What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5272899 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5272899?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $156.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5272899?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5272899?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12483994-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5272899 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited

How much money was awarded in case 5272899?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $156.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5272899?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5272899?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12483994-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

60 Calluna Crescent, Totara Heights, Auckland 2105 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5272899 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5272899 — net $183.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates owing as at 30 September 2025	$156.50	Water rates owing as at 30 September 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$183.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$183.50

This matter was set down for hearing by telephone today to consider the landlord’s claim for water rates owing of $156.50.

The tenants were called on both of their mobile phones but none of the calls were answered. Ms Brown attended for the landlord.

Ms Brown tells me that the tenants dispute liability for the water rates owing because they say they have paid the water bills.

The tenants make payments for rent and water. When they make the payment, they don’t say what each payment is for. A landlord is obliged to put any amount paid by a tenant, which is not noted as being for something else, towards any rent that might be owing.

At times the tenants have fallen behind in rent, when this happens the landlord has quite rightly put any money paid by the tenant towards rent owed.

The tenants paid $150 in January, which they understood paid the outstanding water. However, as they were in rent arrears that money was later reversed out of the water account and given to the rent account, thereby reducing the rent the tenants owed.

When the landlord filed this application the tenants were behind in rent as well, but that the tenants have since brought the rent up to date.

I am satisfied from the records that the landlord provided me with that whilst the tenants did make a payment of $150 which was not marked for water (even though the tenants thought it was for water) it was credited to the rent account, which reduced the amount that they owed for rent, but did not reduce the amount owed for water.

There is a simple solution to this occurring again and that is when the tenant makes a payment towards water that they put the word ‘water’ in the reference. The landlord must then put that amount towards water not rent. Other issues discussed.

The landlord and I discussed the Console software system that the landlord uses. That system only shows in the rent ledgers total amounts paid for a day, for instance if the tenant paid $100.00 and $500.00 in the same day with no references it would show as $600 being paid (not the two separate amounts) usually this amount would be paid towards rent. If the tenant thinks I am paying $100.00 towards water and $500 towards rent, then Console may not allocate it in that way. This can become difficult when a tenant is making payments towards water but is not identifying it on the deposit.

The landlord should also ensure that any amounts referenced as being paid towards water are used for that purpose. They should not be paid towards rent and reversed out at a later stage, as that gets very confusing for tenants and landlords to understand the ledger. I remind the landlord of their obligation under s29(3) and s30 RTA that the landlord must keep records of payments of rent which would allow the landlord to provide the tenant with a rent ledger within a reasonable time. It is implicit that the rent ledger is accurate showing the exact amounts paid in by the tenant and when.

As the landlord has been successful, I award the landlord the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5272899 — net $183.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates owing as at 30 September 2025	$156.50	Water rates owing as at 30 September 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$183.50
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$183.50

Order

[The tenant/s] and [The tenant/s] must pay Barfoot & Thompson Limited Manurewa As Agent For Ai Chen Liu $183.50 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

This matter was set down for hearing by telephone today to consider the landlord’s claim for water rates owing of $156.50.
The tenants were called on both of their mobile phones but none of the calls were answered. Ms Brown attended for the landlord.
Ms Brown tells me that the tenants dispute liability for the water rates owing because they say they have paid the water bills.
The tenants make payments for rent and water. When they make the payment, they don’t say what each payment is for. A landlord is obliged to put any amount paid by a tenant, which is not noted as being for something else, towards any rent that might be owing.
At times the tenants have fallen behind in rent, when this happens the landlord has quite rightly put any money paid by the tenant towards rent owed.
The tenants paid $150 in January, which they understood paid the outstanding water. However, as they were in rent arrears that money was later reversed out of the water account and given to the rent account, thereby reducing the rent the tenants owed.
When the landlord filed this application the tenants were behind in rent as well, but that the tenants have since brought the rent up to date.
I am satisfied from the records that the landlord provided me with that whilst the tenants did make a payment of $150 which was not marked for water (even though the tenants thought it was for water) it was credited to the rent account, which reduced the amount that they owed for rent, but did not reduce the amount owed for water.
There is a simple solution to this occurring again and that is when the tenant makes a payment towards water that they put the word ‘water’ in the reference. The landlord must then put that amount towards water not rent. Other issues discussed.
The landlord and I discussed the Console software system that the landlord uses. That system only shows in the rent ledgers total amounts paid for a day, for instance if the tenant paid $100.00 and $500.00 in the same day with no references it would show as $600 being paid (not the two separate amounts) usually this amount would be paid towards rent. If the tenant thinks I am paying $100.00 towards water and $500 towards rent, then Console may not allocate it in that way. This can become difficult when a tenant is making payments towards water but is not identifying it on the deposit.
The landlord should also ensure that any amounts referenced as being paid towards water are used for that purpose. They should not be paid towards rent and reversed out at a later stage, as that gets very confusing for tenants and landlords to understand the ledger. I remind the landlord of their obligation under s29(3) and s30 RTA that the landlord must keep records of payments of rent which would allow the landlord to provide the tenant with a rent ledger within a reasonable time. It is implicit that the rent ledger is accurate showing the exact amounts paid in by the tenant and when.
As the landlord has been successful, I award the landlord the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5272899 — Tenancy dispute at 60 Calluna Crescent, Totara Heights, Auckland 2105

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5272899 — Tenancy dispute at 60 Calluna Crescent, Totara Heights, Auckland 2105

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions