How much money was awarded in case 5302486?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5302486?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5302486?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12431677-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5302486?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5302486?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5302486?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12431677-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5302486 — Exemplary damages

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5302486 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

The tenancy of Anthony William Bundle at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 2 October 2025.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted by videoconference. [The landlord’s representative/s] appeared for the landlord.

This is a boarding house tenancy which began on 27 March 2024. The rent is $295.00 per week and there is a bond of $840.00.

On 2 July 2025 the landlord gave the tenant a 28 day written notice terminating the tenancy on 30 July 2025. The tenant wrote to the landlord, seeking to continue with the tenancy. In response, the landlord reminded the tenant of his obligation to vacate the premises at the end of the notice period. The tenant has remained in possession beyond this date.

The tenant has filed an application to the Tribunal (5302486) claiming that the landlord’s notice to end the tenancy was unjustified. He states it was unexpected, and notes he has been a good tenant since the start of the tenancy. He wished to remain in the premises for health reasons and for access to medical services. He claims there are some documentation irregularities, and potential discrimination on the basis of his age.

The landlord has filed a cross application (5318439) seeking termination of the tenancy and possession. The landlord no longer seeks exemplary damages.

Should the landlord be granted possession?

The landlord has applied for possession of the premises occupied by the tenant. The landlord has given the tenant notice terminating the tenancy, and the tenant has not quit the premises within the period specified in the notice. As this is a boarding house tenancy, the landlord’s application must be considered under section 66Y of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA). This provision requires the landlord to give the tenant notice under section 66U.

Under section 66U of the RTA, a landlord of a boarding house tenancy is required to give the tenant 28 days’ notice to terminate the tenancy, where no reason for the termination is given. I am satisfied that the landlord’s notice has been issued in accordance with section 66U. The tenant has confirmed at the hearing that the notice was delivered to him in person by the landlord on 2 July 2025.

Section 66M of the RTA sets out the tenant’s obligations, and provides that, on termination of the tenancy, the tenant of a boarding house must quit the premises and remove all his or her goods from the premises.

At the hearing, the tenant explained the reasons why he wanted the tenancy to continue, stating that the premises was close to the hospital, which he needed to access for his ongoing medical care. Essentially, he sought a compassionate approach from the landlord.

I note the tenant’s submission about the claimed irregularity of the recording of his name in the tenancy agreement. However, since he signed this agreement, which recorded his first name as he commonly used it (Bill), rather than as his name is officially recorded on legal documents (Anthony William), he will need to take some responsibility for this. His surname is correctly recorded in the tenancy agreement. The landlord’s evidence is that it relied on how the tenant has recorded his name when applying for the tenancy, and this information was directly copied from the application form without any changes being made. Therefore, I do not find the way the tenant’s name was recorded in the tenancy agreement to be grounds for remaining in possession beyond the notice period.

I also find the tenant has not provided sufficient evidence to support the claim that the landlord was discriminating against him, on the basis of his age, in giving notice to end the tenancy. The tenant’s interpretation of a conversation with the landlord that is said to give rise to this belief is disputed by the landlord. I accept there is another explanation for the landlord’s comment.

A landlord is not always required to give reasons for ending a tenancy, and in this case, section 66U specifically allows for a 28 day notice period where no reason is given for the notice.

The tenant’s reasons for wanting to remain in the premises are understandable, and I acknowledge the challenge in finding another suitable place. However, as explained, the landlord has established that it has validly terminated the tenancy. Therefore, the landlord is entitled to an order for possession of the premises.

With the landlord’s agreement, possession is delayed to 2 October 2025. Therefore, the tenancy will terminate on this date and the tenant is required to vacate the premises. Name suppression and filing fee

An application for suppression has been made by the landlord. The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details, in view of the landlord being substantially successful in the proceedings.

The tenant does not request name suppression.

While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

The tenancy of Anthony William Bundle at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on 2 October 2025.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted by videoconference. [The landlord’s representative/s] appeared for the landlord.

This is a boarding house tenancy which began on 27 March 2024. The rent is $295.00 per week and there is a bond of $840.00.

The landlord has filed a cross application (5318439) seeking termination of the tenancy and possession. The landlord no longer seeks exemplary damages.

Should the landlord be granted possession?

A landlord is not always required to give reasons for ending a tenancy, and in this case, section 66U specifically allows for a 28 day notice period where no reason is given for the notice.

The tenant does not request name suppression.

While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5302486 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5302486 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the landlord be granted possession?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the landlord be granted possession?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions