What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344226 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the respondent’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5344226?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344226?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344226?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12676528-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344226 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the respondent’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5344226?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344226?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344226?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12676528-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

suppressed] Tenancy Tribunal Case 5344226 — Rent arrears

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Neither party attended the video conference hearing. The applicant advised, prior to the hearing, that he was unable to attend and requested that the Tribunal determine the matter based on the information provided. The respondent did not join the video meeting at the scheduled time, and could not be contacted by telephone.

On 5 August 2025 the parties entered into a flat sharing agreement. In the written agreement, the applicant is described as the head tenant and the respondent is noted to be the flatmate. The start date is 5 August 2025 and was to continue on a weekly basis, with the payment of rent of $240.00 per week. According to the application, the arrangement came to an end on 13 August 2025.

The applicant has filed an application seeking rent arrears of $480.00 and compensation of $47.00 for room cleaning and washing of bedding.

The first matter to be determined is whether the arrangement between the parties is a residential tenancy to which the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 applies, or whether it is a flatmate arrangement, which is outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Legal framework

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) applies to every tenancy for residential purposes. There are some exclusions, listed in Section 5 of the Act.

A tenancy, in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent...

A landlord, in relation to residential premises subject to a tenancy agreement, means the grantor of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement. 1

A tenant, in relation to residential premises subject to a tenancy agreement, means the grantee of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement. 2

Section 77 of the RTA provides that the Tenancy Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine (in accordance with the RTA) any dispute that (a) exists between a landlord and a tenant or between a landlord and the guarantor of a tenant; and (b) relates to any tenancy to which this Act applies or to which this Act did apply at any material time. .

Therefore, it is clear from the legislation that the Tenancy Tribunal only has jurisdiction to determine disputes between a landlord and tenant. There is no jurisdiction to consider disputes between tenants or flatmates.

When determining the nature of the relationship, the Tribunal must look at the substance of the arrangement, not just the labels used by the parties: Watson v Watson & Roo. 3 Analysis

In this case, it is clear from the written agreement that this is a flat-sharing arrangement. The agreement is headed “Flat/house-sharing Agreement.” The agreement also states that “flat/house sharing agreements between tenants and other flatmates are not covered under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.” The agreement further provides that in the event of any dispute, “the parties agree that the dispute will be determined by the Disputes Tribunal.”

While the labels used by the parties will not always be determinative, in this case, I have not heard any direct evidence from either party about the substance of the 1 s.2 RTA definition of “landlord” 2 s.2 RTA definition of “tenant” 3 DC Christchurch CIV-2010-009-002030, 14 September 2010 arrangement. Furthermore, the evidence provided with the application does not support there being a landlord/tenant relationship. The e-mail from the applicant to the respondent refers to a flat sharing agreement between them. The respondent’s e-mail in response to the application claim refers to her occupation of a room. From the evidence provided, the interaction between the parties indicates they are most likely flatmates.

There has been no further evidence provided to support there being a landlord/tenant relationship.

Accordingly, jurisdiction to determine the application is declined and the application is dismissed. Filing fee and name suppression

The applicant is unsuccessful, so there is no reimbursement of the filing fee.

The applicant seeks name suppression, which is declined, since the applicant has been unsuccessful.

Section 95A(4) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal may, on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that the name or any identifying particulars of any party not be published. On my own initiative, and pursuant to s95A(4) of the RTA, I have suppressed the respondent’s name, since the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to determine the application, and the respondent’s interests outweigh the public interest in the respondent being identified.