What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5334873 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to refund the bond of $1,700.00 (3519466-010) to Colliers

How much money was awarded in case 5334873?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,685.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5334873?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5334873?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12463955-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5334873 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to refund the bond of $1,700.00 (3519466-010) to Colliers

How much money was awarded in case 5334873?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $2,685.40 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5334873?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5334873?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12463955-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

47 Hendry Avenue, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5334873 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5334873 — net $1,013.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14 September 2025	$2,685.40	23. Based on the available evidence, the Tribunal finds the landlord’s rent arrears claim is proven.
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,013.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,013.40

The Bond Centre is to refund the bond of $1,700.00 (3519466-010) to Colliers International Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand upon receipt of the proper paperwork, including a copy of this order, which the landlord is to submit.

[The tenant/s] owes Colliers International Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand, the sum of $1,013.40, calculated as follows:

Reasons

After initial delays due to the tenant’s availability, both parties attended the hearing via telephone on 25 September 2025. The tenant was supported by her sister.

The landlord sought recovery of rent arrears, the bond, and the filing fee, following the end of the tenancy.

The tenant opposed the claim, stating she had given notice to vacate resulting in no arrears, and that WINZ had covered all other rent arrears.

At the hearing on 25 September 2025, the Tribunal issued the following timetabling directions: a. The tenant was to file and serve evidence of WINZ payments, her alleged notice of termination, and any other supporting information by 5:00pm on 25 September 2025. b. The landlord was to provide an updated rent summary to the tenant by 5:00pm on 25 September 2025. c. The landlord was to file and serve a response to the tenant’s documents, including confirmation regarding WINZ payments, by 12:00pm on 26 September 2025.

Parties confirmed up-to-date contact information for communication and document exchange.

The landlord mentioned a possible claim for items left at the property. However, since this was not part of the original application or hearing notice, the Tribunal does not consider its merits in this decision.

In early September 2025, the tenant had earlier enquired with the Registry about filing a counterclaim and was advised of the process, including the need to file the appropriate application and pay the filing fee. The Tribunal staff re- provided relevant contact details and website information. Did the parties comply with the Tribunal’s directions?

The Tribunal intended the timetable to give both parties a fair opportunity to present evidence, particularly regarding the tenancy end date and rent arrears.

During the hearing, the tenant indicated her sister would help send the necessary documents that evening. No documents were received.

The landlord first emailed the rent summary to the Registry and the tenant on 24 September 2025 at 9:01am, and again after the hearing on 25 September 2025 at 3:44pm.

On 26 September 2025 at 12:02pm, the landlord confirmed that the last WINZ payment was received on 23 July 2025, with no further payments located.

On 29 September 2025 at 2:03pm, the tenant responded by email, raising several issues, addressed as relevant below.

When did the tenancy terminate?

On 13 June 2025, the landlord issued a 90-day termination notice, stating the tenancy would end on 14 September 2025. The notice allowed early departure without full 21-days’ written notice if the property was in good condition and rent was up to date.

The landlord referenced a 4 September 2025 phone call with the tenant, in which she said she would be out by the 14th, though another family member might still be there. The landlord took vacant possession but believed the tenant remained in occupation until 14 th September.

The tenant did not provide a copy of her alleged 28-day notice as claimed and offered. The landlord states no such notice was received.

The tenant’s email dated 29 September 2025 included claims that she had given notice on 25 June 2025, and that WINZ had covered her rent. However, no copy of the notice or supporting documentation was attached.

The landlord issued a reminder letter dated 3 September 2025, which the Tribunal considers would have been unnecessary had the tenant’s notice been given earlier.

In the absence of any other evidence, the Tribunal finds the tenancy ended on 14 September 2025 as per the landlord’s notice.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord submitted rent records confirming arrears of $2,685.40 as of 14 September 2025.

The tenant claimed WINZ had paid all arrears but provided no evidence, despite offering and being given the opportunity to do so.

The landlord confirmed a payment from WINZ on 23 July 2025, but no further payments thereafter.

The tenant did not attach the documents she referred to in her email.

Based on the available evidence, the Tribunal finds the landlord’s rent arrears claim is proven.

Should the bond be refunded?

Given the established arrears, it is appropriate that the bond be released to the landlord.

The landlord must submit the appropriate Bond Centre forms along with this order to initiate the refund.

Should the filing fee be reimbursed?

The Tribunal reimburses the filing fee as the landlord has wholly succeeded with its claim. Complaints raised by the tenant about the landlord

In her 29 September 2025 email, the tenant raised further concerns and complaints about the landlord during the tenancy.

The Tribunal reiterates that any such claims must be formally filed with the appropriate fee to be considered. Until then, the Tribunal has no authority to hear or progress those matters.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5334873 — net $1,013.40 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 14 September 2025	$2,685.40	23. Based on the available evidence, the Tribunal finds the landlord’s rent arrears claim is proven.
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,013.40
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,013.40

Order

The Bond Centre is to refund the bond of $1,700.00 (3519466-010) to Colliers International Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand upon receipt of the proper paperwork, including a copy of this order, which the landlord is to submit.
[The tenant/s] owes Colliers International Limited As Agent For Land Information New Zealand, the sum of $1,013.40, calculated as follows:

Reasons

After initial delays due to the tenant’s availability, both parties attended the hearing via telephone on 25 September 2025. The tenant was supported by her sister.
The landlord sought recovery of rent arrears, the bond, and the filing fee, following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant opposed the claim, stating she had given notice to vacate resulting in no arrears, and that WINZ had covered all other rent arrears.
At the hearing on 25 September 2025, the Tribunal issued the following timetabling directions: a. The tenant was to file and serve evidence of WINZ payments, her alleged notice of termination, and any other supporting information by 5:00pm on 25 September 2025. b. The landlord was to provide an updated rent summary to the tenant by 5:00pm on 25 September 2025. c. The landlord was to file and serve a response to the tenant’s documents, including confirmation regarding WINZ payments, by 12:00pm on 26 September 2025.
Parties confirmed up-to-date contact information for communication and document exchange.
The landlord mentioned a possible claim for items left at the property. However, since this was not part of the original application or hearing notice, the Tribunal does not consider its merits in this decision.
In early September 2025, the tenant had earlier enquired with the Registry about filing a counterclaim and was advised of the process, including the need to file the appropriate application and pay the filing fee. The Tribunal staff re- provided relevant contact details and website information. Did the parties comply with the Tribunal’s directions?
The Tribunal intended the timetable to give both parties a fair opportunity to present evidence, particularly regarding the tenancy end date and rent arrears.
During the hearing, the tenant indicated her sister would help send the necessary documents that evening. No documents were received.
The landlord first emailed the rent summary to the Registry and the tenant on 24 September 2025 at 9:01am, and again after the hearing on 25 September 2025 at 3:44pm.
On 26 September 2025 at 12:02pm, the landlord confirmed that the last WINZ payment was received on 23 July 2025, with no further payments located.
On 29 September 2025 at 2:03pm, the tenant responded by email, raising several issues, addressed as relevant below.

When did the tenancy terminate?

On 13 June 2025, the landlord issued a 90-day termination notice, stating the tenancy would end on 14 September 2025. The notice allowed early departure without full 21-days’ written notice if the property was in good condition and rent was up to date.
The landlord referenced a 4 September 2025 phone call with the tenant, in which she said she would be out by the 14th, though another family member might still be there. The landlord took vacant possession but believed the tenant remained in occupation until 14 th September.
The tenant did not provide a copy of her alleged 28-day notice as claimed and offered. The landlord states no such notice was received.
The tenant’s email dated 29 September 2025 included claims that she had given notice on 25 June 2025, and that WINZ had covered her rent. However, no copy of the notice or supporting documentation was attached.
The landlord issued a reminder letter dated 3 September 2025, which the Tribunal considers would have been unnecessary had the tenant’s notice been given earlier.
In the absence of any other evidence, the Tribunal finds the tenancy ended on 14 September 2025 as per the landlord’s notice.

How much is owed for rent?

The landlord submitted rent records confirming arrears of $2,685.40 as of 14 September 2025.
The tenant claimed WINZ had paid all arrears but provided no evidence, despite offering and being given the opportunity to do so.
The landlord confirmed a payment from WINZ on 23 July 2025, but no further payments thereafter.
The tenant did not attach the documents she referred to in her email.
Based on the available evidence, the Tribunal finds the landlord’s rent arrears claim is proven.

Should the bond be refunded?

Given the established arrears, it is appropriate that the bond be released to the landlord.
The landlord must submit the appropriate Bond Centre forms along with this order to initiate the refund.

Should the filing fee be reimbursed?

The Tribunal reimburses the filing fee as the landlord has wholly succeeded with its claim. Complaints raised by the tenant about the landlord
In her 29 September 2025 email, the tenant raised further concerns and complaints about the landlord during the tenancy.
The Tribunal reiterates that any such claims must be formally filed with the appropriate fee to be considered. Until then, the Tribunal has no authority to hear or progress those matters.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5334873 — Rent arrears at 47 Hendry Avenue, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5334873 — Rent arrears at 47 Hendry Avenue, Hillsborough, Auckland 1042

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

When did the tenancy terminate?

How much is owed for rent?

Should the bond be refunded?

Should the filing fee be reimbursed?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

When did the tenancy terminate?

How much is owed for rent?

Should the bond be refunded?

Should the filing fee be reimbursed?

Topics & place

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions