Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5172836 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 5, 74 Metcalfe Road, Ranui, Auckland 0612
Decided 11 Apr 2025 · Published 11 Apr 2025 · Application 5172836
- Rent arrears
Order
- The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit 5, 74 Metcalfe Road, Ranui, Auckland 0612 terminated on 2 April 2025. Kāhui Tū Kaha Limited took possession of the tenancy premises on the same date.
- [The tenant/s] must pay Kāhui Tū Kaha Limited $519.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- The landlord’s request for suppression of its name is declined.
Reasons
- The landlord attended the hearing but the tenant did not attend.
- I am satisfied from the letter received from the tenant that the tenant had received notice of the hearing and the claim.
- The landlord applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, reimbursement of the filing fee and refund of the bond.
- Prior to the hearing the tenant had advised the landlord that they were not living in the premises and would not be returning. The landlord stated the keys were provided to them on 2 April 2025 and that they agreed to terminate the tenancy on that date. Accordingly the tenancy has already ended and the landlord has possession of the premises. Rent arrears:
- Rent was in arrears at the end of the tenancy. The rent summary provided proves the amount of arrears. The Bond:
- The landlord has made a claim on the bond. The landlord confirmed the tenant paid the bond on the same day that he paid his initial payment of two weeks rent (15 April 2024).
- The landlord could not provide a bond number as it says the Bond Centre has not recorded the bond against the tenant or the property. The landlord states the bond was paid to the Bond Centre as part of a bulk payment made on 29 November 2024. The Bond Centre was called during the hearing. The Bond Centre had no record of the bond for this property being received.
- The landlord has not proven the bond was paid to the Bond Centre therefore the conclusion I reach is that the landlord holds the bond. In the event that the landlord can conclusively show the Bond Centre has the bond and has not correctly attributed it to this tenancy then either the landlord can make a one party application for the bond or can file a rehearing application for an order that the bond is paid to them by the Bond Centre. Such an application is to be set down in front of me for determination. Reimbursement of the filing fee:
- Because Kāhui Tū Kaha Limited has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee. Suppression
- The landlord has applied for suppression of its name.
- Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name 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 application is declined for the following reasons.
- The landlord was required to forward the bond to the Bond Centre within 23 working days of receiving it from the tenant 1 . According to the landlord’s evidence the bond was received on 15 April 2024, which means it should have been forwarded to the Bond Centre by 17 May 2024. The landlord says the bond was forwarded on 29 November 2024 more than 6 months after it was legally required to do so.
- The landlord has committed an unlawful act in not forwarding the bond. Conduct of this nature is unacceptable. It is in the public interest that all landlords lodge tenant’s bonds with the Bond Centre as legally required. The bond is the tenant’s money and should not be held by the landlord outside of the requirements in the RTA. I find it would be inequitable for me to suppress the landlord’s name as in doing so I would be removing the transparency of this unlawful act.
- I encourage the landlord to review its bond procedures to ensure that all bonds are paid to the Bond Centre as required.