Tenantcheck Insights

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 5227732 — Tenancy dispute

Decided 13 Aug 2025 · Published 13 Aug 2025 · Application 5227732

Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

New Zealand

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

M Kan

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 5227732 — Tenancy dispute

Decided 13 Aug 2025 · Published 13 Aug 2025 · Application 5227732

Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

New Zealand

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

M Kan

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the [Tenant/Landlord] name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[The landlord’s representative] attended the hearing in person.
The tenants did not attend the hearing. They had requested permission to attend via teleconference. This request appears to have been overlooked. However, that oversight does not alter the outcome, as my decision would not prejudice the tenants. The landlord’s application is dismissed.
During the hearing, I asked [The landlord’s representative] about evidence suggesting that the parties had already reached an agreement regarding the claims.
[The landlord’s representative] confirmed that the parties reached an agreement on 7 November 2024 concerning the claims and a repayment plan. On that basis, [The landlord’s representative] withdrew his previous application, 4929093.
In those circumstances, I do not consider that I have jurisdiction to interfere with a private agreement. Nor do I consider that I have jurisdiction to adjudicate a matter that has effectively been resolved between the parties.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed. Name suppression
Both parties reached an agreement in November 2024, and the tenants’ failure to honour the terms of the agreement is a private matter. It is the landlord's responsibility to pursue the tenants for breach of contract in a civil jurisdiction.
Accordingly, I do not consider that there is a public interest in publishing the tenants’ names or identifying details.

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

NO ADDRESS

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5227732 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 5227732?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5227732?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5227732?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11936300-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the [Tenant/Landlord] name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[The landlord’s representative] attended the hearing in person.
The tenants did not attend the hearing. They had requested permission to attend via teleconference. This request appears to have been overlooked. However, that oversight does not alter the outcome, as my decision would not prejudice the tenants. The landlord’s application is dismissed.
During the hearing, I asked [The landlord’s representative] about evidence suggesting that the parties had already reached an agreement regarding the claims.
[The landlord’s representative] confirmed that the parties reached an agreement on 7 November 2024 concerning the claims and a repayment plan. On that basis, [The landlord’s representative] withdrew his previous application, 4929093.
In those circumstances, I do not consider that I have jurisdiction to interfere with a private agreement. Nor do I consider that I have jurisdiction to adjudicate a matter that has effectively been resolved between the parties.
Accordingly, the landlord’s application is dismissed. Name suppression
Both parties reached an agreement in November 2024, and the tenants’ failure to honour the terms of the agreement is a private matter. It is the landlord's responsibility to pursue the tenants for breach of contract in a civil jurisdiction.
Accordingly, I do not consider that there is a public interest in publishing the tenants’ names or identifying details.

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

NO ADDRESS

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5227732 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 5227732?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5227732?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5227732?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11936300-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.