Tenantcheck Insights

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 4622782 — Tenancy dispute

Decided 21 Sept 2023 · Published 21 Sept 2023 · Application 4622782

Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

New Zealand

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

K Koller

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 4622782 — Tenancy dispute

Decided 21 Sept 2023 · Published 21 Sept 2023 · Application 4622782

Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

New Zealand

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

K Koller

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant names and identifying details.
Winston Joe must pay [The tenant/s] $20.44 immediately, being reimbursement of the filing fee.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,250.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Joe asked for an adjournment but this was not allowed because the matter needs to be resolved, and Mr Joe was able to attend by telephone.
The tenants have applied for refund of their bond following the end of the tenancy.
At the hearing the landlord made a claim against the bond. However, the landlord did not file an application with Tenancy Services.
Section 22B RTA provides: (1) If there is a dispute between the parties as to the payment of a bond, either party may apply to the Tribunal for an order determining to whom the bond, or any part of it, is to be paid. (2) If the tenant applies to the Tribunal and the landlord seeks payment of the bond in whole or in part, the landlord must file an application with the Tribunal that sets out the landlord’s counterclaim.
The requirement for the landlord to file a counterclaim is mandatory. Therefore, because the landlord has not done so, the bond is refunded in full to the tenant. This does not prevent the landlord from filing a claim against the tenant at a later date. It just means that, if the landlord’s claim is successful, there is no bond to put towards any monetary award made.
Because the tenants have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenants’ application for suppression is allowed because the tenants are the most successful party.

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

NO ADDRESS

Residential Tenancies Act sections

s22B

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4622782 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4622782?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4622782?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4622782?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9372483-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.