What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5237331 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5237331?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5237331?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5237331?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11967166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5237331 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5237331?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5237331?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5237331?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11967166-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

5 Kiltole Drive, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5237331 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

5 Kiltole Drive, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5237331 — 14-day notice | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5237331. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of	$1,600.00		bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Claims and awards for application 5237331. Verify on MoJ.

bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Amount: $1,600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre must pay the bond of $2,240.00 (bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant.
The balance of the bond of $1,600.00 is to remain at the Bond Centre.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond, but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services. The landlord claims that they were unaware that they needed to file a counterclaim.
Ignorance of the law however, is no excuse.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’) provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim.
I consider that section 22B(2) RTA applies even though the landlord is only seeking for the bond to be retained and continue to be held at the Bond Centre.
The parties (namely the landlord and the tenant) have a dispute on whether the tenant’s portion of her bond should be refunded to her after she has vacated the premises. The tenant has duly filed her application to the Tribunal pursuant to section 22B(1) RTA in April 2025.
Once the tenant has applied for all or part of the bond, it is mandatory for the landlord to file a counterclaim.
Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim, part of the bond totalling $2,240.00 is refunded to the tenant, as requested by this tenant.
It is in order for the landlord to require the remaining tenants to top up the bond as required under the tenancy agreement, to $3,840.00. In the event of breach, the landlord is entitled to apply to the Tribunal for a monetary order and/or for an order terminating the tenancy under section 56 RTA after issuance of a 14 day breach notice.
I consider the above procedure to be fair and appropriate in dealing with disputes regarding the return of the bond.
In the upshot, it is my finding that the outgoing tenant is entitled to the refund of part of her bond, as requested, forthwith.

Claims & awards

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

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5237331. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of	$1,600.00		bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Claims and awards for application 5237331. Verify on MoJ.

bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Amount: $1,600.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant. 3. The balance of the bond of

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
The Bond Centre must pay the bond of $2,240.00 (bond number BN-00024611) to the tenant.
The balance of the bond of $1,600.00 is to remain at the Bond Centre.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond, but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services. The landlord claims that they were unaware that they needed to file a counterclaim.
Ignorance of the law however, is no excuse.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’) provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim.
I consider that section 22B(2) RTA applies even though the landlord is only seeking for the bond to be retained and continue to be held at the Bond Centre.
The parties (namely the landlord and the tenant) have a dispute on whether the tenant’s portion of her bond should be refunded to her after she has vacated the premises. The tenant has duly filed her application to the Tribunal pursuant to section 22B(1) RTA in April 2025.
Once the tenant has applied for all or part of the bond, it is mandatory for the landlord to file a counterclaim.
Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim, part of the bond totalling $2,240.00 is refunded to the tenant, as requested by this tenant.
It is in order for the landlord to require the remaining tenants to top up the bond as required under the tenancy agreement, to $3,840.00. In the event of breach, the landlord is entitled to apply to the Tribunal for a monetary order and/or for an order terminating the tenancy under section 56 RTA after issuance of a 14 day breach notice.
I consider the above procedure to be fair and appropriate in dealing with disputes regarding the return of the bond.
In the upshot, it is my finding that the outgoing tenant is entitled to the refund of part of her bond, as requested, forthwith.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5237331 — 14-day notice at 5 Kiltole Drive, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5237331 — 14-day notice at 5 Kiltole Drive, Flat Bush, Auckland 2019

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