What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5131552?

The tribunal order states: Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu owes South United Limited $2,353.43 (“the debt”)

How much money was awarded in case 5131552?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,356.43 awarded to landlord; Rent Owed 2 - 15 April 2025: $970.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5131552?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5131552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11659157-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5131552?

The tribunal order states: Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu owes South United Limited $2,353.43 (“the debt”)

How much money was awarded in case 5131552?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,356.43 awarded to landlord; Rent Owed 2 - 15 April 2025: $970.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5131552?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5131552?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11659157-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

32A Sharland Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5131552 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5131552 — net $2,353.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 1 April 2025	$1,356.43	Rent arrears to 1 April 2025
Rent owed 2 - 15 April 2025	$970.00	Rent owed 2 - 15 April 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,353.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,353.43

Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu owes South United Limited $2,353.43 (“the debt”) as set out in the table:

Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu has until Tuesday 15 April 2025 to pay the debt in full.

Any payments made between now and 15 April 2025 will be allocated in the following order: current rent, rent arrears, and the filing fee.

If the tenant fails to pay the debt, not including the filing fee, within 2 working days of the due date: a. The tenancy at 32A Sharland Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises. b. The balance of the debt will be payable immediately.

If the tenant fails to pay the filing fee within 2 working days of the due date, the filing fee will be payable immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant was properly notified but she did not answer the calls made to her phone.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond. The tenant is 20 days in arrears and also owes water rates. The landlord wants to give the tenant two weeks to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable – very unfair - to refuse to terminate.

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The tenant breached her obligations by not paying rent on time and not paying rent a week in advance. On 11 December 2024 the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant but the breach was not remedied within the required period.

In Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229, the District Court considered s 56(1)(c) RTA and set out a range of factors relevant to whether it would be “inequitable to refuse” to terminate the tenancy: • The history of the tenancy. • Whether there had been a persistent failure after repeated warnings. • Whether the history of breaches is such that it is unlikely the tenant would comply with their obligations in the future. • Whether the breach was inadvertent or deliberately committed. • The conduct of the landlord. • The gravity of the breach. • Whether termination is a proportionate response to the breach.

The tenancy started in 2019. The tenant was in credit for most of the tenancy. However, she has been behind in the rent since May 2024. After the 14 day notice was served the tenant missed another two weeks of rent and has not remedied the breach. She is currently 20 days behind. She also owes around $700 in water rates arrears, although that is not part of the application today.

It seems most likely to me there has been a persistent failure to pay rent on time over the past 11 months. The tenant did not take part in the hearing, so I do not know if there has been a genuine reason for the arrears.

It seems from the application that the landlord has acted appropriately in managing the breach, by chasing the tenant, serving a 14 day notice, and filing an application. The landlord submitted that ending the tenancy would be a proportionate response because they have tried every other means of managing the rent arrears. I find it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.

Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, I have heard evidence that the tenant has one option left for getting a lump sum of money, and she may be able to pay all the money owed by 15 April 2025. The landlord has asked that the tenancy terminate in two weeks time if the tenant cannot pay the money owed by then. I am persuaded by this submission and I have granted a conditional termination. See section 78(3) RTA.

The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) RTA.

Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5131552 — net $2,353.43 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 1 April 2025	$1,356.43	Rent arrears to 1 April 2025
Rent owed 2 - 15 April 2025	$970.00	Rent owed 2 - 15 April 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,353.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,353.43

Order

Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu owes South United Limited $2,353.43 (“the debt”) as set out in the table:
Peatalita Dee Rose Luausu has until Tuesday 15 April 2025 to pay the debt in full.
Any payments made between now and 15 April 2025 will be allocated in the following order: current rent, rent arrears, and the filing fee.
If the tenant fails to pay the debt, not including the filing fee, within 2 working days of the due date: a. The tenancy at 32A Sharland Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102 will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises. b. The balance of the debt will be payable immediately.
If the tenant fails to pay the filing fee within 2 working days of the due date, the filing fee will be payable immediately.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant was properly notified but she did not answer the calls made to her phone.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond. The tenant is 20 days in arrears and also owes water rates. The landlord wants to give the tenant two weeks to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable – very unfair - to refuse to terminate.
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant breached her obligations by not paying rent on time and not paying rent a week in advance. On 11 December 2024 the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant but the breach was not remedied within the required period.
In Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229, the District Court considered s 56(1)(c) RTA and set out a range of factors relevant to whether it would be “inequitable to refuse” to terminate the tenancy: • The history of the tenancy. • Whether there had been a persistent failure after repeated warnings. • Whether the history of breaches is such that it is unlikely the tenant would comply with their obligations in the future. • Whether the breach was inadvertent or deliberately committed. • The conduct of the landlord. • The gravity of the breach. • Whether termination is a proportionate response to the breach.
The tenancy started in 2019. The tenant was in credit for most of the tenancy. However, she has been behind in the rent since May 2024. After the 14 day notice was served the tenant missed another two weeks of rent and has not remedied the breach. She is currently 20 days behind. She also owes around $700 in water rates arrears, although that is not part of the application today.
It seems most likely to me there has been a persistent failure to pay rent on time over the past 11 months. The tenant did not take part in the hearing, so I do not know if there has been a genuine reason for the arrears.
It seems from the application that the landlord has acted appropriately in managing the breach, by chasing the tenant, serving a 14 day notice, and filing an application. The landlord submitted that ending the tenancy would be a proportionate response because they have tried every other means of managing the rent arrears. I find it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy.
Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, I have heard evidence that the tenant has one option left for getting a lump sum of money, and she may be able to pay all the money owed by 15 April 2025. The landlord has asked that the tenancy terminate in two weeks time if the tenant cannot pay the money owed by then. I am persuaded by this submission and I have granted a conditional termination. See section 78(3) RTA.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) RTA.
Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5131552 — Rent arrears at 32A Sharland Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5131552 — Rent arrears at 32A Sharland Avenue, Manurewa, Auckland 2102

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions