How much money was awarded in case 5156435?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5156435?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5156435?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12428057-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5156435?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $161.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,600.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5156435?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5156435?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12428057-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

80D Woodglen Road, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5156435 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5156435 about?

The tribunal order states: Austar Property Services Limited As Agent For Nicollete And [The landlord/s] must

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5156435 — net $1,612.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 December 2024	$1,600.00		Rent arrears to 16 December 2024
Repairs	$161.00		Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond refund		$3,400.00	Bond refund
Total award	$1,788.00	$3,400.00
Net award		$1,612.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,612.00

The landlord attended the hearing. The tenant did not attend the hearing.

The landlord applied for rent arrears to 13 January 2025, water rates, wall repairs, cleaning and key replacement.

The hearing allocated for 6 June 2025 was adjourned for the landlord to provide the following evidence: (a) Communication with the tenant around the agreement to end the fixed term tenancy early; (b) Communication with the tenant around arrangements for removing her belongings, cleaning the premises and return of the keys; (c) Any photographs of the premises after the tenant removed her belongings; (d) Any evidence that the tenant had access to the premises up until 13 January 2025; and (e) Evidence of the date when the power was disconnected. 1 Background

This tenancy commenced on 1 April 2024 and was for a fixed term due to end on 1 April 2025.

On 1 October 2024 the tenant emailed the landlord mistakenly giving 28 days to end the tenancy. On 3 October 2024 there was email communication between the parties in relation to the break lease fee followed by the tenant saying she will keep at the current rental until the end of the fixed term. Essentially the tenant changed her mind about ending the tenancy early.

The tenancy agreement 2 states, “Break lease fee – if the tenants would like to leave there fixed term tenancy they agree to pay a $500.00 plus GST break fee to the owner prior to vacating and agree to pay all rent until the owner and or property manager can replace the tenancy.” However, the tenant was advised that each property was different with a minimum of $650.00 plus GST and she would be given a breakdown when she vacates. It was after this email that the tenant decided not to end the fixed term early.

On 15 October 2025 the tenant emailed the landlord saying, “Could I please have a full cost breakdown please – I’m wishing to proceed with a break lease.” She also advised that she was moving out and she understood that she would pay the owners $500.00 and rent until a new tenant was found. On 16 October 2024 the landlord emailed the tenant advising that the owner had been informed about the proposed break of the fixed term lease and he would be in contact to organise viewing times.

On 17 October 2024 the landlord advised that he had still not heard from the owner about whether there was agreement to end the fixed term tenancy early. At the hearing the landlord submitted that the owner agreed over the weekend (19 or 20 October 2024) and he phoned the tenant to advise. 1 Paragraph 10, order dated 6 June 2025 2 Additional term and condition, clause 1

There is no evidence of communication in relation to a date that the tenancy would end. The landlord also did not advertise for new tenants.

On 14 November 2024 the landlord carried out an inspection of the premises. That inspection report has been produced and as recorded in the earlier order, “The photographs in the routine inspection report show the premises full of belongings but it appears to be abandoned. I reach that view because there is only one mattress in the photographs and it is standing on its end in one of the bedrooms. I also note that the landlord has applied for reconnection of the power suggesting that there was no power in the premises for a period of time.” 3

What isn’t recorded in the inspection report is that there was no power at the premises. Also, the Watercare invoiced dated 18 November 2024 recorded that no water had been used during the month of November 2024. So, on that day, or very soon afterwards, the landlord was aware, or ought to have been aware, that the tenant had vacated the premises, even though some of her belongings remained there.

The landlord did not advertise the premises for new tenants until 25 January 2025, more than 10 weeks later. When asked why this was the landlord responded that the tenant had not moved her belongings out and the premises were not in a state to market for tenants. In the meantime, the landlord continued to collect full rent from the tenant up until the last payment on 10 December 2024.

In December 2024 the tenant communicated with the landlord in relation to the lack of power at the premises. She had prepaid power when living there but after she moved out, she was unable to continue to do so because she had a power account elsewhere. She advised the landlord on 16 December 2024 that she could not vacate because there was no power connected and she was unable to open the garage door.

The landlord arranged for the power to be connected from 6 January 2025. The tenant then managed to move her belongings out by 13 January 2025.

If there is agreement to end a fixed term tenancy early the landlord must take reasonable steps to mitigate their loss 4 . This means that the landlord must actively seek a new tenant and cannot simply claim full rent without evidence of mitigation efforts.

The landlord in this case made no attempt to advertise for new tenants until 25 January 2025, three months after the agreement reached between the parties for the fixed term tenancy to end early. The landlord should have 3 Paragraph 9, Order dated 6 June 2025 4 Section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 communicated with the tenant soon after the agreement in relation to the next steps. After the inspection on 14 November 2024 the landlord could have arranged for the tenant’s belongings to be moved and stored and the premises cleaned for a new tenant.

The landlord knew that the tenant was not living in the premises and could not afford to pay rent for the premises. The tenant had advised on 15 October 2024 that the rent of $850.00 was putting her in a position of hardship. But the landlord made no effort to mitigate the loss and the tenant continued to pay rent for a further two months. Rent arrears

The landlord claims rent arrears to 13 January 2025 because that is the day that the tenant managed to remove her belongings from the tenancy. While the tenancy was for a fixed period until 1 April 2025 the property was on the market from 22 February 2025 and sold on 21 March 2025. There was no new tenancy after the tenant left.

Given the landlord’s failure to mitigate the tenant’s loss I award rent arrears to 16 December 2024 which is the date that the tenant advised she was trying to move out but was unable to because there was no power at the premises. Water rates

The landlord claims water rates for the invoices dated 19 September 2024 and 17 October 2024. The water invoices were not sent to the tenant until 20 January 2025 even though the due dates were 10 October and 7 November 2024 respectively.

Section 39 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) is the relevant section with respect to outgoings: (1) The landlord is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that— (a) are incurred whether or not the premises are occupied; and are incurred for common facilities.... (3) The tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities. (4) Without limiting the generality of subsection (3), the tenant is responsible for the following charges, incurred during the tenancy, in respect of the premises:... (c) supply of water if the water supplier charges for water provided to the premises on the basis of consumption.

The tenants have the obligation to pay for their water usage. However, there is a corresponding implied obligation on a landlord to advise the tenant of the costs clearly and within a reasonable time frame. A tenant must be provided with the actual provider invoices and be able to clearly identify what is their usage. This has been detailed in precedent by the District Court which the Tenancy Tribunal is bound to follow, as discussed below.

Firstly, the case of Braganza v Saia (DC) CIV-2010-004-2024. In respect to the issue of a landlord's obligation to render water accounts promptly, the Judge held: "It is plainly incumbent on a landlord to set out with clarity what it is that he claims is due, as and when it falls due, and, when it comes to water, to provide the bills to the tenant as they fall due, so that the tenant may make any challenge to the supplier that he thinks is appropriate and make arrangements for payment in a timely fashion". 5

Further, the Judge noted that: "If the tenant is to be asked to pay after the event with no opportunity to check the calculation, or to make provision for payment at the time, he is at a manifest disadvantage. It is down to the landlord to provide the detail as it falls due". 6

The earlier case of Judge McElrea in Woollams v Simpson, CIV-2005-004- 1583, DC Auckland, 16 March 2006, is also relevant. In this case, the tenant had been presented at the end of her tenancy, with a claim for water rates for the three years of her tenancy. Judge McElrea stated: “As a result, in my view, there is a requirement on the landlord seeking to rely on any such arrangement in the lease, that accounts be supplied quarterly or at least within a reasonable period such as within a few weeks after the account is due, unless some other arrangement is agreed between the parties. Failure to do that has predictable consequences for any tenant and apparently did have for this tenant. In my view, the implied term which I read into the Act and into this agreement is necessary in order to make the clause a workable one from a commercial point of view, and in order to decide this matter according to the substantial merits and justice of the case.”

In the more recent case of Nordon 3202 Ltd v Shailaja Nair [2018] NZDC 17499, the facts are similar as the landlord failed to charge water rates during the term of the tenancy but presented the tenant with an account at the end. At paragraph 19 Judge Sinclair says: “It is the obligation of the landlord to supply the water rates accounts to the tenant. Furthermore, this obligation cannot be deflected by saying that the tenant was aware of their responsibility to pay such outgoings and/or did not raise the issue.”

In this situation the tenant received the water invoices months after they were due. The landlord’s claim for water rates is dismissed. 5 Paragraph 15 6 Paragraph 16 Cleaning

The landlord claimed $805.00 for an exit clean and a garden tidy. The tenant moved out on 13 January 2025. The landlord did not provide any evidence to show that cleaning was required after 13 January 2025.

The landlord’s claim is dismissed due to lack of evidence. Keys

The landlord claims for replacement of the keys for the premises. At the hearing the landlord said that the locks were changed because the house was being sold.

There is no evidence that it was necessary for the locks to be changed. There is no communication of the landlord asking for the keys to be returned. Changing the locks because the house is being sold is not an expense that the tenant should pay. The claim for replacement keys is dismissed. Wall repairs

The landlord claims for repairs to one of the walls. The damage was caused by a TV bracket on the wall. I am satisfied that the damage was caused by the tenant during this tenancy. The claim is awarded.

The bond was released to the landlord on 28 January 2025. As the award to the landlord is less than the bond, the balance is to be paid to the tenant.

Because Austar Property Services Limited As Agent For Nicollete And [The landlord/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5156435 — net $1,612.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 16 December 2024	$1,600.00		Rent arrears to 16 December 2024
Repairs	$161.00		Repairs
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Bond refund		$3,400.00	Bond refund
Total award	$1,788.00	$3,400.00
Net award		$1,612.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,612.00