[kerrijeansmith]

http://www.propertybrokers.co.nz/5.html?quicksearch=mp1164&txtsearch=true&form_uid=1230009697&r=quicksearch&x=21&y=9&search_history_id=1242304&style=MP1164&page=1

The letting fees and bond and all that stuff? In Canada you pay rent per month, plus a damage deposit of half the amount of the first months' rent. That's it. So I'm not really getting the other stuff. I'm assuming they're one-time charges?

Kerri

[dilanium]

rent here is per week (usually).

The bond is like the deposit- it's held by a government office to cover and damages to the place. There are also agent fees you sometimes have to pay as well.

There are legal limits that said fees can be but I'm not sure what they are.

Also there are fixed term tenancies and periodic where you can leave at anytime with a certain amount of notice (you can also be kicked out with a certain amount of notice).

[kerrijeansmith]

So the agent fee (letting fee I think it's called) is something I pay to the property managers? One time? But we don't get that back. And the bond is the damage deposit that we will get back provided the place isn't trashed?

Thanks for your input.

Kerri

[Familyofmonkeys]

Have a good look at thiis website. The Department of Building and Housing is an invaluble source of information about your rights as a tenant and will also help you if you have an issues with renting later on.

http://www.dbh.govt.nz/tenancy-index

[dilanium]

The letting fee is a one time payment that you do not get back. The bond you can get back or it can be transferred to the next place you rent (assuming you keep the terms of your lease). :)

[Super_BQ]

The bond is like the deposit- it's held by a government office to cover and damages to the place

I just want to make it clear that the "BOND" being held by the Dept. Bld.& House (as per your website link) is rarely the case for most people that rent. Mainly because of the fee they charge to administer and handle any tenancy / landlord disputes.

There is no incentive for such landlord to tell their next tenants to pay to a 3rd party gov't organisation for handling the bond. Also the letting fee has to be reasonably priced that tenants can see value in using a 3rd party organisation.

The bond is no different than the damage deposit you have in Canada. However, it's quite common for landlords in NZ (that I have experienced) to find a way not to refund the bond. So the best advice I can give you when looking at a rental place is to MAKE SURE YOU INSPECT THE PLACE BEFORE AGREEING TO STAY! Mark down all cigarette burns on the carpet, damages to the drywall (gib board), even possible condensation issues in the bathroom. The last thing you want is the landlord to do a last inspection after you have left, to find 1 thing wrong and thus keep the bond.

A true story. Some years ago I knew some overseas students that were renting a flat (house). All of them thought they would get their bond back as they left the house in the same condition as it was when they 1st moved in. However, to their surprise the landlord came into the house and the 1st thing he did was to roll up the living room rug which showed some cigarette burn marks. The students were surprised and claimed they were there before they moved in. However, there was nothing they could do as it's the case of 1 person's word over another person's word. Call it cavete emptor

BQ

[IanW99]

I just want to make it clear that the "BOND" being held by the Dept. Bld.& House (as per your website link) is rarely the case for most people that rent. Mainly because of the fee they charge to administer and handle any tenancy / landlord disputes.

There is no incentive for such landlord to tell their next tenants to pay to a 3rd party gov't organisation for handling the bond. Also the letting fee has to be reasonably priced that tenants can see value in using a 3rd party organisation.
...


Not quite sure what you are saying here?

Are you saying that landlords often don't charge a bond, or that they don't lodge the bond?

If the landlord charges a bond then they must lodge it with the Department of Building and Housing within 23 working days.

Ian

[BigRod]

I just want to make it clear that the "BOND" being held by the Dept. Bld.& House (as per your website link) is rarely the case for most people that rent. Mainly because of the fee they charge to administer and handle any tenancy / landlord disputes.
I'm also not sure what you are saying (?) - are you referring to the *LEGAL REQUIREMENT* for landlords to lodge the bond with DBH? Please be clear that this is a legal requirement and the Residential Tenancies Act also covers other items of protection for tenants such as maximum bonds, conditions and standards.

There is no incentive for such landlord to tell their next tenants to pay to a 3rd party gov't organisation for handling the bond. Also the letting fee has to be reasonably priced that tenants can see value in using a 3rd party organisation. This is hardly the case - the only 'charge' is a $20 one-off if the tenant / landlord cannot reach an agreement and this is for an independant arbitration.

Link to Residential Tenancies Act information here:
http://www.dbh.govt.nz/tenancy-index

[Super_BQ]

Are you saying that landlords often don't charge a bond, or that they don't lodge the bond?

They don't lodge the bond. Regardless if it's a legal requirement or not.

The loop-hole is the wording of the contract. Tenancy Agreement? or Contract to stay in a flat? I'm referring to contract law where the landlord basicaly opts out in using such 'tenancy agreement' forms. Show me where it's by law a landlord has to rent a flat based on the Residential Tenancies Act?

BQ

[BigRod]

They don't lodge the bond. Regardless if it's a legal requirement or not.

The loop-hole is the wording of the contract. Tenancy Agreement? or Contract to stay in a flat? I'm referring to contract law where the landlord basicaly opts out in using such 'tenancy agreement' forms. Show me where it's by law a landlord has to rent a flat based on the Residential Tenancies Act?

BQ

I suggest you use this information:
http://www.dbh.govt.nz/breachs-of-rta

Call them and get yourself protected. What you describe *is not the norm* and breaches the RTA.

[Super_BQ]

I can see what you're getting at but i'm pretty sure at the end of the day, there's little power that an investigating officer can do to enforce the landlord to follow the RTA. If the landlord follows the guidelines and does all the paper work and lodging to the RTA (like using a proper tenancy agreement forms), then of course the investigating officer has a case. However what i'm getting at is the case where landloards find the RTA a little unreasonable and want to suit their own version of say renting a room out with agreements that both the landlord and the tenant agree on. Such as waiving last month's rent if they professionally cleaning the carpets when they move out.

This deals in contract law no different than you wanting to negotiate a purchase of a new car. Asking for a full petro fill or floor mats or offering a lower price for the removal of an option you don't want in a car.

Now if the issue is where the contract is erroneously slated towards the landloard, then the dispute would have to be brought up by the tenant through a civil matter - contract law in the disputes tribunal (small claims court). In this case, the courts can grant judgement and power to the person so they legally can walk into the landlord's bank and demand payment or even garnish their paycheck from the landlord's employer.

From what i've been reading in the RTA, it's more of a guideline for landlord & tenant rather than an act. Though I havn't read it page to page, i'm sure that the RTA can NOT limit the powers of what agreements the landlord and tenant can agree on, especially if it's contracted outside the guidelines of the RTA.

BQ

[BigRod]

<SNIP>
From what i've been reading in the RTA, it's more of a guideline for landlord & tenant rather than an act.
Erm ... This is the RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT 1986 !!
Though I havn't read it page to page, i'm sure that the RTA can NOT limit the powers of what agreements the landlord and tenant can agree on, especially if it's contracted outside the guidelines of the RTA. BQ
I suggest that you *do* read the ACT that can be found in the links I gave, as opposed to your supposition, the ACT can not legally be limited by *any* agreement no matter what sort of contract. I suggest that if you are in this situation then instead of hypothesising you should contact the Department immediately as the ACT and requirements are quite clear.

[IanW99]

Erm ... This is the RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES ACT 1986 !!

I suggest that you *do* read the ACT that can be found in the links I gave, as opposed to your supposition, the ACT can not legally be limited by *any* agreement no matter what sort of contract. I suggest that if you are in this situation then instead of hypothesising you should contact the Department immediately as the ACT and requirements are quite clear.

There are some exceptions to the act but for the most part the landlord must comply with it.

Except as otherwise provided in this Part of this Act, this Act
shall apply to every tenancy for residential purposes.

I've never known any landlord not follow the RTA (but to be fair, my experience is very limited) and as said by BigRod, if anyone knows that a landlord isn't following it then they should be reported immediately - this act is to benefit both parties.

Ian

[bobo]

Show me where it's by law a landlord has to rent a flat based on the Residential Tenancies Act?

BQ

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1986/0120/latest/DLM94899.html

[dilanium]

If you're afraid of your landlord keeping the bond go through and take pictures and video of everything before moving in and after moving out, that way you can show what your place looked like before and after to help back up your word.

[BkyMonster]

We certainly filled out paperwork for our bond and within a few weeks had gotten a receipt from the Dept of B&H for the amount.
A typical letting fee seems to be equivalent to one weeks rent. At least when we were looking that seemed the standard, and that is what we ended up paying.
We had the option of filling out a property damage checklist, but when I questioned a few things the landlord stated that they weren't broken, that's just they way they were... I settled for taking pictures instead, which I may come to regret, but oh well. This house is really...interesting to say the least. Had to take what we could get on short notice with 2 dogs.

[bobo]

We had the option of filling out a property damage checklist, but when I questioned a few things the landlord stated that they weren't broken, that's just they way they were... I settled for taking pictures instead, which I may come to regret, but oh well. This house is really...interesting to say the least. Had to take what we could get on short notice with 2 dogs.

Do you have a copy of the checklist signed and dated by the landlord, as this would be better than pictures as they could have been taken at anytime.

[BkyMonster]

Do you have a copy of the checklist signed and dated by the landlord, as this would be better than pictures as they could have been taken at anytime.
of course.
I've had some incredibly bad experiences with landlords in the US, so it isn't as if renting and all the fun that can go with it is new. Property laws aren't actually that different.

[Familyofmonkeys]

Well we've lived in four different places so far, and even the landlady we eventually had problems with still lodged the bond.....and when it came to disputing deductions she wanted to make from our bond before returning it, the Dept of buildings and housing were very helpful with the advice so after much wrangling she eventually coughed up the money she had wrongly witheld.

You cannot be charged more than 'reasonable market rate' for any repairs or damage you may have caused and remember you are not liable for fair wear and tear. For example if an already old worn carpet develops a hole you are not liable, but you much inform land lord straight away....in fact they are required to maintain the property anyway so if they resist you can legally get such things fixed by issuing them with a notice (forms are availble to print off Dept Building & Housing website).

Also make sure you are actually present for the final check out inspection so that both you and landlord sign the check-out inventory.....that way you cannot suddenly be charged for something later on. If there are any issues you don't agree on, make sure these issues are put in writing, take photos and get signed so that it is more straightforward to get resolved with arbitration service.