How much money was awarded in case 5310940?

Enancy Ended On Wednesday 2 July 202…: $1,064.07 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5310940?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5310940?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12479833-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5310940?

Enancy Ended On Wednesday 2 July 202…: $1,064.07 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5310940?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5310940?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12479833-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

4 Normandy Place, Henderson, Auckland 0610 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5310940 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5310940 about?

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

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5310940. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
enancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1 3. The water ra	$1,064.07		enancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1 3. The water ra

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

DECLARATION

This tenancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1

The water rates arrears of $1064.07 are the liability of the respondent and can be deducted from any rent credit that the respondent has with the applicant. Attendance:

The applicant attended the hearing in Waitakere. The respondent did not attend. Background:

The landlord issued a 90-day notice on 1 April 2025, which expired on 30 June 2025. The applicant states that the respondent requested an additional two days to clean the premises before a joint final inspection and handover, scheduled for 2 1 I made an error in the previous copy of this order dated 25 September 2025. This is the correct date that the tenancy ended. July 2025. The applicant consented to this request. However, she reports that the respondent made no further contact since.

On 2 July 2025, the applicant attended the property and found it vacant. The dwelling was locked, but a significant quantity of rubbish remained on site. Despite the apparent abandonment, rent payments continued, being made by the Ministry of Social Development. For this reason, the applicant did not retake possession of the premises and has awaited the present Tribunal hearing before doing so.

The applicant now seeks an order formally terminating the tenancy and restoring possession. She also seeks recovery of rubbish removal and remediation costs, which she estimates are the likely insurance charges and contractor fees. The applicant states that, apart from securing the property and taking photographs, she has not entered or used the premises since 2 July 2025. Issues:

Whether an order terminating the tenancy is required;

Whether the applicant is entitled to the estimated costs she seeks, including rubbish removal and remediation; and

Whether I should award the water charges?

Is Termination required?

The applicant issued a 90-day notice, and the tenant requested an additional two days. The applicant explains that, although it was apparent to her the tenant had vacated the premises, she did not retake possession because rent payments continued to be made.

On the facts, the applicant gave valid notice, the tenant requested a brief extension, and then vacated the property. Vacant possession was effectively returned on 2 July 2025, with possession returned to the applicant on 3 July 2025.

Accordingly, the tenancy ended on the 2nd of July 2025 and possession was returned to the landlord. Accordingly, no order of termination is required. I have made a declaration to this effect under section 78(1)(a) of the RTA 1986. Is the applicant entitled to the estimated costs she seeks, including rubbish removal and remediation?

The applicant states that she has not entered the property since the conclusion of the tenancy, and therefore has not obtained quotes or undertaken the necessary work. Instead, she seeks reimbursement based on her own estimates of likely costs.

In my view, this claim is premature. The landlord is now in possession of the premises. She should first obtain quotes and complete the required work. Once the actual costs are known, she may decide to return to the Tribunal with a quantified claim.

Should I award the water charges and the filing fee?

The remaining claim concerns water rates and the application filing fee. The applicant confirms that rent has continued to be received for approximately three months following the conclusion of the tenancy. In my view, once all matters are reconciled, the respondent will likely hold a credit balance. That conclusion is not certain, as the property was left with a significant quantity of rubbish and some apparent damage.

However, as with awarding other costs or applying the bond at this stage, it would be inappropriate to make an order. This is because currently the respondent has a credit balance that exceeds current liabilities.

I however accept that the applicant is liable for the water claim and I have made a declaration to this effect under section 78(1)(a) of the RTA 1986. Suppression:

The applicant has sought suppression. Although her claims have not been successful in the way she sought, I do consider that she has been successful in the substance of what she has come to the tribunal seeking: clarity of position and a pathway forward. She has been cautious in her approach, perhaps to her own detriment. As such, I find it appropriate to grant her suppression under s95A(1). Next Steps:

Once the applicant has completed repairs and maintenance and quantified her claim, she may decide to make an application to the Tribunal to recover those costs. H Ben Fayed 29 September 2025

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5310940. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
enancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1 3. The water ra	$1,064.07		enancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1 3. The water ra

