What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5046309 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 5046309?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $14,900.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5046309?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5046309?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11651568-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5046309 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 5046309?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $14,900.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5046309?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5046309?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11651568-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

270 Milton Street, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5046309 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5046309 — net $14,927.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$14,900.00	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$14,927.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,927.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name.
Geoffrey Alan Thomas must pay [The landlord/s] $14,927.00 immediately, being rent arrears of $14,900 and the filing fee of $27.00

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing with [redacted] representing, as per the previous hearing.
The hearing on 28 January 2025 was adjourned for further service on the tenant. That order gave specific service instructions. These instructions were followed but no contact from the tenant has been made. The telephone number provided is not responding to calls today.
I consider effective service had now completed and I proceeded with the hearing.
The tenancy ended 1 July 2024. At that date the rent arrears totalled $21,500.00. The landlord sought an order for that amount.
The landlord provided a rent summary that established the rent arrears. This is accepted but I needed to consider mitigation of loss. Failure to mitigate loss
In Huang v Ashworth [2024] NZDC 15726 the District Court confirmed there is a duty to mitigate for rent arrears (see section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The Court confirmed the test of what the landlord ought to do to mitigate its loss is a factual one and depends on: a. Whether the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate its loss; and b. More particularly, whether it acted reasonably having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
In Huang v Ashworth the Court reduced the rent arrears by a third to take into account a failure to mitigate loss.
In Ho v Tenant [2024] NZTT 4875311, 27 August 2024, a recent decision in the Tribunal, the Adjudicator, in applying Huang v Ashworth capped the rent arrears payable by the tenant to 12 weeks.
At the hearing I raised my concern with [redacted] that the landlord had failed to mitigate its loss in respect of the rent arrears. This was initially forewarned in the first adjournment order. The rent summary shows a long history of significant rent arrears (since 2021 and increasing since). [Redacted] indicated there had been verbal communication in respect to rent arrears but nothing in writing was available until April 2024. I heard the Trustee had sympathy with the ongoing claims of the tenant regarding his financial hardship and promises were made to address the rent arrears. Rent payments improved during 2023 although some payments were still missed. The final payment of rent for this tenancy was received on 13 December 2024 (with rent arrears at that time $13,100). Even allowing for the generosity of the landlord, the ongoing and increasing rent arrears should have been addressed via an appropriate Tribunal application. As it was, the tenancy run through until 1 July 2024 after which the premises was demolished. The plan to demolish may have had a role in the extended accommodation of significant rent arrears but as the Trustee was not on the call, I was unable to confirm that. [Redacted] was unable to speak to that.
In Huang, Judge Sainsbury noted: [18] I consider...attempts to resolve the issue of rent arrears without resorting to eviction were reasonable, especially for a tenancy that had lasted close to 4 years. But I qualify that; it is reasonable only up to a point. Where a tenant repeatedly breaches promises to make up arrears and instead additional arrears are incurred there comes a point when it is being naive or careless to your own interests to persist giving the tenant more time to pay. For that reason, I do not consider that the full arrears can be claimed. In other words I am satisfied on balance of probabilities that here was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.
I consider there are parallels with that matter and this. I consider a reduction to the rent arrears due to a failure to mitigate is appropriate.
I award $14,900 as tenant liability for rent arrears, this was the rent arrears as at 31 January 2024 and reflects approximately 30% reduction in the total rent arrears. The discount aligns with that determined in Huang, but also reflects a date when I consider any prior generous accommodation should have been discarded and an appropriate application made to the Tribunal, with an appropriate order made by the end of January 2025. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, name suppression is ordered.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5046309 — net $14,927.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$14,900.00	Rent arrears
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$14,927.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,927.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Landlord name.
Geoffrey Alan Thomas must pay [The landlord/s] $14,927.00 immediately, being rent arrears of $14,900 and the filing fee of $27.00

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing with [redacted] representing, as per the previous hearing.
The hearing on 28 January 2025 was adjourned for further service on the tenant. That order gave specific service instructions. These instructions were followed but no contact from the tenant has been made. The telephone number provided is not responding to calls today.
I consider effective service had now completed and I proceeded with the hearing.
The tenancy ended 1 July 2024. At that date the rent arrears totalled $21,500.00. The landlord sought an order for that amount.
The landlord provided a rent summary that established the rent arrears. This is accepted but I needed to consider mitigation of loss. Failure to mitigate loss
In Huang v Ashworth [2024] NZDC 15726 the District Court confirmed there is a duty to mitigate for rent arrears (see section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The Court confirmed the test of what the landlord ought to do to mitigate its loss is a factual one and depends on: a. Whether the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate its loss; and b. More particularly, whether it acted reasonably having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
In Huang v Ashworth the Court reduced the rent arrears by a third to take into account a failure to mitigate loss.
In Ho v Tenant [2024] NZTT 4875311, 27 August 2024, a recent decision in the Tribunal, the Adjudicator, in applying Huang v Ashworth capped the rent arrears payable by the tenant to 12 weeks.
At the hearing I raised my concern with [redacted] that the landlord had failed to mitigate its loss in respect of the rent arrears. This was initially forewarned in the first adjournment order. The rent summary shows a long history of significant rent arrears (since 2021 and increasing since). [Redacted] indicated there had been verbal communication in respect to rent arrears but nothing in writing was available until April 2024. I heard the Trustee had sympathy with the ongoing claims of the tenant regarding his financial hardship and promises were made to address the rent arrears. Rent payments improved during 2023 although some payments were still missed. The final payment of rent for this tenancy was received on 13 December 2024 (with rent arrears at that time $13,100). Even allowing for the generosity of the landlord, the ongoing and increasing rent arrears should have been addressed via an appropriate Tribunal application. As it was, the tenancy run through until 1 July 2024 after which the premises was demolished. The plan to demolish may have had a role in the extended accommodation of significant rent arrears but as the Trustee was not on the call, I was unable to confirm that. [Redacted] was unable to speak to that.
In Huang, Judge Sainsbury noted: [18] I consider...attempts to resolve the issue of rent arrears without resorting to eviction were reasonable, especially for a tenancy that had lasted close to 4 years. But I qualify that; it is reasonable only up to a point. Where a tenant repeatedly breaches promises to make up arrears and instead additional arrears are incurred there comes a point when it is being naive or careless to your own interests to persist giving the tenant more time to pay. For that reason, I do not consider that the full arrears can be claimed. In other words I am satisfied on balance of probabilities that here was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.
I consider there are parallels with that matter and this. I consider a reduction to the rent arrears due to a failure to mitigate is appropriate.
I award $14,900 as tenant liability for rent arrears, this was the rent arrears as at 31 January 2024 and reflects approximately 30% reduction in the total rent arrears. The discount aligns with that determined in Huang, but also reflects a date when I consider any prior generous accommodation should have been discarded and an appropriate application made to the Tribunal, with an appropriate order made by the end of January 2025. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The landlord requested suppression in its application. As it has been wholly successful, name suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5046309 — Rent arrears at 270 Milton Street, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5046309 — Rent arrears at 270 Milton Street, Sydenham, Christchurch 8023

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions