind. The TT usually allows $25 ph for a landlord, more for an itemised invoice from a third party. $25 ph is not much for what is often a mucky job.That the tenant should have dealt with.

    ** Ok I see it was the journalist who has a weird idea of sizeable.
    Last edited by artemis; 25-11-2019 at 03:37 PM.

  5. #65
    ShareTrader Legend Beagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    13,958

    Default

    Yeah I couldn't agree more artemis. $25 an hour isn't much these days.
    No butts, hold no mutts, (unless they're the furry variety).

  6. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    rural canterbury
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Evicted a tenant last year and took 2 trailer loads of their rubbish and "returned" it to them at their new place. Wouldn't really recommend it as standard operating practice but it sure was more satisfying than going back to the tenancy tribunal. At TT (which is actually quite a reasonable system) it takes up so much time, you get a judgement and then more than likely you will need to enforce it through the courts if you can.

  7. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Wellington, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    960

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Biscuit View Post
    Evicted a tenant last year and took 2 trailer loads of their rubbish and "returned" it to them at their new place. Wouldn't really recommend it as standard operating practice but it sure was more satisfying than going back to the tenancy tribunal. At TT (which is actually quite a reasonable system) it takes up so much time, you get a judgement and then more than likely you will need to enforce it through the courts if you can.
    Heh, you should have applied for some of their bond for your time and petrol.

    The Ministry of Justice has processes to recover debts through their collections unit.

  8. #68
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    rural canterbury
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artemis View Post
    Heh, you should have applied for some of their bond for your time and petrol.

    The Ministry of Justice has processes to recover debts through their collections unit.
    Already had been to TT and got the bond (didn't cover the missed rent of course), got an order for eviction, got a bailiff, got them out .... then the clean up. I've taken a couple of tenants to court and that can work if you have good info on them and where they work or a work and income number. But if you don't and they don't show up, good luck getting anything out of them and all the time it is costing you time and money.

  9. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Wellington, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    960

    Default

    MoJ can often help with addresses etc if there is a TT order.

  10. #70
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    rural canterbury
    Posts
    479

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by artemis View Post
    MoJ can often help with addresses etc if there is a TT order.
    Depending on what's owing, what info you have, and how you are feeling on the day, I guess its a personal judgement call whether you'd rather go through the courts or prefer to return the rubbish and let it go at that.

  11. #71
    ShareTrader Legend Beagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    13,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Biscuit View Post
    Evicted a tenant last year and took 2 trailer loads of their rubbish and "returned" it to them at their new place. Wouldn't really recommend it as standard operating practice but it sure was more satisfying than going back to the tenancy tribunal. At TT (which is actually quite a reasonable system) it takes up so much time, you get a judgement and then more than likely you will need to enforce it through the courts if you can.
    LOL now that's what I call restorative justice !
    No butts, hold no mutts, (unless they're the furry variety).

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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