Though well-intentioned, the Greens’ open letter to the Prime Minister fails to offer real solutions. Instead, it risks deepening divisions within the rental sector and keeping tenants in a perpetual state of disempowerment.
The timing is no coincidence. Hearings are underway at the Social Services and Community Select Committee on the Residential Tenancies Amendment Bill. The bill introduces measures to increase tenant access to private rental supply, with the most controversial policy being the restoration of the 90-day no-fault termination (colloquially mischaracterised as the ‘no-cause eviction).
The Green Party’s proposals show a lack of understanding of the current tenancy laws and mechanisms already in place to protect tenants. For instance, Section 54 of the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) provides significant protections for tenants against retaliatory termination. This powerful tool enables tenants to challenge and overturn any termination notice given in bad faith. It’s surprising that such an essential safeguard is ignored in the Green Party’s narrative.
Sarina Gibbon, APIA’s general manager, says, “It is baffling that landlord groups are the only ones talking about Section 54 when it literally is a tenant’s trump card against bad faith landlords. I, for one, would love to work with the Green Party to bring better awareness and utility of Section 54 to renters.”
Related Item: APIA Press Release – Greens’ Open Letter Offers No Real Solutions
The Green Party’s letter also overlooks existing regulations that address many of their concerns:
- Limiting Rent Increases: The Residential Tenancies Act already restricts rent increases to once a year and caps them at market rate. Rather than rehashing this issue, the focus should be on increasing the supply of private rental housing. This is a real solution to rental affordability.
- Rental Warrant of Fitness: Proposing a new building quality scheme is premature, given that the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) compliance date has not yet passed. Strengthening HHS compliance oversight and improving tenant education on filing complaints with the Tenancy Compliance and Investigations Team would be more practical.
- Landlord Register: We already have a landlord register through the Bond database. While APIA is open to exploring better utilisation of this database, the Green Party has not clearly articulated their goals for it. Simply having a register does not make someone a good or bad landlord. Enhancing landlord accountability requires strengthening the RTA with meaningful sanctions against bad actors and supporting the NZPIF’s RentSkills programme and property manager regulation.
- Scrapping No-Fault Termination: No-fault termination is essential for giving landlords the confidence to rent to strangers. Removing this provision without understanding its purpose and the protections already in place, such as Section 54, is misguided. Restoring the 90-day no-fault termination provision, combined with better tenant education on Section 54, would provide greater security and access to housing for tenants.
APIA remains committed to advocating for sensible and effective legislation that benefits all stakeholders in the rental market. We believe in practical solutions that address the root issues without resorting to feel-good policies that fail to make a real impact. We urge the Green Party and other stakeholders to collaborate with us to promote a balanced, fair, and thriving rental market for both tenants and landlords.
I disagree with your comment about the limitation of rent increases. Most landlords will generally go over the market rent amount which further causes the market rent data to keep going up every 3 – 6 months. Alot of landlords also do not adjust their market rent amount to suit the standard of the property they are renting. Rentals brand new go for the top market rent as do the older homes that have had a lick of paint over it.
As for a rental WOF, proposing such a scheme will ensure that landlords are adhering not only to the RTA, but to all the other Acts that pertain to residential properties. The Health Act, the Housing Improvement Regulations Act, the Building Act and the Building code. Lets not forget that not only are their undesirable tenants, their are the same amount of landlords that this scheme will help to keep tenants health and safety safe.
You state that simply by having a landlord register does not make someone a good or bad landlord. Why is this such a bigger deal then when it comes to the landlord having access to registers for tenant’s? illion tenancy for a start has one such register and encourages landlords to file tenants names on it, good and bad.
You also state that it is essential to bring back in the 90 day no fault termanations to give landlords the confidence to rent to strangers? What does that have to do when it comes time to get rid of them after being offered the rental? It has nothing to do with accepting tenants, and isnt every tenant a stranger to a landlord? And to be fair, even with it being in, landlords have still been able to find loop holes to get rid of tenants that they don’t want to have to deal with like any other business would with a so called troublesome or demanding customer. And generally this is to do with tenants that are expecting the service and goods they pay for to be worth what the amount they pay, but some landlords prefer to ignore tenants instead and get rid of them hoping to end up with tenants who are too afraid to speak up incase of being kicked out because they have asked for repairs and should just be happy to have a roof over their heads.
The only thing I do agree with is having better tenant education on standing up for their rights and to not let landlords have total control over the homes they pay money to live in and the security of being able to live in a healthy and safe environment.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful comments. There will always be marginal and exceptional cases of bad actors on both sides of the rental equation. Let’s keep the discussion productive by focusing on the customary practices of generally good landlords and generally good tenants.
On your point about market rent. There is no empirical evidence of landlords ‘generally going over the market rent’. Rent is a function of supply and demand. Whether it trends up or down is the market’s way of manifesting that imbalance. Remember, market rent is what a willing landlord will let a property out for AND what a willing tenant will pay for that property. Your discontentment over affordability can only be solved if there are more supplies in the market that will give tenants the choice to say no to substandard properties. And the exercise of that choice, that power, will drive the prices of those substandard properties down.
As to your point about landlords’ obligation to comply with all other Acts, there is already a provision under the RTA requiring them to do so. See section 45(1)(c). We are not against legislation; we are only against excessive legislation that increases compliance costs without improving tenant outcomes.
On your point about registers. There is no such thing as a tenant register. Credit agencies such as Illion hold credit information on EVERYONE. The files can only be called up if a landlord has secured a tenant applicant’s permission to access them. To suggest that there is a database of all tenants where any landlord can get unfettered access is a falsehood. In any event, proponents of a landlord register have yet to make the case for what that data will be used for. At the moment, calls for a landlord register come across as wanting a register for the sake of a register. Happy to revisit if a credible use case is made.
Yes, just about every tenant is a stranger to the landlord. That’s why it is so critical to bring back the 90-day no fault termination provision because it is the safety net landlords need to give exclusive possession of their property to a perfect stranger. We sure as hell don’t want to use it, but it is the peace of mind we need to give tenants (especially those without a perfect rental/credit record) a chance at having a stable home. Think of it this way: you don’t buy car insurance so that you can purposely get into a car crash. We are just asking for the same assurance.
Tenants should absolutely continue to speak up and go toe to toe against bad acting landlords. Section 54 of the RTA protects tenants’ right to complain and hold landlords to account without fear of losing their homes. The fact that we are the only organisation that consistently talks about s54 publically to landlords and tenant groups is a travesty. There should be more awareness of how s54 functions to protect tenants and deter landlords. Feel free to reach out to us if you would like access to our training materials.
Happy we agree on better tenant education. We are always looking for ways to work with tenant groups. Let us know if you can help. You can reach us at [email protected].
Cheers!