What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5089591 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5089591?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5089591?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5089591?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11196424-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5089591 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5089591?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5089591?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5089591?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11196424-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

252B Talbot Street, Geraldine, Geraldine 7930 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5089591 — Tenancy dispute

Order

The tenant’s application is dismissed.
The landlord’s name and details are suppressed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 11 July 2025.
By signing a fixed term tenancy, the tenant accepted liability for rent for a year. A tenant cannot unilaterally end a fixed term tenancy. The tenant requires the consent of the landlord, or an order of the Tribunal to reduce a fixed term tenancy.
The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) RTA.
It is the tenant’s responsibility to prove her claim on the balance of probabilities and to provide the Tribunal with evidence of her claim. It is not for the Tribunal to extract evidence from an applicant.
The tenant gave verbal evidence that both tenants had been effectively dismissed from their jobs. She provided no further information and would not give specific details despite being asked three times. She explained that she was on a benefit and that her partner was neither on a benefit nor working.
The landlord gave evidence that she learned of the tenant’s change of plans when another property manager telephoned her regarding another property which the tenant wished to rent in another locality. The landlord contacted the tenant and advised her that as she was in a fixed term tenancy, she would be liable for rent until a new tenancy started, together with the landlord’s reasonable costs.
The landlord advised that the tenant then sent her an email on 27 November 2024 informing the landlord that they would be vacating the property on 9 December 2024.
The tenant confirmed at the hearing that she had vacated the property. The landlord advised that no keys had been returned and that she had not been advised that the tenant had vacated. Decision
The Tribunal is not satisfied on the balance of probabilities on the evidence before it that there has been an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances. The tenant has failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding the termination of the tenants’ employment for the Tribunal to determine if it was unforeseen. Redundancy or redeployment in another centre may be unforeseen as they occur for reasons beyond the tenant’s control. Resignation or dismissal are not: they are events brought about by the tenant’s intentional actions.
As the tenant has not proven that the change of circumstances was unforeseen, it is unnecessary to consider whether the tenant’s hardship she would suffer is greater than the hardship the landlord may suffer if the fixed term were broken.
The tenant should return the keys to the landlord and authorise her to have access to the property so that the landlord can find a new tenant and so limit the tenant’s liability under the fixed term tenancy agreement.
As the tenant has not been successful in her application, it is appropriate that the landlord’s name be suppressed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.

The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 11 July 2025.

By signing a fixed term tenancy, the tenant accepted liability for rent for a year. A tenant cannot unilaterally end a fixed term tenancy. The tenant requires the consent of the landlord, or an order of the Tribunal to reduce a fixed term tenancy.

The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) RTA.

It is the tenant’s responsibility to prove her claim on the balance of probabilities and to provide the Tribunal with evidence of her claim. It is not for the Tribunal to extract evidence from an applicant.

The tenant gave verbal evidence that both tenants had been effectively dismissed from their jobs. She provided no further information and would not give specific details despite being asked three times. She explained that she was on a benefit and that her partner was neither on a benefit nor working.

The landlord gave evidence that she learned of the tenant’s change of plans when another property manager telephoned her regarding another property which the tenant wished to rent in another locality. The landlord contacted the tenant and advised her that as she was in a fixed term tenancy, she would be liable for rent until a new tenancy started, together with the landlord’s reasonable costs.

The landlord advised that the tenant then sent her an email on 27 November 2024 informing the landlord that they would be vacating the property on 9 December 2024.

The tenant confirmed at the hearing that she had vacated the property. The landlord advised that no keys had been returned and that she had not been advised that the tenant had vacated. Decision

The Tribunal is not satisfied on the balance of probabilities on the evidence before it that there has been an unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances. The tenant has failed to provide sufficient evidence regarding the termination of the tenants’ employment for the Tribunal to determine if it was unforeseen. Redundancy or redeployment in another centre may be unforeseen as they occur for reasons beyond the tenant’s control. Resignation or dismissal are not: they are events brought about by the tenant’s intentional actions.

As the tenant has not proven that the change of circumstances was unforeseen, it is unnecessary to consider whether the tenant’s hardship she would suffer is greater than the hardship the landlord may suffer if the fixed term were broken.

The tenant should return the keys to the landlord and authorise her to have access to the property so that the landlord can find a new tenant and so limit the tenant’s liability under the fixed term tenancy agreement.

As the tenant has not been successful in her application, it is appropriate that the landlord’s name be suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5089591 — Tenancy dispute at 252B Talbot Street, Geraldine, Geraldine 7930

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5089591 — Tenancy dispute at 252B Talbot Street, Geraldine, Geraldine 7930

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions