Self contained flat, own entrance but part of the main structure of the landlords home with shared garden and driveways etc.

Exempt from RTA or not?

Go....

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 10:23:00

sparkychap wrote:

Self contained flat, own entrance but part of the main structure of the landlords home with shared garden and driveways etc.

Exempt from RTA or not?

Go....

Top of my head, no.

johnston - 2020-11-14 10:30:00

No, not exempt.
There is a major exemption that applies within the RTA: the LL is allowed to discriminate in his/her selection of tenant, where s/he wouldn't be allowed to do so with some other property, but the RTA does apply otherwise.
So you can advertise for a single childless Swedish volleyball player, without fear of legal repercussions. But you will still have to give her the required 90 days notice when she rebuffs your suggestions for creative ways to settle the rent.
(Of course I don't mean you personally, Sparky, I know that's not your style!)

Edited by luteba at 11:08 am, Sat 14 Nov

luteba - 2020-11-14 11:06:00

Luteba - I should probably know this, but where in the RTA is that distriction made. More than happy to positively discriminate in favour of Swedish Volleyball players (female of course)? TIA.

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 13:12:00

sparkychap wrote:

Luteba - I should probably know this, but where in the RTA is that distriction made. More than happy to positively discriminate in favour of Swedish Volleyball players (female of course)? TIA.

I must retract a little: the distinction is made in the Human Rights Act 1993 rather than in the RTA (the RTA prohibits discrimination in contravention of the HRA; the HRA s54 says "Nothing in section 53 shall apply to residential accommodation which is to be shared with the person disposing of the accommodation, or on whose behalf it is disposed of."
When I worked at the HRCommission, the understanding was that "shared" included the premises in general, rather than just the individual dwelling, so long as there was some shared space. If you had your own entrance, no shared outdoor space (eg clothesline) and no connection to the LL's home, it wasn't really "shared", and the LL couldn't discriminate. But if you were going to be sharing any space with the tenant, even if it was just the clothesline area, you could.
I suspect there would be limits to that. eg if you lived in an apartment block and the LL happened to live in another apartment, and the block had a shared laundry or something, I don't think that would be enough to count as "shared". And given I haven't worked at the HRC for 16 years, it's possible the interpretation might have tightened since then. But from what you describe, I'd say you can start polishing up your ABBA karaoke.

Edited by luteba at 2:14 pm, Sat 14 Nov

luteba - 2020-11-14 14:13:00

Depends on the definition of 'premises' if that is indeed defined somewhere in statute that is relevant to the original question. I think there is a case to be answered that it is exempt unless both parties formally opt in..

s5 (1) (n) where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family:

artemis - 2020-11-14 15:23:00

artemis wrote:

Depends on the definition of 'premises' if that is indeed defined somewhere in statute that is relevant to the original question. I think there is a case to be answered that it is exempt unless both parties formally opt in..

s5 (1) (n) where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family:

It's in the "interpretation" section of the RTA:
"premises includes (other than in relation to a boarding house tenancy, in which case the definition in section 66B applies)—
(a) any part of any premises; and
(b) any land and appurtenances, other than facilities; and
(c) any mobile home, caravan, or other means of shelter placed or erected upon any land and intended for occupation on that land"

Edited by luteba at 3:28 pm, Sat 14 Nov

luteba - 2020-11-14 15:28:00

And also refer to the interpretation of “facilities”

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 15:43:00

????
Mrs sparkychappette sent you to the basement sparky?

lovelurking - 2020-11-14 16:22:00

Never, ever go down to the basement.

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 16:28:00

Anyway, thanks for the replies - a friend is looking to buy one, not for the actual flat part, but the rest of the house meets their needs but they asked me about renting it out. Cheers.

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 20:34:00

sparkychap wrote:

Self contained flat, own entrance but part of the main structure of the landlords home with shared garden and driveways etc.

Exempt from RTA or not?

Go....

what's the electricity situation-separate meter? LL can't just charge a set fee for electricity. Also unmetered water can't be charged. And no, not exempt.

Edited by evoalg at 8:59 pm, Sat 14 Nov

evoalg - 2020-11-14 20:58:00

evoalg wrote:

what's the electricity situation-separate meter? LL can't just charge a set fee for electricity. Also unmetered water can't be charged.

Good questions, I don't know yet, have asked though.

sparkychap - 2020-11-14 20:59:00

sparkychap wrote:

Self contained flat, own entrance but part of the main structure of the landlords home with shared garden and driveways etc.
Go....

What you see as possible grounds for an exemption would also apply in the case of two or more attached units owned by the same person who lives in one and rents out the other.

webworth - 2020-11-14 22:35:00

webworth wrote:

What you see as possible grounds for an exemption would also apply in the case of two or more attached units owned by the same person who lives in one and rents out the other.

Maybe but that scenario might be more separated than a flat on the ground floor of the family house, where there might be more opportunity for inadvertently breaching (or seeming to breach) the tenants rights around quiet enjoyment. Guess they'd just need to be doubly careful.

sparkychap - 2020-11-15 08:06:00

Sparkychap's issue has been the subject of some recent discussion elsewhere. While not extensively canvassed there was a definite view that some situations as outlined in the OP could be exempt from the RTA. Because there are hundreds, if not thousands of similar situations, feel there needs to be some sort of definition and determination from the powers that be.

An option would be to put the issue to Tenancy Services as a first step. Then to the Minister of Housing depending on the response. Any takers?

ETA The Tenancy Tribunal may have issued relevant determinations in which case it would be preferable for Tenancy Services to ferret them out, since it is their day job. Not that TT determinations are precedents.

Edited by artemis at 8:22 am, Sun 15 Nov

artemis - 2020-11-15 08:18:00

luteba wrote:

I must retract a little: the distinction is made in the Human Rights Act 1993 rather than in the RTA (the RTA prohibits discrimination in contravention of the HRA; the HRA s54 says "Nothing in section 53 shall apply to residential accommodation which is to be shared with the person disposing of the accommodation, or on whose behalf it is disposed of."
But from what you describe, I'd say you can start polishing up your ABBA karaoke.

Thanks Luteba, knowing me, knowing you, that's good intel. it's a one bed flat, so plenty of scope for focusing on a suitable older tenant rather than one that just just says "take a chance on me" when it's harder to remove them. I guess they don't want to going "ring ring" on the door at 2am saying "thank you for the music, now turn it off". Or having to face a young tenant everyday saying "does your mother know" that "you owe me one" weeks rent?

And it's not about the "money, money, money" - the house itself is perfect for their family as it is and they are "head over heals" in love with it and are likely to say "I do, I do, I do, I do" when the agent asks if they'll make an offer.

But you've got me thinking about AB&B, A good ideal.

sparkychap - 2020-11-15 08:19:00

artemis wrote:

Sparkychap'-
s issue has been the subject of some recent discussion elsewhere. While not extensively canvassed there was a definite view that some situations as outlined in the OP could be exempt from the RTA. Because there are hundreds, if not thousands of similar situations, feel there needs to be some sort of definition and determination from the powers that be.

An option would be to put the issue to Tenancy Services as a first step. Then to the Minister of Housing depending on the response. Any takers?

Thanks Artemis - definitely agree with the view that a home and income like this *should* be exempt, or have more liberty when assigning or terminating tenancies.

sparkychap - 2020-11-15 08:22:00

get a lawyer.

spead - 2020-11-15 08:46:00

If the property is shouting to your mates take a chance on me, then I’d be telling your mates if you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it...????

lovelurking - 2020-11-15 09:28:00

lovelurking wrote:

If the property is shouting to your mates take a chance on me, then I’d be telling your mates if you liked it then you shoulda put a ring on it...????

Agreed, and last night she was telling me "My Milkshake Brings All the Boys to the Yard", so do you think I should check if its zoned commercial?

Edited by sparkychap at 9:41 am, Sun 15 Nov

sparkychap - 2020-11-15 09:41:00

artemis wrote:

An option would be to put the issue to Tenancy Services as a first step. Then to the Minister of Housing depending on the response. Any takers?

You'd be lucky even to receive an acknowledgement. I never have when I've submitted ideas or pointed out problems in the past.

webworth - 2020-11-15 22:52:00

webworth wrote:

You'd be lucky even to receive an acknowledgement. I never have when I've submitted ideas or pointed out problems in the past.

I have sent a couple of enquiries via their website, and they have got responses (had to chase up though). Those queries get a record number so can't be ignored. Alternative, use the official information website FYI.org.nz, that does get the attention of officials, though can't be used for personal info requests. Requests and responses are public and searchable, very useful.

All requests for information are supposed to be treated as OI requests, but officials don't always seem to realise that and don't record them and manage them under the OI Act..

Anyway, the OI Act is very powerful and seems to me it is a good avenue to cite it when making requests and actually get decent answers and not just fluff. (Speaking generally, not just about Tenancy Services.)

artemis - 2020-11-16 05:10:00

sparkychap wrote:

Anyway, thanks for the replies - a friend is looking to buy one, not for the actual flat part, but the rest of the house meets their needs but they asked me about renting it out. Cheers.

"a friend" nudge-nudge wink-wink.

masturbidder - 2020-11-16 19:22:00