Cruel rental scam hoodwinks tenants out of thousands of dollars

A couple who lost thousands of dollars in an “elaborate rental scam” online have been unable to get their money back through a tribunal.

They applied for a property on a classifieds site, dealing with a property manager who they later discovered was not real, and sought a legal route to get their cash back.

The fake agent, who gave the name of Harry Smith, hoodwinked the pair of hopeful tenants, who paid $NZ2750 (about $AU2500) in bond and the first month’s rent to secure the home.

The New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal heard they inspected the house, which they saw on the NZ-based TradeMe marketplace, and communicated with Smith through Facebook Messenger. The day after seeing the listing online they toured the address. The wife looked through it in person, with her husband on a video call.

They were shown around by a legitimate real estate agent – not Smith – and they did not find it unusual that Smith was not present, the tribunal was told.

They signed a tenancy agreement, which already had the signature of LM Tutty provided as the landlord. They transferred the rent and bond into an account in Tutty’s name but were told that the amount had not come through into the bank account.

The ruse continued over Messenger with Smith creating delays that stopped them from moving in. During this time Tutty – communicating with the would-be tenants over Gmail – continued to request the pair pay another $2750. He blamed the stalling on his wife’s illness.

When they raised concerns with Smith, he blocked them, and they stopped receiving communication from Tutty.

They reached out to the agent who took them through the property, who revealed she was a real agent who had never heard of Smith, told them she had leased the property to someone else, and had no idea the couple thought she was associated with the person they were speaking to on Messenger.

The adjudicator Melissa Allan said in her published decision: “Sadly it appears that the applicants have been the victim of an elaborate rental scam.”

She ruled that because their payment was not for a real tenancy, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to award compensation, and encouraged the couple to go to the police.

“Although the applicants have signed a ‘tenancy agreement’ for the property they viewed, the purported landlord had no association whatsoever with the property and no right or authority to grant a tenancy. No tenancy ever existed despite the applicants having signed a purported tenancy agreement.

“The applicants may wish to refer this matter to the New Zealand Police. From the evidence before me it appears that they paid funds into a New Zealand bank account and were provided with details to make payment to a further account.”

Names and addresses were suppressed by the tribunal. Allan made the decision available online because it was a matter public interest, she said.