How much money was awarded in case 5319879?

Property Damage: $218.56 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,249.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319879?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319879?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12531647-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5319879?

Property Damage: $218.56 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,249.01 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319879?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319879?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12531647-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5319879 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5319879 about?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319879 — net $7,467.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$7,249.01	Rent arrears
Window repairs	$218.56	Window repairs
Net award	$7,467.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,467.57

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

Israel Hufanga-Talakai and Pen (Benji) Ah Lam owe [The landlord/s] $7,467.57 (“the debt”).

Israel Hufanga-Talakai and Pen (Benji) Ah Lam must pay rent and the debt as follows: a. By 1 weekly payment of $780.00 on Thursday 9 October 2025. b. By 9 weekly payments of $1,560.00, being $780.00 for rent and $780.00 for the debt with the first payment on Thursday 16 October 2025 and every Thursday thereafter, continuing until Thursday 18 December 2025. c. A final payment of $1,227.57, being $780.00 for rent and $447.57 for the debt.

Payments will be allocated in the following order: rent, rent arrears.

If the tenant fails to pay rent and rent arrears within 2 working days of the due dates: a. The tenancy at [Tenancy address suppressed] will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises. b. The balance of the debt will be payable immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing. Pen (Benji) Ah Lam appeared for both tenants.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond. The tenant wants to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days, and establish that the tenant has failed to do so. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant breached their obligations by failing to pay rent on time and in full. On 15 August 2025 the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant but the breach was not remedied within the required period. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy as the rent remains in arrears.

Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence, I am satisfied the tenant will pay the debt within the period specified in the order and is unlikely to commit any further breach. I have granted a conditional termination. See section 78(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord has applied for compensation.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.

Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.

Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.

Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty. See Guo v Korck [2019] NZHC 1541.

A window was damaged during the tenancy. The landlord provided an invoice for the repairs and a photo of the damage. The tenant accepted that his children had damaged the window. The damage is more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage.

The amount ordered is proved.

Both parties applied for name suppression. The landlord has been wholly successful in this hearing. The landlord’s name and details are suppressed. The tenants have not been wholly or substantially successful in this hearing. The tenants’ application for name suppression is dismissed.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319879 — net $7,467.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$7,249.01	Rent arrears
Window repairs	$218.56	Window repairs
Net award	$7,467.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,467.57

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

Israel Hufanga-Talakai and Pen (Benji) Ah Lam owe [The landlord/s] $7,467.57 (“the debt”).

Payments will be allocated in the following order: rent, rent arrears.

Reasons

Both parties attended the video hearing. Pen (Benji) Ah Lam appeared for both tenants.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, compensation and refund of the bond. The tenant wants to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.

Should a conditional termination order be made?

The landlord has applied for compensation.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The amount ordered is proved.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319879 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319879 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should a conditional termination order be made?

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions