What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5192754 about?

The tribunal order states: This order amends and replaces the order made by the Tribunal on 25 March

How much money was awarded in case 5192754?

Cy Is To End On 31 March 2025 As Pro…: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5192754?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5192754?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11628362-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5192754 about?

The tribunal order states: This order amends and replaces the order made by the Tribunal on 25 March

How much money was awarded in case 5192754?

Cy Is To End On 31 March 2025 As Pro…: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5192754?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5192754?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11628362-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

11A Shore Road, Remuera, Auckland 1050 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5192754 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5192754. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
cy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination. 3. The landlord must reimburse the tena	$27.00		cy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination. 3. The landlord must reimburse the tena

Order

This order amends and replaces the order made by the Tribunal on 25 March 2025 by changing the amount of the filing fee to be reimbursed by the landlord to the tenant. The incorrect amount was entered by the Tribunal’s system and is now corrected. In all other respects the Order is unchanged.
The tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
The landlord must reimburse the tenant $27.00 for the filing fee.
The tenant’s name and identifying details are suppressed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
The landlord had requested an adjournment because she alleged the tenant had threatened the landlord to withdraw its application or they would damage the property and she did not wish to attend the hearing in these circumstances.
The Tribunal determined that the hearing would proceed because: a. The landlord has no application before the Tribunal to withdraw. b. The tenant’s application is urgent and straightforward. c. The hearing was by telephone and so there was no suggestion of intimidation arising. d. Alleged threats without compelling evidence in these circumstances are not grounds to adjourn an urgent hearing. The tenant’s claim
The tenant’s application was for a determination that the tenancy will end on 31 March 2025.
The landlord contended that the tenant was liable for rent until a new tenant was found because the tenant had agreed to extend the tenancy until the end of April 2025.
In considering the tenant’s claim, the standard of proof is “on the balance of probabilities”. In other words, the tenant must establish with evidence that their claim is more likely than not. The tenant’s claim has been considered bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
Contemporaneous documents such as emails and texts are often helpful in making factual findings, especially where facts are disputed or there are gaps in the recollection of the parties.
While this decision has not referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered. In the interests of conciseness, only the most relevant or important evidence has been referred to in this Order. Any evidence that was not directly relevant to proving a claim that was part of the application has been omitted. Evidence
The tenant provided the following evidence: a. The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy from 28 June 2023 to 25 September 2024. The tenancy became a periodic tenancy from that date and no further fixed term tenancy agreement was entered into by the parties. b. To keep the landlord informed of their intentions, on 13 December 2024 the tenant texted the landlord to advise that they were considering their options but were considering ending the tenancy on either on 31 March 2025 or on a date in July 2025 to be confirmed. c. The tenant texted the landlord on 1 January 2025 to advise “We won’t be leaving in March now, will be end of April/May”. d. Due to changes in their employment situation and with their flatmates moving out, the tenant gave the landlord formal notice on 23 February 2025 that they were terminating the tenancy on 31 March 2025. e. On 6 March 2025 the tenant contacted the landlord to see if they could continue the tenancy for a period after 31 March 2025. f. The landlord enquired by text on 7 March 2025 to see if the tenant wished to remain in the property to 30 June 2025. g. The next day on 8 March 2025 the tenant confirmed by text that they would be leaving on 31 March 2025 in accordance with their notice.
The landlord agreed with the tenant’s evidence which was supported by copies of the text correspondence between the parties. The landlord explained that she was confused by the request to extend the end of the tenancy and believes that the parties’ agreed to end the tenancy in April 2025. She did not supply any evidence such as a text or email exchange confirming that agreement had been reached on extending the date. Discussion and decision
Once the fixed term ended, the tenancy became a periodic tenancy. See section 60A Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant was entitled to terminate the tenancy by giving 28-days’ notice. See section 51(2A) RTA.
Both parties accept that such notice was given for the tenancy to end on 31 March 2025. Extending the termination date beyond 31 March 2025 required the agreement of both parties.
While the tenant made enquiries about extending the termination date, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that the parties came to an agreement to extend the date.
The Tribunal is persuaded on the balance of probabilities and on the evidence before it that the tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
Because [The applicant/s] have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5192754. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
cy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination. 3. The landlord must reimburse the tena	$27.00		cy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination. 3. The landlord must reimburse the tena

Order

This order amends and replaces the order made by the Tribunal on 25 March 2025 by changing the amount of the filing fee to be reimbursed by the landlord to the tenant. The incorrect amount was entered by the Tribunal’s system and is now corrected. In all other respects the Order is unchanged.
The tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
The landlord must reimburse the tenant $27.00 for the filing fee.
The tenant’s name and identifying details are suppressed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by telephone.
The landlord had requested an adjournment because she alleged the tenant had threatened the landlord to withdraw its application or they would damage the property and she did not wish to attend the hearing in these circumstances.
The Tribunal determined that the hearing would proceed because: a. The landlord has no application before the Tribunal to withdraw. b. The tenant’s application is urgent and straightforward. c. The hearing was by telephone and so there was no suggestion of intimidation arising. d. Alleged threats without compelling evidence in these circumstances are not grounds to adjourn an urgent hearing. The tenant’s claim
The tenant’s application was for a determination that the tenancy will end on 31 March 2025.
The landlord contended that the tenant was liable for rent until a new tenant was found because the tenant had agreed to extend the tenancy until the end of April 2025.
In considering the tenant’s claim, the standard of proof is “on the balance of probabilities”. In other words, the tenant must establish with evidence that their claim is more likely than not. The tenant’s claim has been considered bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
Contemporaneous documents such as emails and texts are often helpful in making factual findings, especially where facts are disputed or there are gaps in the recollection of the parties.
While this decision has not referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered. In the interests of conciseness, only the most relevant or important evidence has been referred to in this Order. Any evidence that was not directly relevant to proving a claim that was part of the application has been omitted. Evidence
The tenant provided the following evidence: a. The tenancy was a fixed term tenancy from 28 June 2023 to 25 September 2024. The tenancy became a periodic tenancy from that date and no further fixed term tenancy agreement was entered into by the parties. b. To keep the landlord informed of their intentions, on 13 December 2024 the tenant texted the landlord to advise that they were considering their options but were considering ending the tenancy on either on 31 March 2025 or on a date in July 2025 to be confirmed. c. The tenant texted the landlord on 1 January 2025 to advise “We won’t be leaving in March now, will be end of April/May”. d. Due to changes in their employment situation and with their flatmates moving out, the tenant gave the landlord formal notice on 23 February 2025 that they were terminating the tenancy on 31 March 2025. e. On 6 March 2025 the tenant contacted the landlord to see if they could continue the tenancy for a period after 31 March 2025. f. The landlord enquired by text on 7 March 2025 to see if the tenant wished to remain in the property to 30 June 2025. g. The next day on 8 March 2025 the tenant confirmed by text that they would be leaving on 31 March 2025 in accordance with their notice.
The landlord agreed with the tenant’s evidence which was supported by copies of the text correspondence between the parties. The landlord explained that she was confused by the request to extend the end of the tenancy and believes that the parties’ agreed to end the tenancy in April 2025. She did not supply any evidence such as a text or email exchange confirming that agreement had been reached on extending the date. Discussion and decision
Once the fixed term ended, the tenancy became a periodic tenancy. See section 60A Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant was entitled to terminate the tenancy by giving 28-days’ notice. See section 51(2A) RTA.
Both parties accept that such notice was given for the tenancy to end on 31 March 2025. Extending the termination date beyond 31 March 2025 required the agreement of both parties.
While the tenant made enquiries about extending the termination date, there is no evidence before the Tribunal that the parties came to an agreement to extend the date.
The Tribunal is persuaded on the balance of probabilities and on the evidence before it that the tenancy is to end on 31 March 2025 as provided in the tenant’s notice of termination.
Because [The applicant/s] have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5192754 — Tenancy dispute at 11A Shore Road, Remuera, Auckland 1050

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5192754 — Tenancy dispute at 11A Shore Road, Remuera, Auckland 1050

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