How it Works Pricing Sample Report Insights Login Start your check

How it Works Pricing Sample Report Insights Login Start your check

Insights

Pulling tribunal records…Crunching monthly trends…Mapping regional patterns…

Loading insights

Trusted data. Independent assessment. Confident outcomes.

© 2026 TenantCheck. All rights reserved.

Product

How it Works
Pricing
Sample Report
API & Integrations
FAQ

Company

About
Contact

Legal

Privacy Policy
Terms of Service

Your data is secure and encrypted.

support@tenantcheck.co.nz

Tenantcheck Insights

Overview Find cases

Overview Find cases

Sections ▾

All topics Claim types All places Landlord awards Tenant awards Property managers

Insights

Pulling tribunal records…Crunching monthly trends…Mapping regional patterns…

Loading insights

105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5327068 — Tenancy dispute | TenantCheck

Insights
/
Auckland
/
Case 5327068

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 5327068 — Tenancy dispute at 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Decided 7 May 2026 · Published 7 May 2026 · Application 5327068

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

Auckland

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

J Yi

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Insights
/
Auckland
/
Case 5327068

Tenantcheck Insights · Case study

Tenancy Tribunal case 5327068 — Tenancy dispute at 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Decided 7 May 2026 · Published 7 May 2026 · Application 5327068

View official order on MoJ →Explore similar cases

At a glance

Key facts from the published tribunal order.

Location

Auckland

Tribunal region

Adjudicator

J Yi

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.

Order

The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
If the applicant is to pursue this claim, it needs to be pursued at the Disputes Tribunal.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The applicant attended via teleconference. The respondent attended in person. A Mandarin interpreter was present to assist both parties.
The applicant claimed for monetary compensation from the respondent. The respondent submitted that the Tenancy Tribunal did not have jurisdiction as the applicant was a flatmate of the respondent and not a tenant.
At the hearing, the applicant confirmed that the respondent was living at the address at the same time the applicant was there. They shared every part of the house except for their own rooms. This means that they were in a flatmate or a boarding situation.
Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 confirms that the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear matters between flatmates or a boarder. The premises was being used as the respondent’s principal place of residence during the time the applicant was living together as a flatmate.
Therefore, this application is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
If the applicant is to pursue this claim, the applicant can pursue the claim at the Disputes Tribunal.

J Yi

07 May 2026

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

Residential Tenancies Act sections

s5(1)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5327068 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 5327068?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5327068?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5327068?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13559286-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Case details

Citation: [2026] NZTT 5327068
Tribunal: TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
Address: 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Adjudicator: J Yi

Official MoJ PDF →

Related

Auckland tribunal insights
Explore all cases
National overview

Case details

Citation: [2026] NZTT 5327068
Tribunal: TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
Address: 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Adjudicator: J Yi

Official MoJ PDF →

Related

Auckland tribunal insights
Explore all cases
National overview

Reproduces published Ministry of Justice tribunal text for research — not legal advice.

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks. Order a Tenantcheck →

Order

The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
If the applicant is to pursue this claim, it needs to be pursued at the Disputes Tribunal.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The applicant attended via teleconference. The respondent attended in person. A Mandarin interpreter was present to assist both parties.
The applicant claimed for monetary compensation from the respondent. The respondent submitted that the Tenancy Tribunal did not have jurisdiction as the applicant was a flatmate of the respondent and not a tenant.
At the hearing, the applicant confirmed that the respondent was living at the address at the same time the applicant was there. They shared every part of the house except for their own rooms. This means that they were in a flatmate or a boarding situation.
Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 confirms that the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear matters between flatmates or a boarder. The premises was being used as the respondent’s principal place of residence during the time the applicant was living together as a flatmate.
Therefore, this application is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
If the applicant is to pursue this claim, the applicant can pursue the claim at the Disputes Tribunal.

J Yi

07 May 2026

Topics & place

Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).

Residential Tenancies Act sections

s5(1)

Frequently asked questions

Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5327068 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

How much money was awarded in case 5327068?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5327068?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5327068?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13559286-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Case details

Citation: [2026] NZTT 5327068
Tribunal: TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
Address: 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Adjudicator: J Yi

Official MoJ PDF →

Related

Auckland tribunal insights
Explore all cases
National overview

Case details

Citation: [2026] NZTT 5327068
Tribunal: TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU
Address: 105 The Drive, Epsom, Auckland 1023

Adjudicator: J Yi

Official MoJ PDF →

Related

Auckland tribunal insights
Explore all cases
National overview

Reproduces published Ministry of Justice tribunal text for research — not legal advice.

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks. Order a Tenantcheck →