Order

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

DECLARATION

This tenancy ended on Wednesday 2 July 2025 and possession returned to the landlord on Thursday 3 July 2025. 1
The water rates arrears of $1064.07 are the liability of the respondent and can be deducted from any rent credit that the respondent has with the applicant. Attendance:
The applicant attended the hearing in Waitakere. The respondent did not attend. Background:
The landlord issued a 90-day notice on 1 April 2025, which expired on 30 June 2025. The applicant states that the respondent requested an additional two days to clean the premises before a joint final inspection and handover, scheduled for 2 1 I made an error in the previous copy of this order dated 25 September 2025. This is the correct date that the tenancy ended. July 2025. The applicant consented to this request. However, she reports that the respondent made no further contact since.
On 2 July 2025, the applicant attended the property and found it vacant. The dwelling was locked, but a significant quantity of rubbish remained on site. Despite the apparent abandonment, rent payments continued, being made by the Ministry of Social Development. For this reason, the applicant did not retake possession of the premises and has awaited the present Tribunal hearing before doing so.
The applicant now seeks an order formally terminating the tenancy and restoring possession. She also seeks recovery of rubbish removal and remediation costs, which she estimates are the likely insurance charges and contractor fees. The applicant states that, apart from securing the property and taking photographs, she has not entered or used the premises since 2 July 2025. Issues:
Whether an order terminating the tenancy is required;
Whether the applicant is entitled to the estimated costs she seeks, including rubbish removal and remediation; and
Whether I should award the water charges?

Is Termination required?

The applicant issued a 90-day notice, and the tenant requested an additional two days. The applicant explains that, although it was apparent to her the tenant had vacated the premises, she did not retake possession because rent payments continued to be made.
On the facts, the applicant gave valid notice, the tenant requested a brief extension, and then vacated the property. Vacant possession was effectively returned on 2 July 2025, with possession returned to the applicant on 3 July 2025.
Accordingly, the tenancy ended on the 2nd of July 2025 and possession was returned to the landlord. Accordingly, no order of termination is required. I have made a declaration to this effect under section 78(1)(a) of the RTA 1986. Is the applicant entitled to the estimated costs she seeks, including rubbish removal and remediation?
The applicant states that she has not entered the property since the conclusion of the tenancy, and therefore has not obtained quotes or undertaken the necessary work. Instead, she seeks reimbursement based on her own estimates of likely costs.
In my view, this claim is premature. The landlord is now in possession of the premises. She should first obtain quotes and complete the required work. Once the actual costs are known, she may decide to return to the Tribunal with a quantified claim.

Should I award the water charges and the filing fee?

The remaining claim concerns water rates and the application filing fee. The applicant confirms that rent has continued to be received for approximately three months following the conclusion of the tenancy. In my view, once all matters are reconciled, the respondent will likely hold a credit balance. That conclusion is not certain, as the property was left with a significant quantity of rubbish and some apparent damage.
However, as with awarding other costs or applying the bond at this stage, it would be inappropriate to make an order. This is because currently the respondent has a credit balance that exceeds current liabilities.
I however accept that the applicant is liable for the water claim and I have made a declaration to this effect under section 78(1)(a) of the RTA 1986. Suppression:
The applicant has sought suppression. Although her claims have not been successful in the way she sought, I do consider that she has been successful in the substance of what she has come to the tribunal seeking: clarity of position and a pathway forward. She has been cautious in her approach, perhaps to her own detriment. As such, I find it appropriate to grant her suppression under s95A(1). Next Steps:
Once the applicant has completed repairs and maintenance and quantified her claim, she may decide to make an application to the Tribunal to recover those costs. H Ben Fayed 29 September 2025

Tenancy Tribunal case 5310940 — Tenancy dispute at 4 Normandy Place, Henderson, Auckland 0610

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5310940 — Tenancy dispute at 4 Normandy Place, Henderson, Auckland 0610

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

DECLARATION

Is Termination required?

Should I award the water charges and the filing fee?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

DECLARATION

Is Termination required?

Should I award the water charges and the filing fee?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions