What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5290182 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale,

How much money was awarded in case 5290182?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5290182?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5290182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12060101-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5290182 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale,

How much money was awarded in case 5290182?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5290182?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5290182?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12060101-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5290182 — Rent arrears

Order

The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale, Auckland 0600 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities, immediately.

Reasons

Background

The tenancy began in March 2001.
The application seeks termination of the tenancy and rent arrears.
The hearing took place by phone today, 2 July 2025. Ms Eder represented Kāinga Ora at the hearing. I was unable to contact the tenant. Termination and rent arrears
Ms Eder said that Kāinga Ora was aware that Mr Vinkovskiy was overseas earlier this year, but he indicated that he would return in March.
Kāinga Ora was unable to contact Mr Vinkovskiy. They carried out a property inspection on 4 April. They found that squatters were occupying the premises. There was no furniture or clothing at the property.
On 18 April the weekly rent increased from $84.00 per week to the market rate of $517.00 per week. Ms Eder indicated that this was because Mr VInkovskiy did not provide information to MSD and MSD were unable to contact him. Notice of this rent increase was sent to Mr Vinkovskiy in January.
Mr Vinkovskiy had built up a substantial rent credit as at 12 April, but he has continued to pay $90 per week after 18 April. The shortfall in relation to the new rent amount used up the credit and put Mr Vinkovskiy into rent arrears.
The application seeks termination of the tenancy on the alternative grounds of abandonment and breach (rent arrears, failing to use the premises as a primary place of residence). Kāinga Ora issued 14-day breach notices in respect of both of those breaches.
Whether the tenancy is terminated on the grounds of abandonment or breach has a bearing on Mr Vinkovskiy’s liability for rent arrears. Termination for abandonment
The Tribunal may make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that the tenant abandoned the premises and the rent is in arrear (section 61(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986).
Ms Eder said that the date of discovery of abandonment was 4 April. That was when Kāinga Ora inspected the premises and found no sign of Mr Vinkovskiy or his belongings.
On that date, the rent was not in arrears. On the date of hearing, the rent is in arrears.
There is, therefore, an interpretation question in respect of section 61(1) RTA. Does the wording “and the rent is in arrears” mean at the date of abandonment or at the date of hearing.
I am satisfied that the correct interpretation is ‘at the date of hearing’ for the following reasons: a. Section 61(1) is about the Tribunal making an order for termination. That is something that happens at, or after, a Tenancy Tribunal hearing. The section uses the past tense when referring to the abandonment (“the tenant abandoned the premises”) but the present tense when referring to the rent (“the rent is in arrear”). b. By contrast, section 61(5) RTA uses different wording in respect of what constitutes the unlawful act of abandonment. Section 61(5) RTA says that “a tenant commits an unlawful act if, without reasonable excuse, he or she abandons the premises when the rent is in arrear”. This makes it clear that the elements of the unlawful act are abandonment, and the rent being in arrears when the abandonment happened. The use of “when” in this sub- section contrasts with the “and” used in subsection 61(1).
I am satisfied that the tenant has abandoned the tenancy. The fact that the tenant removed all of his belongings, together with the complete ending of all communication with Kāinga Ora, indicates that he does not intend to return to the property. Although the tenant has continued to pay rent (and not by re- direction), he has not increased the rent payment to match the new rental amount that came into effect in April. This suggests that the continued $90 per week payment by automatic payment is due to the tenant failing to cancel it rather than indicating that the tenant considers this an on-going tenancy.
Therefore I find that the landlord is entitled to an order for termination of the tenancy for abandonment. Rent arrears
Ms Eder was aware that termination on the basis of abandonment means that the tenant’s obligation to pay rent ends on the date that is 21 days from the date of abandonment, whereas termination for breach (if granted) would entitle Kāinga Ora to rent to the date of hearing.
Ms Eder said that her preference was for termination for abandonment.
The tenant was obliged to pay rent to 25 April 2025.
Kāinga Ora’s rent record shows that the rent was not in arrears at that date. Outcome
The tenancy is terminated immediately.
Ms Eder indicated that Kāinga Ora is likely to bring a further application for costs after re-taking possession. The bond will remain with the Bond Centre. N Blake, 02 July 2025

Reasons

Background

The tenancy began in March 2001.

The application seeks termination of the tenancy and rent arrears.

The hearing took place by phone today, 2 July 2025. Ms Eder represented Kāinga Ora at the hearing. I was unable to contact the tenant. Termination and rent arrears

Ms Eder said that Kāinga Ora was aware that Mr Vinkovskiy was overseas earlier this year, but he indicated that he would return in March.

Kāinga Ora was unable to contact Mr Vinkovskiy. They carried out a property inspection on 4 April. They found that squatters were occupying the premises. There was no furniture or clothing at the property.

On 18 April the weekly rent increased from $84.00 per week to the market rate of $517.00 per week. Ms Eder indicated that this was because Mr VInkovskiy did not provide information to MSD and MSD were unable to contact him. Notice of this rent increase was sent to Mr Vinkovskiy in January.

Mr Vinkovskiy had built up a substantial rent credit as at 12 April, but he has continued to pay $90 per week after 18 April. The shortfall in relation to the new rent amount used up the credit and put Mr Vinkovskiy into rent arrears.

The application seeks termination of the tenancy on the alternative grounds of abandonment and breach (rent arrears, failing to use the premises as a primary place of residence). Kāinga Ora issued 14-day breach notices in respect of both of those breaches.

Whether the tenancy is terminated on the grounds of abandonment or breach has a bearing on Mr Vinkovskiy’s liability for rent arrears. Termination for abandonment

The Tribunal may make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that the tenant abandoned the premises and the rent is in arrear (section 61(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986).

Ms Eder said that the date of discovery of abandonment was 4 April. That was when Kāinga Ora inspected the premises and found no sign of Mr Vinkovskiy or his belongings.

On that date, the rent was not in arrears. On the date of hearing, the rent is in arrears.

There is, therefore, an interpretation question in respect of section 61(1) RTA. Does the wording “and the rent is in arrears” mean at the date of abandonment or at the date of hearing.

I am satisfied that the correct interpretation is ‘at the date of hearing’ for the following reasons: a. Section 61(1) is about the Tribunal making an order for termination. That is something that happens at, or after, a Tenancy Tribunal hearing. The section uses the past tense when referring to the abandonment (“the tenant abandoned the premises”) but the present tense when referring to the rent (“the rent is in arrear”). b. By contrast, section 61(5) RTA uses different wording in respect of what constitutes the unlawful act of abandonment. Section 61(5) RTA says that “a tenant commits an unlawful act if, without reasonable excuse, he or she abandons the premises when the rent is in arrear”. This makes it clear that the elements of the unlawful act are abandonment, and the rent being in arrears when the abandonment happened. The use of “when” in this sub- section contrasts with the “and” used in subsection 61(1).

I am satisfied that the tenant has abandoned the tenancy. The fact that the tenant removed all of his belongings, together with the complete ending of all communication with Kāinga Ora, indicates that he does not intend to return to the property. Although the tenant has continued to pay rent (and not by re- direction), he has not increased the rent payment to match the new rental amount that came into effect in April. This suggests that the continued $90 per week payment by automatic payment is due to the tenant failing to cancel it rather than indicating that the tenant considers this an on-going tenancy.

Therefore I find that the landlord is entitled to an order for termination of the tenancy for abandonment. Rent arrears

Ms Eder was aware that termination on the basis of abandonment means that the tenant’s obligation to pay rent ends on the date that is 21 days from the date of abandonment, whereas termination for breach (if granted) would entitle Kāinga Ora to rent to the date of hearing.

Ms Eder said that her preference was for termination for abandonment.

The tenant was obliged to pay rent to 25 April 2025.

Kāinga Ora’s rent record shows that the rent was not in arrears at that date. Outcome

The tenancy is terminated immediately.

Ms Eder indicated that Kāinga Ora is likely to bring a further application for costs after re-taking possession. The bond will remain with the Bond Centre. N Blake, 02 July 2025

Tenancy Tribunal case 5290182 — Rent arrears at Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5290182 — Rent arrears at Unit 6, 310 Blockhouse Bay Road, Avondale, Auckland

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions