Department of Communities, Housing and Homelessness Services v Kairouz

[2010] QCAT 355

CITATION: Department of Communities, Housing and Homelessness Services v Kairouz [2010] QCAT 355

PARTIES:	State of Queensland – Dept of Communities Housing and homelessness services
v
Ms Noelle Kairouz

APPLICATION NUMBER:   1768/10

MATTER TYPE: Residential tenancy matters

HEARING DATE:     13 July 2010

HEARD AT:  Brisbane

DECISION OF: Bill Lemass - Adjudicator

DELIVERED ON: 13 July 2010

DELIVERED AT:      Brisbane

ORDERS MADE: The matter is to be adjourned for a period of 30 days.

CATCHWORDS :  Tenancy, termination, warrant for possession, homelessness, children

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	Ms Greg & Ms Johns
RESPONDENT:	In Person

REASONS FOR DECISION

1. The applicant, the State Department of Communities, Housing and Homelessness Services applies for the termination of a tenancy and, issue of a warrant of possession of the property situated 213B Station Road, Sunnybank, presently occupied by the respondent Noelle Kairouz.

1. The facts said to support the application are a breach of terms of the lease namely, failure to maintain the property as the respondent’s principle place of residence.

1. The particular clause of the lease was not available at the first hearing.

1. The applicant relies on the following evidence–

   §  I recent times the applicant has attended the premises on at least six unscheduled visits and on each occasion the respondent was not present.

   §  The applicant has provided statutory declarations by the neighbours whose evidence is that the respondent is rarely there and she does not collect her mail.  I accept this evidence.

   §  That the Department has evidence of the Respondent living elsewhere and the “central” branch of the Department in fact requires her sign a new lease for those premises. If this is the case and she moves to the new premises a termination order is not necessary.

2. The Respondent opposes the application and says –

   §  She lives in the premises, paying $80 per week upon a supported basis for herself and her young daughter

   §  Her daughter suffers from asthma, has been hospitalised on a number of occasions and this explains some of her absences.

   §  She regularly stays with her boyfriend on week-ends.

   §  She forgets to collect her mail.

   §  Her boyfriend will not allow her to move into the property.

   §  In the event that an order is made she and her daughter will be homeless.

3. the case presented by the applicant certainly raises serious concerns as to as to whether or not the respondent is residing in the premises on a full time basis. However today I am prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt.

1. I also have grave concerns that she appears to have little insight into her circumstances and her obligations under the lease arrangement with the applicant. I am satisfied that if a termination order is made she may well be homeless as a result of an order.

1. The making of this order requested by the Applicant pursuant to both the Residential Tenancies & Rooming Accommodation Act 2008 and also the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 is discretionary.

1. See RTRA section 337(2) “may make an order” and sub section 3 the Tribunal may consider “any other issues it considers appropriate”.

10. Further section 13 Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 “must make orders that it considers fair and equitable to the parties to the proceeding”.

11. In this matter the very real prospect of the respondent, as a single mother with an ill child, becoming homeless which is a relevant consideration when exercising the discretion.

12. On the other hand, the Applicant is the State of Queensland which provides public housing for those in need. Clearly the respondent fall within this category. I also take into account the potential future burden that this respondent would be on other state and charitable agencies when considering what is proper and equitable between these parties.

13. I have therefore come to the conclusion that the application should be  adjourned for a period of 30 days. During this time it is hoped that the respondent will gain some appreciation of and insight into her circumstances and comply with the terms of her lease with the applicant. Should she do so this application may not have to proceed on the adjourned date.

14.  However should the hearing continue I will direct that:

§  The applicant provide direct evidence from the central agency of the Department to the effect that this respondent is approved to reside at other premises as has been indicated by the Department in this matter.

§  The applicant provide evidence and if possible, attendance by personnel, showing that this respondent has been introduced by the Applicant to relevant social work and homeless support services and they  advise what steps have been made and have been put in place to ensure the respondent is not rendered homeless as a result of a termination order being made.