What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5270242 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 5270242?

Compensation: $2,450.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5270242?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5270242?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12325031-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5270242 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 5270242?

Compensation: $2,450.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5270242?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5270242?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12325031-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 8, 4 Mead Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5270242 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5270242 — net $2,477.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$2,450.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,477.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,477.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Markus Tasker (aka Markus Tasker) must pay [The tenant/s] $2,477.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 26 August 2025.
The tenant is an international student from Sri Lanka. Before moving to New Zealand, they looked for a property to rent for their family. They came across an advertisement on Facebook Marketplace for the tenancy address. The person advertising the premises was the landlord, Mark Robert Tasker (aka Markus Tasker). The parties signed a tenancy agreement and the tenant paid Mr Tasker $2,450.00. The tenant claims the landlord breached the tenancy agreement by not granting the tenant possession of the premises. The tenant seeks a refund of $2,450.00 paid to the landlord. The landlord claims the tenant cancelled the tenancy agreement and they are entitled to keep the bond as rent in lieu of notice. The bond was not lodged with the Bond Centre however, that is not a claim before me. The issues I must determine are: a. To what standard must the tenant prove their claim? b. Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

To what standard must the tenant prove their claim?

As the applicant, the tenant must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Katipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ...[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit of not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

The tenant submitted a copy of the tenancy agreement dated 28 April 2025. Clause 1 of the agreement states that “[t]he Landlord agrees to rent to the Tenant the house, municipally described as 8/4 mead street (the “Property”), for use as residential premises only.”
The agreement states that the tenancy will begin at 12:00 noon on 11 May 2025 and end at 12:00 noon on 10 November 2025. The rent is recorded as being $550.00 per week and the bond amount is $2,200.00.
Despite only being required to pay a bond of $2,200.00, the tenant paid the landlord a further $250.00. The tenant submitted screenshots of both payments to the landlord.
The tenant gave evidence that they arrived in New Zealand on 11 May 2025 and visited the premises on the 12 th or 13 th of May 2025. The tenant claims the landlord’s car was present, but the landlord would not let them into the premises. The tenant claims they tried calling and texting the landlord to no avail. The tenant claims they were never given possession of the premises and had to look for another property to rent.
The tenant sent copies of their communications with the landlord via Whatsapp. These relevantly read as follows: Tenant to landlord By the way, we are leaving sri lanka by 9 th of may, I may not online for two days, landing to Auckland on 11 th . Will reach your place between 6pm and 8PM, depend on how fast immigration process goes. My friend will come to collect the key, pls let him/ or me know time you prefer. ... Landlord to tenant I will be contact on tue[s]day [I’m] busy and can’t do anything faster Wednesday at the latest Be in contact on Wednesday Im busy atm the moment ... Wednesday just leave it ... I don’t want anymore messages and stuff till then I can’t not move until the 20 th I’ve had family problems I’ll transfer your money back on that date I’m sorry for unfortunate family issues I can’t do anything Come see me then I give money back ...
The messages continue in the same manner with the landlord promising to return the tenant’s money on 20 May 2025 and stating that they are having family problems. The landlord constantly changes the date they claim the premises will be made available to the tenant.
In none of the messages does the tenant cancel the agreement and I am far from convinced this ever happened. The landlord claims to have messages sent by the tenant cancelling the agreement, but nothing was submitted. I gave the landlord the opportunity to submit these messages during the hearing, but they said they were too busy and unable to do this. The landlord has known about the hearing since 3 July 2025 and has had ample time to prepare. If the landlord had messages from the tenant cancelling the agreement, I consider it more likely than not these would have been provided.
The tenant strongly denies they cancelled the agreement. The tenant gave evidence they were relying on the tenancy to provide them with accommodation when they arrived in New Zealand. The tenant’s messages to the landlord support this claim, as they contacted the landlord shortly before they left Sri Lanka and followed up with the landlord when they arrived in New Zealand. The tenant even visited the tenancy address. This behaviour is inconsistent with any claim the tenant cancelled the agreement and no longer wanted to rent the premises.
On the balance of probabilities, I am convinced the landlord breached the tenancy agreement by failing to give the tenant possession of the premises on 11 May 2025. The tenant paid the landlord $2,450.00 under the tenancy agreement and the landlord must repay this amount to the tenant.
The tenant’s claim for compensation of $2,450.00 is granted. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5270242 — net $2,477.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$2,450.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,477.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,477.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Markus Tasker (aka Markus Tasker) must pay [The tenant/s] $2,477.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 26 August 2025.
The tenant is an international student from Sri Lanka. Before moving to New Zealand, they looked for a property to rent for their family. They came across an advertisement on Facebook Marketplace for the tenancy address. The person advertising the premises was the landlord, Mark Robert Tasker (aka Markus Tasker). The parties signed a tenancy agreement and the tenant paid Mr Tasker $2,450.00. The tenant claims the landlord breached the tenancy agreement by not granting the tenant possession of the premises. The tenant seeks a refund of $2,450.00 paid to the landlord. The landlord claims the tenant cancelled the tenancy agreement and they are entitled to keep the bond as rent in lieu of notice. The bond was not lodged with the Bond Centre however, that is not a claim before me. The issues I must determine are: a. To what standard must the tenant prove their claim? b. Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

To what standard must the tenant prove their claim?

As the applicant, the tenant must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof.” Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Katipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ...[L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit of not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

The tenant submitted a copy of the tenancy agreement dated 28 April 2025. Clause 1 of the agreement states that “[t]he Landlord agrees to rent to the Tenant the house, municipally described as 8/4 mead street (the “Property”), for use as residential premises only.”
The agreement states that the tenancy will begin at 12:00 noon on 11 May 2025 and end at 12:00 noon on 10 November 2025. The rent is recorded as being $550.00 per week and the bond amount is $2,200.00.
Despite only being required to pay a bond of $2,200.00, the tenant paid the landlord a further $250.00. The tenant submitted screenshots of both payments to the landlord.
The tenant gave evidence that they arrived in New Zealand on 11 May 2025 and visited the premises on the 12 th or 13 th of May 2025. The tenant claims the landlord’s car was present, but the landlord would not let them into the premises. The tenant claims they tried calling and texting the landlord to no avail. The tenant claims they were never given possession of the premises and had to look for another property to rent.
The tenant sent copies of their communications with the landlord via Whatsapp. These relevantly read as follows: Tenant to landlord By the way, we are leaving sri lanka by 9 th of may, I may not online for two days, landing to Auckland on 11 th . Will reach your place between 6pm and 8PM, depend on how fast immigration process goes. My friend will come to collect the key, pls let him/ or me know time you prefer. ... Landlord to tenant I will be contact on tue[s]day [I’m] busy and can’t do anything faster Wednesday at the latest Be in contact on Wednesday Im busy atm the moment ... Wednesday just leave it ... I don’t want anymore messages and stuff till then I can’t not move until the 20 th I’ve had family problems I’ll transfer your money back on that date I’m sorry for unfortunate family issues I can’t do anything Come see me then I give money back ...
The messages continue in the same manner with the landlord promising to return the tenant’s money on 20 May 2025 and stating that they are having family problems. The landlord constantly changes the date they claim the premises will be made available to the tenant.
In none of the messages does the tenant cancel the agreement and I am far from convinced this ever happened. The landlord claims to have messages sent by the tenant cancelling the agreement, but nothing was submitted. I gave the landlord the opportunity to submit these messages during the hearing, but they said they were too busy and unable to do this. The landlord has known about the hearing since 3 July 2025 and has had ample time to prepare. If the landlord had messages from the tenant cancelling the agreement, I consider it more likely than not these would have been provided.
The tenant strongly denies they cancelled the agreement. The tenant gave evidence they were relying on the tenancy to provide them with accommodation when they arrived in New Zealand. The tenant’s messages to the landlord support this claim, as they contacted the landlord shortly before they left Sri Lanka and followed up with the landlord when they arrived in New Zealand. The tenant even visited the tenancy address. This behaviour is inconsistent with any claim the tenant cancelled the agreement and no longer wanted to rent the premises.
On the balance of probabilities, I am convinced the landlord breached the tenancy agreement by failing to give the tenant possession of the premises on 11 May 2025. The tenant paid the landlord $2,450.00 under the tenancy agreement and the landlord must repay this amount to the tenant.
The tenant’s claim for compensation of $2,450.00 is granted. Filing fee
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5270242 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 8, 4 Mead Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5270242 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 8, 4 Mead Street, Avondale, Auckland 1026

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

To what standard must the tenant prove their claim?

Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

To what standard must the tenant prove their claim?

Did the landlord breach the terms of the tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions