What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5301352 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5301352?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5301352?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5301352?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12433202-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5301352 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5301352?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5301352?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5301352?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12433202-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

91B Rangiora Avenue, Roslyn, Palmerston North 4414 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5301352 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

91B Rangiora Avenue, Roslyn, Palmerston North 4414 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5301352 — Rent arrears | 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 5301352. Verify amounts on MoJ.
Claim	Category	Amount	Awarded to	Reason

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Rent arrears

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by teleconference.

CLAIM

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and reimbursement of the filing fee.

RELEVANT LAW

Section 55 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) relates to termination of a tenancy for rent arrears. The relevant provisions in this case say: 55Termination on non-payment of rent, damage, or assault (1)Subject to subsection (2), on any application made to it under this section by the landlord, the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that— (a)the rent was, at the date on which the application was filed under section 86, at least 21 days in arrear; ... ... (2) The Tribunal may refuse to make an order under subsection (1) if, but only if, it is satisfied that the breach has been remedied (where it is capable of remedy), the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach, and it is unlikely that the tenant will commit any further breach of a kind to which this section applies (but see also section 78A(3)(b)).

SHOULD THE TENANCY BE TERMINATED?

Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. Section 5 (2) of the RTA provides the Tribunal may refuse to make a termination order if it is satisfied that the breach has been remedied, the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach and it is unlikely the tenant will commit any further breach of this kind
As at the date of the hearing the rent arrears had been repaid and there was some rent in advance held by the landlord. I note that rent summary provided by the landlord for the hearing recorded rent arrears but during the hearing the landlord confirmed that payment of $400 had been received on the day of the hearing. This would have paid the rent arrears.
The tenant said he fell into rent arrears as he had to travel to see a family member and the travel expenses were a priority. The tenant also said he was paid on a Thursday, that car payments were intended to go out after rent but appears they were going out on the day rent was also to be paid and it appears this meant he could not meet his rent obligations – although I am unclear when this was an issue.
The tenant said he is now paying $400 a week (which is confirmed by the last number of payments he has made) and he will leave the current payments at $400 to provide an assurance that he will not going into rent arrears again and he should in effect end up with rent in advance. The tenant also said he has had a promotion at work.
The landlord said the Tribunal should find it is likely the tenant will breach his obligation to pay rent as and when it is due and payable as the rent summary shows a long history of missing rent payments. I note the tenancy commenced in 2016. The landlord says there are 43 incidents of non-payment of rent and he has not been in advance since December 2024. The landlord says the trust has gone and they have no faith the tenant will consistently prioritise and pay rent moving forward.
Having considered the evidence today I am satisfied that the breach has been remedied and rent is currently in advance, no evidence of loss to the landlord was presented, and I consider the tenant is unlikely to commit any further breach of this kind given he has given an assurance to pay an extra $30 per week which I suggest he does until he is two weeks in advance. Accordingly, the Tribunal refuses to make a termination order and the application is dismissed.

RENT ARREARS

As there are no rent arrears owed the application for rent arrears is dismissed.

FILING FEE

As the landlord has not succeeded with the claim, I decline to award the filing fee.

NAME SUPPRESSION

Section 95A of the RTA relates to suppression orders. The relevant provisions state: (1)The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.... ...(4) The Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate.
The landlord sought name suppression but as they have been unsuccessful with the claim name suppression is declined.
The tenant did not seek name suppression.

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 5301352. Verify amounts on MoJ.
Claim	Category	Amount	Awarded to	Reason

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Rent arrears

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which took place by teleconference.

CLAIM

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and reimbursement of the filing fee.

RELEVANT LAW

Section 55 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) relates to termination of a tenancy for rent arrears. The relevant provisions in this case say: 55Termination on non-payment of rent, damage, or assault (1)Subject to subsection (2), on any application made to it under this section by the landlord, the Tribunal shall make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that— (a)the rent was, at the date on which the application was filed under section 86, at least 21 days in arrear; ... ... (2) The Tribunal may refuse to make an order under subsection (1) if, but only if, it is satisfied that the breach has been remedied (where it is capable of remedy), the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach, and it is unlikely that the tenant will commit any further breach of a kind to which this section applies (but see also section 78A(3)(b)).

SHOULD THE TENANCY BE TERMINATED?

Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. Section 5 (2) of the RTA provides the Tribunal may refuse to make a termination order if it is satisfied that the breach has been remedied, the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach and it is unlikely the tenant will commit any further breach of this kind
As at the date of the hearing the rent arrears had been repaid and there was some rent in advance held by the landlord. I note that rent summary provided by the landlord for the hearing recorded rent arrears but during the hearing the landlord confirmed that payment of $400 had been received on the day of the hearing. This would have paid the rent arrears.
The tenant said he fell into rent arrears as he had to travel to see a family member and the travel expenses were a priority. The tenant also said he was paid on a Thursday, that car payments were intended to go out after rent but appears they were going out on the day rent was also to be paid and it appears this meant he could not meet his rent obligations – although I am unclear when this was an issue.
The tenant said he is now paying $400 a week (which is confirmed by the last number of payments he has made) and he will leave the current payments at $400 to provide an assurance that he will not going into rent arrears again and he should in effect end up with rent in advance. The tenant also said he has had a promotion at work.
The landlord said the Tribunal should find it is likely the tenant will breach his obligation to pay rent as and when it is due and payable as the rent summary shows a long history of missing rent payments. I note the tenancy commenced in 2016. The landlord says there are 43 incidents of non-payment of rent and he has not been in advance since December 2024. The landlord says the trust has gone and they have no faith the tenant will consistently prioritise and pay rent moving forward.
Having considered the evidence today I am satisfied that the breach has been remedied and rent is currently in advance, no evidence of loss to the landlord was presented, and I consider the tenant is unlikely to commit any further breach of this kind given he has given an assurance to pay an extra $30 per week which I suggest he does until he is two weeks in advance. Accordingly, the Tribunal refuses to make a termination order and the application is dismissed.

RENT ARREARS

As there are no rent arrears owed the application for rent arrears is dismissed.

FILING FEE

As the landlord has not succeeded with the claim, I decline to award the filing fee.

NAME SUPPRESSION

Section 95A of the RTA relates to suppression orders. The relevant provisions state: (1)The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.... ...(4) The Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. (5) An order under subsection (4) may be made subject to any conditions that the Tribunal considers appropriate.
The landlord sought name suppression but as they have been unsuccessful with the claim name suppression is declined.
The tenant did not seek name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5301352 — Rent arrears at 91B Rangiora Avenue, Roslyn, Palmerston North 4414

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5301352 — Rent arrears at 91B Rangiora Avenue, Roslyn, Palmerston North 4414

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

CLAIM

RELEVANT LAW

SHOULD THE TENANCY BE TERMINATED?

RENT ARREARS

FILING FEE

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

CLAIM

RELEVANT LAW

SHOULD THE TENANCY BE TERMINATED?

RENT ARREARS

FILING FEE

NAME SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions