What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5194354 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5194354?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5194354?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5194354?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11638926-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5194354 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5194354?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5194354?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5194354?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11638926-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 4, 26 Grove Road, Addington, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5194354 — Rent arrears

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of tenants name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
This tenancy commenced on 5 July 2023 and was for a fixed term due to end on 7 July 2024. The tenancy was then renewed with a new fixed term to which the tenants are currently subject to.
The Tribunal must hear an application made by a tenant to end a tenancy before the expiry of the fixed term.
A fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice. It can only be ended by agreement between the landlord or tenant, or by an order from the Tenancy Tribunal.
There is a high threshold that needs to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) 1986. Unforeseen change in the applicants circumstances
The tenants are originally from India and are husband and wife. They seek to end their fixed term early due to financial pressures.
They say that only one is working full time. Her husband undertakes casual Uber taxi driving.
They had planned to bring their parents from India so that they could take care of their children. This appears to no longer be an option in the immediate future. The tenants are presently in New Zealand on temporary visas. They also wish to apply for New Zealand resident visas and are struggling to afford the Immigration New Zealand visa application fees.
The tenants are no longer living at the tenancy address and have since moved to Wellington for employment reasons. They say they could not find alternative employment in Christchurch.
The tenants vacated the premises on 3 March 2025 and moved to Wellington on 4 March 2025.
The tenant resigned her job as a caregiver in Christchurch when she received a job offer in Wellington. The decision to move to Wellington was purely financial. Her hourly rate as a caregiver in Christchurch was $28.00 and as a nurse in Wellington she now earns $40.00 per hour. The tenants stated during the hearing that they have had to borrow money from friends. They are now paying $300.00 per week in Wellington for a house sharing arrangement in addition to their commitment with this fixed term tenancy.
The tenants have a 7-month-old child.
The landlord says that they are doing what they can to find a replacement but so far no success. The landlord stated that they are working as hard as they can and have even offered to lower the rent payable. The landlord also stated during the hearing that the tenants are currently two weeks in rent arrears.
The requirement that there be an unforeseen change in circumstances limits the scope of the section. “Unforeseen” means unexpected, without warning. It is the opposite of foreseen and means something that is not liable to result, not a real risk.
The tenant has decided to change jobs. In the tenant’s case, she applied for a job in Wellington (as a nurse), there was a real chance that, if accepted, they would have to move to Wellington before the fixed term tenancy ended. The desire to move to Wellington after successfully applying for a job is not an unforeseen change in circumstances.
I am not satisfied, after full consideration of the evidence, that the tenant’s circumstances have changed in an unforeseen way. Severe hardship to the applicant
The tenants say they cannot afford to pay two sets of rent. No probative evidence was provided by the tenants that the requirement that they pay additional rent will be a severe hardship to them. The tenant had no financial information to provide the Tribunal. Hardship must be severe, that is more than ordinary hardship, rigorous and not negligible and this has not been proven by the tenants. The tenants therefore did not prove hardship. While I have the greatest of sympathy for the tenants, being on a temporary visa is at times extremely challenging for many people, especially with a young dependant child.
Given the above findings I do not have to consider whether the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced.
In those circumstances, the application is dismissed.
The tenants applied for name suppression. I have awarded this a) to protect the potential discovery of the tenant’s existing and future employer and b) because it is in the public interest that a tenant is able to make an application to the Tribunal to get clarity of their obligations relating to the end of a fixed term tenancy.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of tenants name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via remote teleconference.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
This tenancy commenced on 5 July 2023 and was for a fixed term due to end on 7 July 2024. The tenancy was then renewed with a new fixed term to which the tenants are currently subject to.
The Tribunal must hear an application made by a tenant to end a tenancy before the expiry of the fixed term.
A fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice. It can only be ended by agreement between the landlord or tenant, or by an order from the Tenancy Tribunal.
There is a high threshold that needs to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) 1986. Unforeseen change in the applicants circumstances
The tenants are originally from India and are husband and wife. They seek to end their fixed term early due to financial pressures.
They say that only one is working full time. Her husband undertakes casual Uber taxi driving.
They had planned to bring their parents from India so that they could take care of their children. This appears to no longer be an option in the immediate future. The tenants are presently in New Zealand on temporary visas. They also wish to apply for New Zealand resident visas and are struggling to afford the Immigration New Zealand visa application fees.
The tenants are no longer living at the tenancy address and have since moved to Wellington for employment reasons. They say they could not find alternative employment in Christchurch.
The tenants vacated the premises on 3 March 2025 and moved to Wellington on 4 March 2025.
The tenant resigned her job as a caregiver in Christchurch when she received a job offer in Wellington. The decision to move to Wellington was purely financial. Her hourly rate as a caregiver in Christchurch was $28.00 and as a nurse in Wellington she now earns $40.00 per hour. The tenants stated during the hearing that they have had to borrow money from friends. They are now paying $300.00 per week in Wellington for a house sharing arrangement in addition to their commitment with this fixed term tenancy.
The tenants have a 7-month-old child.
The landlord says that they are doing what they can to find a replacement but so far no success. The landlord stated that they are working as hard as they can and have even offered to lower the rent payable. The landlord also stated during the hearing that the tenants are currently two weeks in rent arrears.
The requirement that there be an unforeseen change in circumstances limits the scope of the section. “Unforeseen” means unexpected, without warning. It is the opposite of foreseen and means something that is not liable to result, not a real risk.
The tenant has decided to change jobs. In the tenant’s case, she applied for a job in Wellington (as a nurse), there was a real chance that, if accepted, they would have to move to Wellington before the fixed term tenancy ended. The desire to move to Wellington after successfully applying for a job is not an unforeseen change in circumstances.
I am not satisfied, after full consideration of the evidence, that the tenant’s circumstances have changed in an unforeseen way. Severe hardship to the applicant
The tenants say they cannot afford to pay two sets of rent. No probative evidence was provided by the tenants that the requirement that they pay additional rent will be a severe hardship to them. The tenant had no financial information to provide the Tribunal. Hardship must be severe, that is more than ordinary hardship, rigorous and not negligible and this has not been proven by the tenants. The tenants therefore did not prove hardship. While I have the greatest of sympathy for the tenants, being on a temporary visa is at times extremely challenging for many people, especially with a young dependant child.
Given the above findings I do not have to consider whether the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced.
In those circumstances, the application is dismissed.
The tenants applied for name suppression. I have awarded this a) to protect the potential discovery of the tenant’s existing and future employer and b) because it is in the public interest that a tenant is able to make an application to the Tribunal to get clarity of their obligations relating to the end of a fixed term tenancy.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5194354 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 26 Grove Road, Addington, Christchurch

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5194354 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 4, 26 Grove Road, Addington, Christchurch

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions