Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5327648 — Rent arrears
Decided 23 Mar 2026 · Published 23 Mar 2026 · Application 5327648
- Rent arrears
Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Adjudicator
R Morgan
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
- Both applications are dismissed.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
- The parties reached a full and final settlement whereby the landlord would pay the tenant $4,200 as follows: a. Initial payment of $1,000. b. Instalments of $350.00 per week.
- The landlord owes the tenant $2,850.00 under the settlement agreement (“the debt”).
- The landlord must pay the tenant must pay the debt in order 4 at the rate of $350.00 per week.
- The first payment must be made on Tuesday, 17 March 2026 and payments must continue every Tuesday until the debt is paid in full.
- If the landlord fails to make any payment within 2 working days of the due date, the balance of the debt owing will be payable immediately and can be enforced through the District Court.
- The parties’ names and identifying details are suppressed.
Reasons
- Both parties attended a hearing today. The landlord claims rent arrears. The tenant claimed multiple breaches of the landlord’s obligations, including improper termination of the tenancy.
- [The landlord/s] raised a preliminary issue. He said that the parties had reached a full and final settlement, so the Tribunal could not consider these applications.
- [The landlord/s] made his application to the Tribunal on 12 September 2026. Both parties provided me with copies of a text exchange on 21 October 2025. In that exchange, [The tenant/s] made settlement proposal, he said: “3 months rent at $350 a week is $4,200, I am happy to put everything behind us if you can square that up. $1,000 as a show of good faith then $350 a week until it is paid. That is fair.”
- There was an exchange about other matters and then [The tenant/s] returned to the settlement proposal, noting that he had lawyers “breathing down his neck” and wanting to know if he could see a show of good faith from [The landlord/s]. [The tenant/s] reiterated the settlement proposal above, and said that if that wasn’t going to work, he would settle in Court.
- [The landlord/s] replied that he would accept the proposal if it was a “full and final settlement”. [The tenant/s] replied that he wanted a lump sum of $4,200 for a full and final settlement.
- [The landlord/s] said that was not possible, but he could agree to the $1,000 lump sum followed by the instalments at $350 per week. [The tenant/s] said that was acceptable.
- I find that the text exchanges record a concluded agreement between the parties. The language is clear. The parties’ intentions were clear.
- [The landlord/s] paid the $1,000 initial payment, and the first instalment of $350.00. [The tenant/s] then attempted to renegotiate the terms of settlement.
- As the parties have reached a settlement, their application as dismissed. The terms of the settlement are recorded to avoid further confusion between them. As this Order records the terms of a full and final settlement made on a “without prejudice” basis, all parties names and identifying details are suppressed.