Tenant liability intervention sought
Outrage over a Tenancy Tribunal ruling which demonstrates the problems with a new rule on tenant damage of rental properties has been building over recent weeks.
The ruling in question left a Foxton landlord liable for the damage to his rental property after his tenant let her dogs urinate in the house – even though the tenancy agreement had specified no pets were allowed.
It came after the Tribunal adopted a new rule, following the Holler & Rouse v Osaki case, which left residential landlords liable for accidental damage caused by tenants
Landlords nationwide have expressed concern at the precedent set by the Foxton case, by the Tribunal rule itself, and by the environment they create.
In response, the NZ Property Investors Federation has reached out to politicians in a bid to find a solution to the issue.
NZPIF executive officer Andrew King said that, as the Osaki decision cannot be appealed to a higher court, the only option is legislative change to have the Residential Tenancies Act amended.
Click the button below to subscribe and will have free unlimited access for a limited time to full article and all other articles on the site.
You will also be able to comment on articles on Good Returns.
