Support secure and stable homes

What is a “submission”?

The Social Affairs Select Committee is considering the law change and wants to hear what the public thinks of it. A submission is a written statement about what you think of the proposed law.

Once they've read and heard all the submissions they can recommend back to parliament whether it should be passed, as well as any changes that could be made to improve it.

Most submissions are made through a form on the NZ Parliament website. You can also request to make an oral submission, usually in person but sometimes via video- or tele-conference. If you are up for telling your story in person an oral submission is a good idea as they can have a lot more impact on the members of the committee.

What should I say?

You do not need to have a detailed understanding of the specific changes proposed, what is most important is that the Committee hears about your experiences and how the law change will make renter's lives better.

After asking for your contact details, the online form asks two questions:

I/we wish to make the following comments ↓
I/we wish to make the following recommendations ↓

Suggestions for “I/we wish to make the following comments”

We recommend you use this space to share your experiences and to make a general statement of support for the law change.

It is particularly relevant to mention experiences you've had of having to move, struggling to make your house a home or not being able to stike up for your rights. For example:

When you have been forced to move due to the landlord ending your tenancy, selling the house, raising the rent above what you could afford or for any other reason outside your control.
When you've wanted to improve your home in some way but not been able to.
How having to move has disrupted your and/or your family's lives.

Here is an example of a general statement you can make in support of the change:

I support the Bill.

A secure and stable home is essential for wellbeing. Renters should be able to make a rented property a home. It’s time to change the perception of renters as visitors in their communities who can never put down roots. Introducing security of tenure will reduce transience, strengthen community engagement, improve educational outcomes and give renters the protection they need to raise the quality of their homes and the housing stock in general.

Suggestions for “I/we wish to make the following recommendations”

We suggest you use this space to highlight any ways you'd like to see the law change improved. Read a summary of the changes being made, and why, on the NZ legislation website ⤴.

Renters United have compiled a number of recommendations to address issues with the Bill that you may want to include in your submission:

Fixed-term tenancies to continue as periodic tenancies: It is very important that the tenant has the option to continue a fixed-term tenancy when the term ends. But a landlord could force tenants to move out at the end of the fixed-term by significantly raising the rent. There needs to be controls to protect tenants. For example, a landlord should not be able to increase rent beyond inflation based on the consumer price index for the preceding 12 months.

Grounds for terminating a periodic tenancy: The proposed grounds on which a landlord can terminate a periodic tenancy are too wide. They could be exploited by landlords. Grounds for termination should be limited to those within the tenant’s power to address, such as non-payment of rent and damage to the property. All termination periods should be 90 days to give tenants the opportunities to find alternative accommodation.

Rent bidding: As people applying for tenancies will still be able to offer to pay higher rent, the Bill will not effectively deal with the exploitative practice of rent bidding. There should be a complete prohibition on landlords accepting any higher rent than the amount advertised.

Suppression orders: The Bill says a tenant can apply to have their information anonymised in Tenancy Tribunal decisions. Many tenants will be unaware they must apply or may lack knowledge or ability to apply. The better approach is to require the Tribunal to anonymise decisions automatically.

Termination for antisocial behaviour: Other laws are in place to deal with antisocial behaviour. It is unnecessary and harsh to give landlords the power to punish tenants for alleged antisocial behaviour. It is also unfair that tenants are the only people in society who can lose their homes for allegedly antisocial behaviour. Property owners don’t face this insecurity.

Penalties and infringement fees: If the Chief Executive seeks exemplary damages, pecuniary penalties or infringement fees against a landlord, tenants are prevented from seeking exemplary damages. This is confiscates tenants’ rights to a remedy when they’re the ones who are actually harmed. The better approach is for the Chief Execut to pass on any damages or penalties they receive to tenants who have been harmed by the wrongdoing.

Amount of exemplary damages: The Bill proposes to increase the maximum amount of exemplary damages the Tenancy Tribunal can award. However, the Tribunal will never, except in the most extreme cases, award the maximum amount. In reality, the amounts the Tribunal is likely to award do not provide meaningful deterrents, nor adequate remedies for tenants.