What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344232 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5344232?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344232?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344232?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12546275-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344232 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5344232?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344232?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344232?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12546275-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5344232 — Rent arrears

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[ Supressed ] appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears and refund of the bond.
The tenancy commenced on 14 June 2025 for a fixed term ending 28 May 2026. On 28 June 2025, the landlord visited the property. The tenant was not home. The landlord made inquiries with the tenant’s sister, who lived nearby and was advised that the tenant had gone to visit their mother in Auckland and that their phone number had changed. In July 2024, the landlord sent an email to the tenant’s sister with new bank account details, which the tenant actioned.
Between 04 July 2025 and 02 September 2025, the landlord drove past the property on six occasions but did not see any sign of the tenant. On 03 September 2025, the landlord visited the property, but the tenant was not home. On that same the day, the landlord issued a notice to inspect the property on 07 September 2025.
The tenant missed the rent payment due on 06 September 2025. Up to that date, the tenant had made regular rent payments. The landlord produced photographs taken at the inspection which show the property in disarray. One of the photographs shows a bed base without its mattress. The tenant missed the next rent payment due 13 September 2025.
The landlord formed the view that the tenant had abandoned the property on or about 03 September 2025, and on 14 September 2025, filed a claim for expedited abandonment (fast track process). The matter was set down for hearing on 22 September 2025. On 18 September 2025, the tenant contacted the Registrar and advised that they were still residing at the property. The Tribunal declined to deal with the application on an expedited basis, and on 29 September 2025 the matter was set down for an in person hearing before me.
The landlord stated that they had reasonable grounds to believe that the tenant had left the property on 03 September 2025 without intending to return, and that they were in rent arrears at the time.
The landlord questioned why the Tribunal had not dealt with the expedited application, stating that the tenant had not replied within 24 hours of the notice of hearing.
The landlord also stated that their insurance would be void if the tenant spent more than 60 days away from the property without advising them. It is unclear whether this refers to consecutive or cumulative days.
The tenant stated that they are a single parent residing at the property with their three children all aged under 10. The mattress referred to was in the lounge. The tenant stated their mother lives in Auckland, and they had been unwell. They explained that during July and August they travelled back and forth between Hamilton and Auckland, and that between 01 September 2025 and 20 September 2025 they were in Auckland before returning to the property.
The tenant disputed that the rent was in arrears and denied that they had left the property not intending to return.
They stated that shortly after the commencement of the tenancy they had broken their phone, which was also used to receive emails. Law
The Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrears at the hearing date. See section 61 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A tenancy is abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord. Decision
The onus of proving abandonment rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not, the tenant had left the property on 03 September 2025 without intending to return or to meet their obligations, and that the rent was in arrears at the time.
The tenant is presently residing at the property. This does not appear to be in dispute. The rent summary shows that on 03 September 2025, the tenant was not in rent arrears, although they appear to have missed two rent payments due on 06 September 2025 and 13 September 2025. I accept the tenant’s evidence. While they spent time away in Auckland visiting their mother, they did not leave the property with the intention of not returning or meeting their obligations.
The application is dismissed. Name suppression.
Under section 95A of the Act, the Tribunal must, unless there are reasons not to, order suppression of the name and details of any party who has been wholly or substantially successful. Although entitled to name suppression, the landlord does not seek it.
The tenant has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression.
Section 95A (4) provides the Tribunal with discretion to suppress the name and details of a party who has not been wholly or substantially successful.
While I am satisfied that the facts and reasoning of this decision are in the public interest, I am not satisfied that this interest necessarily extends to the name of the landlord.
Upon careful consideration, I am satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to depart from the principle of open justice and exercise the discretion in subsection 95A (4). The Tribunal also orders suppression of the landlord’s name.

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

[ Supressed ] appeared for the landlord. The tenant appeared.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment, rent arrears and refund of the bond.
The tenancy commenced on 14 June 2025 for a fixed term ending 28 May 2026. On 28 June 2025, the landlord visited the property. The tenant was not home. The landlord made inquiries with the tenant’s sister, who lived nearby and was advised that the tenant had gone to visit their mother in Auckland and that their phone number had changed. In July 2024, the landlord sent an email to the tenant’s sister with new bank account details, which the tenant actioned.
Between 04 July 2025 and 02 September 2025, the landlord drove past the property on six occasions but did not see any sign of the tenant. On 03 September 2025, the landlord visited the property, but the tenant was not home. On that same the day, the landlord issued a notice to inspect the property on 07 September 2025.
The tenant missed the rent payment due on 06 September 2025. Up to that date, the tenant had made regular rent payments. The landlord produced photographs taken at the inspection which show the property in disarray. One of the photographs shows a bed base without its mattress. The tenant missed the next rent payment due 13 September 2025.
The landlord formed the view that the tenant had abandoned the property on or about 03 September 2025, and on 14 September 2025, filed a claim for expedited abandonment (fast track process). The matter was set down for hearing on 22 September 2025. On 18 September 2025, the tenant contacted the Registrar and advised that they were still residing at the property. The Tribunal declined to deal with the application on an expedited basis, and on 29 September 2025 the matter was set down for an in person hearing before me.
The landlord stated that they had reasonable grounds to believe that the tenant had left the property on 03 September 2025 without intending to return, and that they were in rent arrears at the time.
The landlord questioned why the Tribunal had not dealt with the expedited application, stating that the tenant had not replied within 24 hours of the notice of hearing.
The landlord also stated that their insurance would be void if the tenant spent more than 60 days away from the property without advising them. It is unclear whether this refers to consecutive or cumulative days.
The tenant stated that they are a single parent residing at the property with their three children all aged under 10. The mattress referred to was in the lounge. The tenant stated their mother lives in Auckland, and they had been unwell. They explained that during July and August they travelled back and forth between Hamilton and Auckland, and that between 01 September 2025 and 20 September 2025 they were in Auckland before returning to the property.
The tenant disputed that the rent was in arrears and denied that they had left the property not intending to return.
They stated that shortly after the commencement of the tenancy they had broken their phone, which was also used to receive emails. Law
The Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrears at the hearing date. See section 61 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A tenancy is abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord. Decision
The onus of proving abandonment rests with the landlord. The standard required is on the balance of probabilities. The landlord must establish more likely than not, the tenant had left the property on 03 September 2025 without intending to return or to meet their obligations, and that the rent was in arrears at the time.
The tenant is presently residing at the property. This does not appear to be in dispute. The rent summary shows that on 03 September 2025, the tenant was not in rent arrears, although they appear to have missed two rent payments due on 06 September 2025 and 13 September 2025. I accept the tenant’s evidence. While they spent time away in Auckland visiting their mother, they did not leave the property with the intention of not returning or meeting their obligations.
The application is dismissed. Name suppression.
Under section 95A of the Act, the Tribunal must, unless there are reasons not to, order suppression of the name and details of any party who has been wholly or substantially successful. Although entitled to name suppression, the landlord does not seek it.
The tenant has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression.
Section 95A (4) provides the Tribunal with discretion to suppress the name and details of a party who has not been wholly or substantially successful.
While I am satisfied that the facts and reasoning of this decision are in the public interest, I am not satisfied that this interest necessarily extends to the name of the landlord.
Upon careful consideration, I am satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to depart from the principle of open justice and exercise the discretion in subsection 95A (4). The Tribunal also orders suppression of the landlord’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344232 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344232 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions