The Deputy Principal Tenancy Adjudicator, Rex Woodhouse, once described the Residential Tenancies Act as the most complicated piece of consumer legislation in New Zealand. I can’t agree with him more. When it comes to tenancy law, there isn’t always a thru line between common sense and compliance.
Sam’s story is unusual, though I suspect iterations will become more common now that the Auckland Council is enlisting storm-affected property owners to opt into its Risk Categorisation Programme. It went something like this:
Sam’s Muriwai home emerged from Cyclone Gabrielle largely unscathed. Given its white-sticker status, she and her landlord agreed that the tenancy would continue. A year later, the Council, applying the National Risk Category Framework, classified the property as Category 3, meaning that it would pose an intolerable risk to life in a future climate event. This entitled the landlord to participate in the Council’s buyout programme. The landlord was agreeable and instructed the property manager to initiate termination. Acting on the Council’s advice, the property manager gave a s59 notice, leaving Sam and her family only seven days to move out of the property. Sam accepted that she would have had to move out at some point but struggled to understand the short notice, especially given the property had sustained no damage. In the ensuing back and forth, the manager re-initiated termination under s51(2)(a), citing the impending buyout.
Now, you may think this is no big deal. The property isn’t going to be Sam’s forever home anyway. She’s going to have to move out; it is just a matter of time. But for Sam and her landlord, the way things have unfolded had been entirely distressing and bewildering. One moment, the property was...
