Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5155340 — Rent arrears
Decided 1 Aug 2025 · Published 1 Aug 2025 · Application 5155340
- Rent arrears
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of both the Landlord and Tenants’ names and identifying details.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,000.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as set out in the table below:
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by [Property Manager], who appeared with [assistant]. [Tenant 1] confirmed that he had authority to represent [Tenant 2].
- Both parties have filed claims in the Tribunal.
- The tenancy began on 2 November 2024 and was for a fixed term ending on 1 November 2025.
- The tenants seek orders as follows: a. Release from the fixed term tenancy b. Refund of their bond c. Compensation for wastewater charges during the tenancy together with rent in the amount of $1500 being rent for the period 10 to 31 January 2025 d. Exemplary damages for the following breaches by the landlord: i. Requiring payment of a letting fee ii. Failing to take steps to release them from the fixed term, not assisting them during difficult circumstances, and serving them with a 14 day rent arrears notice
- The landlord seeks orders as follows: a. Rent from 7 – 14 February 2025 b. Expenses incurred by the landlord in releasing the tenant from the fixed term The fixed term tenancy – tenants and landlord’s claims relating to the end of the tenancy
- [Tenant 1] says that he unexpectedly lost his job on 12 December 2024. He said that the situation was very stressful and that his partner moved out and he was having difficulty paying the rent and meeting his basic expenses.
- [Tenant 1] says that he contacted the landlord on 27 December 2024 to tell them of his position but that the landlord did not take any steps to release him from the fixed term tenancy. He said that he contacted Tenancy Services and was told that he could apply to the Tribunal to be released from the fixed term, but that it might take 4 – 6 weeks before a hearing would be held, and so he decided not to proceed.
- On 25 January 2025 [Tenant 1] contacted the landlord again and asked the landlord to agree to terminate the fixed term tenancy early.
- On 27 January 2025 the landlord responded by offering to release the tenants from the fixed term on the basis of an attached agreement, described as a “Letting authority to early terminate fixed term tenancy” (Agreement). The Agreement provided that the landlord would advertise for new tenants, that the tenants would remain liable for rent until the day before new tenants move in, and the tenants would pay the costs incurred by the landlord in finding new tenants.
- [Tenant 1] signed the Agreement and returned it to the landlord on 28 January 2025. He then moved out on 31 January 2025 but returned the key to the landlord (at their request) on 14 February 2025.
- The landlord said that they advertised for new tenants as soon as they received the signed Agreement back from [Tenant 1]. They said that they secured tenants as soon as possible and that those tenants moved in on 15 February 2025. They therefore asked [Tenant 1] to return the key on 14 February 2025.
- The landlord produced a rent summary showing rent arrears owing in the amount of $500 for the period 8 – 14 February 2025 1 . The landlord claims this sum by way of rent arrears.
- The tenants do not agree that they are liable for rent until the new tenants moved in. They say that the landlord should have taken urgent and immediate steps when [Tenant 1] first contacted them on 27 December 2025. [Tenant 1] said that he effectively gave 14 days notice on that date and so should be funded $1500 in rent paid after the expiry of that notice.
- Section 66 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 sets out the basis on which the Tribunal may reduce the term of a fixed term tenancy.
- There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances b. the change was unforeseen c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced. 1 The landlord had initially applied for rent arrears of $1,000 but had in fact applied $500 that the tenant paid to rent towards expenses. At the hearing they agreed that the sum paid for rent should be applied to rent, and this reduced the amount claimed for rent by $500.00 – but increased the sum claimed for expenses
- Section 66(2) provides that, if the Tribunal reduces the term of the tenancy, it may order the applicant to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for any loss or damage which results from the reduction of the term.
- However in this case the Tribunal does not need to consider whether to reduce the fixed term as the parties have already reached an agreement and are bound by the terms of that agreement. The tenants have moved out and new tenants have been found.
- The tenants agreed to pay rent until new tenants moved in. Although [Tenant 1] purported to give 14 days’ notice, that notice was ineffective as a fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice.
- The landlord is entitled to rely on the terms of the Agreement and is entitled to the final week of rent payable before new tenants moved in. The amount of compensation for rent arrears is $500. The tenants are not entitled to a refund of rent paid.
- The landlord also seeks to claim the expenses incurred in finding new tenants.
- The landlord provided an itemised list of expenses including a Letting Fee (586.60), Credit check x2 ($34.22), Advertising ($136.85). The landlord claims this sum after deducting the sum of $80.69 which was incorrectly charged to the tenants for wastewater fixed charges.
- Section 44A RTA provides that where a landlord agrees to terminate a tenancy early, they may claim any expenses reasonably incurred but must first provide an itemised account of the expenses to the tenant.
- The Tribunal takes no issue with the credit checks and advertising claimed by the landlord. However it does not appear that the letting fee is “an expense reasonably incurred”. There are a series of decisions in the tribunal where it has been held that where any expense claimed is a letting fee (which is prohibited under section 17A RTA) the claim must be dismissed, as it cannot be an expense reasonably incurred 2 .
- At the hearing the landlord said that the letting fee in fact represents their time showing the property to new tenants and travel. However the invoice gives no indication that this is the case. Landlords may well be entitled to claim such expenses from tenants but if they wish to do so they must itemise those expenses in accordance with section 44A RTA so that the tenant is able to review and understand the expenses that the landlord has incurred.
- In the circumstances I award the landlord the cost of the credit checks and advertising, less the wastewater fixed charges that are to be reimbursed to the tenant. I do not award the Letting fee. The amount awarded is therefore $90.38. 2 See for example Mill VIP Limited v Clark [2019] NZTT 4208849, 4210012 Additional tenant claims
- [The tenant/s]
- The tenants have also sought exemplary damages on the basis that the landlord charged a letting fee in breach of section 17A RTA and because they do not feel that the landlord acting in a compassionate way given their personal circumstances.
- As advised at the hearing, the landlord did not attempt to charge the tenant a letting fee for this tenancy in breach of section 17A RTA. Section 17A contemplates the landlord charging a letting fee to the tenant for entering into the tenancy. This is not what has happened here. Although the landlord referred to a letting fee in their list of expenses claimed at the end of the tenancy, this was really just a “catch-all” description for costs incurred in obtaining new tenants. I have already disallowed this claimed expense. Landlord’s behaviour
- A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
- Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
- [Tenant 1] explained that he was upset by the landlord’s behaviour. He said that [Property Manager] could see how difficult his circumstances were but did not assist him in ending the tenancy early, was frequently not available, and served him with a 14 day notice for rent arrears.
- [Property Manager] said that the landlord has obligations to the owner and that the owner did not want to release the tenants from the fixed term. He said that much of the communication took place over the Christmas period, that he responded appropriately, and that the landlord ultimately agreed to end the fixed term and quickly found new tenants.
- Having considered all the evidence I do not consider that there is any basis for the tenants’ claims. I can appreciate how stressful and difficult the situation must have been for [Tenant 1] but I do not consider that the landlord has failed in their obligations in any way. Filing fee and name suppression
- The landlord has been successful in their claim for rent arrears. The tenants have successfully challenged the landlord’s claimed expenses to a large degree. Both parties have had some success and I so I have not reimbursed either of the filing fees paid.
- As both parties have had some success, and both parties sought an order for name suppression, I have suppressed both parties names and identifying details pursuant to section 95A RTA.