What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350961 about?

The tribunal order states: Seddon Street Property Management Limited As Agents For [The party] And

How much money was awarded in case 5350961?

Compensation: $4,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350961?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350961?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12900525-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5350961 about?

The tribunal order states: Seddon Street Property Management Limited As Agents For [The party] And

How much money was awarded in case 5350961?

Compensation: $4,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5350961?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5350961?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12900525-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3 Leighton Avenue, Waiwhetu, Lower Hutt 5010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5350961 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5350961 — net $4,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$4,000.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,028.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$4,028.00

Both parties attended the hearing on 17 December 2025. Maureen Duffy appeared on behalf of the landlord. [The landlord/s] also appeared.

The tenancy began on 22 June 2024 and was meant to be for a fixed term ending on 21 June 2025. The tenant claims the landlord wanted to sell the premises and in late 2024 asked them to end the fixed term tenancy early before Christmas 2024. The tenant claims the landlord offered to pay them $4,000.00 if they agreed. The tenant claims they accepted the landlord’s offer and left the premises before Christmas 2024 however, have not received payment. The sole issue I must determine is whether the tenancy agreement was varied in the way claimed by the tenant.

As the applicant, the tenant must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

Was the tenancy agreement varied?

The law

Section 13B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states that every variation to a tenancy agreement shall be in writing and signed by both the landlord and tenant. Notwithstanding this requirement, section 13C RTA states that a variation to a tenancy agreement is not unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing. Evidence and submissions of the parties

The tenant claims they were asked to end the fixed-term tenancy early before Christmas 2024 in exchange for $4,000.00, because the landlord wanted to sell the premises. The tenant claims they agreed to this and vacated the premises before Christmas 2024 but have not received payment. The tenant claims the landlord did not sell the premises and re-tenanted them instead.

Ms Duffy gave evidence that the owner discussed wanting to sell the premises with her before the end of the fixed term on 21 June 2025. Ms Duffy gave evidence that she explained to the owner that an enticement would most likely need to be offered to the tenant for them to agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early. Ms Duffy gave evidence that the owner instructed her to offer the tenant $4,000.00 to end the fixed-term tenancy early before Christmas 2024. Ms Duffy gave evidence she presented the offer to the tenant verbally in late 2024 and it was accepted by them.

[The landlord/s] gave evidence that he lives overseas and Seddon Street Property Management Limited is his agent in New Zealand that manages this tenancy. Mr Patel remembers discussing ending the tenancy early to sell the premises but claims this was a casual conversation and he never formally agreed to offer the tenant $4,000.00. He gave evidence that he told the tenant his manager would be in touch to confirm. Mr Patel claims the agreement was never formalised, and in the end, he decided not to sell the premises. Therefore, he should not have to pay $4,000.00 to the tenant. Analysis

Seddon Street Property Management Limited is the owner’s agent in New Zealand. They are authorised to act on behalf of the owner and their actions bind the owner according to the general laws of agency.

Ms Duffy works at Seddon Street Property Management Limited and was the property manager for this tenancy. Ms Duffy gave evidence that she was instructed by the owner to present an offer to the tenant to end the fixed-term tenancy early in exchange for $4,000.00. Ms Duffy gave evidence she presented this offer to the tenant verbally in late 2024 and it was accepted by them.

Because Seddon Street Property Management Limited are the owner’s agent, the actions of Ms Duffy bind the owners.

I find the tenancy agreement was varied verbally in late 2024 by the landlord and tenant. The variation was for the fixed term tenancy to end on 25 December 2024 (or earlier by mutual agreement) in exchange for payment of $4,000.00 by the landlord to the tenant.

If there is a disagreement between the owners and Ms Duffy about what the owner’s instructions were, that is a separate issue to be determined in another jurisdiction between the two of them. It does not affect my finding in respect of the tenant’s claim.

The tenant has proven their claim. The landlord must pay the tenant $4,000.00 in compensation pursuant to the terms of the agreed variation to the tenancy agreement. Filing fee

Because [The tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5350961 — net $4,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$4,000.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,028.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$4,028.00

Order

Seddon Street Property Management Limited As Agents For [The party] And [The landlord/s], must pay [The tenant/s] $4,028.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 17 December 2025. Maureen Duffy appeared on behalf of the landlord. [The landlord/s] also appeared.
The tenancy began on 22 June 2024 and was meant to be for a fixed term ending on 21 June 2025. The tenant claims the landlord wanted to sell the premises and in late 2024 asked them to end the fixed term tenancy early before Christmas 2024. The tenant claims the landlord offered to pay them $4,000.00 if they agreed. The tenant claims they accepted the landlord’s offer and left the premises before Christmas 2024 however, have not received payment. The sole issue I must determine is whether the tenancy agreement was varied in the way claimed by the tenant.
As the applicant, the tenant must prove their claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. This means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence at the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

Was the tenancy agreement varied?

The law

Section 13B of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states that every variation to a tenancy agreement shall be in writing and signed by both the landlord and tenant. Notwithstanding this requirement, section 13C RTA states that a variation to a tenancy agreement is not unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing. Evidence and submissions of the parties
The tenant claims they were asked to end the fixed-term tenancy early before Christmas 2024 in exchange for $4,000.00, because the landlord wanted to sell the premises. The tenant claims they agreed to this and vacated the premises before Christmas 2024 but have not received payment. The tenant claims the landlord did not sell the premises and re-tenanted them instead.
Ms Duffy gave evidence that the owner discussed wanting to sell the premises with her before the end of the fixed term on 21 June 2025. Ms Duffy gave evidence that she explained to the owner that an enticement would most likely need to be offered to the tenant for them to agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early. Ms Duffy gave evidence that the owner instructed her to offer the tenant $4,000.00 to end the fixed-term tenancy early before Christmas 2024. Ms Duffy gave evidence she presented the offer to the tenant verbally in late 2024 and it was accepted by them.
[The landlord/s] gave evidence that he lives overseas and Seddon Street Property Management Limited is his agent in New Zealand that manages this tenancy. Mr Patel remembers discussing ending the tenancy early to sell the premises but claims this was a casual conversation and he never formally agreed to offer the tenant $4,000.00. He gave evidence that he told the tenant his manager would be in touch to confirm. Mr Patel claims the agreement was never formalised, and in the end, he decided not to sell the premises. Therefore, he should not have to pay $4,000.00 to the tenant. Analysis
Seddon Street Property Management Limited is the owner’s agent in New Zealand. They are authorised to act on behalf of the owner and their actions bind the owner according to the general laws of agency.
Ms Duffy works at Seddon Street Property Management Limited and was the property manager for this tenancy. Ms Duffy gave evidence that she was instructed by the owner to present an offer to the tenant to end the fixed-term tenancy early in exchange for $4,000.00. Ms Duffy gave evidence she presented this offer to the tenant verbally in late 2024 and it was accepted by them.
Because Seddon Street Property Management Limited are the owner’s agent, the actions of Ms Duffy bind the owners.
I find the tenancy agreement was varied verbally in late 2024 by the landlord and tenant. The variation was for the fixed term tenancy to end on 25 December 2024 (or earlier by mutual agreement) in exchange for payment of $4,000.00 by the landlord to the tenant.
If there is a disagreement between the owners and Ms Duffy about what the owner’s instructions were, that is a separate issue to be determined in another jurisdiction between the two of them. It does not affect my finding in respect of the tenant’s claim.
The tenant has proven their claim. The landlord must pay the tenant $4,000.00 in compensation pursuant to the terms of the agreed variation to the tenancy agreement. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5350961 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Leighton Avenue, Waiwhetu, Lower Hutt 5010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5350961 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Leighton Avenue, Waiwhetu, Lower Hutt 5010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the tenancy agreement varied?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the tenancy agreement varied?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions