What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5356082 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 5356082?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5356082?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5356082?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12707262-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5356082 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 5356082?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5356082?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5356082?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12707262-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5356082 — Exemplary damages

Order

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

Reasons

Two of the tenants and the landlord attended the hearing.
On 29/9/2025 the tenant applied for a declaration that a notice to end the tenancy was unlawful and exemplary damages.
The application was later amended on 14/10/2025 to include that a further notice was retaliatory.
The tenancy is for a fixed term from 1/1/2025 to 31/12/2025 at $925.00 rent per week.

Was the notice to terminate the tenancy valid?

On 7/10/2025, the landlord gave the tenant notice that their fixed term tenancy would not be renewed and end on 31/12/2025.
The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory because it was issued after they applied to the Tribunal to have what they believed was a notice to end the tenancy issued via text on 23/9/2025, outside the effective period .
Prior to lodging the claim, the tenant submitted they had “clearly communicated in writing” their wish to continue the tenancy in 2026.
The tenant believed by issuing the notice to terminate so soon after their application suggested it was motivated by their decision to assert their rights rather than any legitimate reason relating to management of the property.
As the tenants understood that the landlord had already signed new tenants for 2026 while their tenancy was still in effect, they believed the notice was issued to make the property available for the 2026 tenants rather than any legitimate reason relating to their tenancy.
In response, the landlord submitted that the notice of 7/10/2025 was issued as part of their standard process for ending fixed term tenancies and they had sent approximately 40 emails to tenants giving notice, with details of end of tenancy expectations.
As the tenants had already made their application the landlord submitted that the extra end of tenancy details were omitted so as not to inflame the situation.
Further the landlord suggested that the text of 23/9 had not been intended as a notice but rather advice that the premises had been let for 2026 because they had not heard from the tenant.
The landlord confirmed that the premises had been re-let around 25/8/2025 but that they had omitted to advise the tenant of that fact.
This is a fixed term tenancy. It is one to which section 60A, as amended in 2021 and subsequently in 2025, applies.
The effect of section 60A(1) is to continue a fixed term tenancy as a periodic tenancy unless any of the circumstances specified in section 60A(2) or (2A) apply.
Subsection 60A(2) provides that the tenancy does not continue as a periodic tenancy if: a. Before the expiry, the parties renew or extend the existing tenancy agreement; or b. Before the expiry, the parties agree not to continue with the tenancy; or c. Within the effective period, either party gives the other party written notice of their intention not to continue with the tenancy; or d. Before the expiry a party gives notice as specified in any of section 50(1)(a) to (ac) that terminates the tenancy on or before the expiry.
The effective period in subsection (2A) means the period that starts before the 90 th day before the date on which the tenancy expires and ends on the 21 st day before that date.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching this obligation without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
For the purposes of this tenancy the effective period is 2/10 to 10/12/2025.
I find the notice to end the tenancy issued on 7/10/2025 was valid because it was given within the effective period, was in writing, identified the premises and the date the tenancy was to end.
Moreover, I am not persuaded that the text of 23/9/2025 was a notice that the tenancy was ending, albeit that it included information that the premises had been re-let for 2026.
Rather, I consider the text was a response to a text from the tenant, after a delay in communication of five weeks during which the tenant had not confirmed their intentions to continue with the tenancy.
The evidence supports that the tenant was aware the premises were being advertised for 2026 because viewings had been held.
While it is understandable the tenant had not made up their mind about continuing with the tenancy in 2026 the evidence does not support that they had definitively communicated their decision to the landlord, even as late as the text of 23/9/2025.
The landlord was entitled to give the other party notice that the tenancy was not continuing, and the notice was given within the effective period.
I find there is no breach of section 60AA. Exemplary damages are not available to the tenant.

Was the notice retaliatory?

Section 50 sets out the criteria in which tenancies are terminated.
Under subsection (1) a fixed term tenancy shall terminate at the expiry of the term or subject to other sections, not applicable here.
Section 54 applies in relation to a notice given by a landlord that complies with the requirements of section 51 or in the case of a boarding house section 66U.
As the notice not to continue with the tenancy after the end of the fixed term was given pursuant to section 60A(2)(c) I consider section 54 does not apply and the notice is not retaliatory.
The claim by the tenant fails.
Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant to deal with the pressures associated with renewing fixed term tenancies, provided the landlord complies with their legal obligations, as I have found is the case here, no remedies are available to them because there is no breach.
As the tenants were unsuccessful with their claim no filing fee is available to them.
Suppression is granted pursuant to section 95A(4) because the tenant applied for suppression for both parties and I consider, in these circumstances, it is in both parties interest to grant suppression.

Order

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

Reasons

Two of the tenants and the landlord attended the hearing.
On 29/9/2025 the tenant applied for a declaration that a notice to end the tenancy was unlawful and exemplary damages.
The application was later amended on 14/10/2025 to include that a further notice was retaliatory.
The tenancy is for a fixed term from 1/1/2025 to 31/12/2025 at $925.00 rent per week.

Was the notice to terminate the tenancy valid?

On 7/10/2025, the landlord gave the tenant notice that their fixed term tenancy would not be renewed and end on 31/12/2025.
The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory because it was issued after they applied to the Tribunal to have what they believed was a notice to end the tenancy issued via text on 23/9/2025, outside the effective period .
Prior to lodging the claim, the tenant submitted they had “clearly communicated in writing” their wish to continue the tenancy in 2026.
The tenant believed by issuing the notice to terminate so soon after their application suggested it was motivated by their decision to assert their rights rather than any legitimate reason relating to management of the property.
As the tenants understood that the landlord had already signed new tenants for 2026 while their tenancy was still in effect, they believed the notice was issued to make the property available for the 2026 tenants rather than any legitimate reason relating to their tenancy.
In response, the landlord submitted that the notice of 7/10/2025 was issued as part of their standard process for ending fixed term tenancies and they had sent approximately 40 emails to tenants giving notice, with details of end of tenancy expectations.
As the tenants had already made their application the landlord submitted that the extra end of tenancy details were omitted so as not to inflame the situation.
Further the landlord suggested that the text of 23/9 had not been intended as a notice but rather advice that the premises had been let for 2026 because they had not heard from the tenant.
The landlord confirmed that the premises had been re-let around 25/8/2025 but that they had omitted to advise the tenant of that fact.
This is a fixed term tenancy. It is one to which section 60A, as amended in 2021 and subsequently in 2025, applies.
The effect of section 60A(1) is to continue a fixed term tenancy as a periodic tenancy unless any of the circumstances specified in section 60A(2) or (2A) apply.
Subsection 60A(2) provides that the tenancy does not continue as a periodic tenancy if: a. Before the expiry, the parties renew or extend the existing tenancy agreement; or b. Before the expiry, the parties agree not to continue with the tenancy; or c. Within the effective period, either party gives the other party written notice of their intention not to continue with the tenancy; or d. Before the expiry a party gives notice as specified in any of section 50(1)(a) to (ac) that terminates the tenancy on or before the expiry.
The effective period in subsection (2A) means the period that starts before the 90 th day before the date on which the tenancy expires and ends on the 21 st day before that date.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching this obligation without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
For the purposes of this tenancy the effective period is 2/10 to 10/12/2025.
I find the notice to end the tenancy issued on 7/10/2025 was valid because it was given within the effective period, was in writing, identified the premises and the date the tenancy was to end.
Moreover, I am not persuaded that the text of 23/9/2025 was a notice that the tenancy was ending, albeit that it included information that the premises had been re-let for 2026.
Rather, I consider the text was a response to a text from the tenant, after a delay in communication of five weeks during which the tenant had not confirmed their intentions to continue with the tenancy.
The evidence supports that the tenant was aware the premises were being advertised for 2026 because viewings had been held.
While it is understandable the tenant had not made up their mind about continuing with the tenancy in 2026 the evidence does not support that they had definitively communicated their decision to the landlord, even as late as the text of 23/9/2025.
The landlord was entitled to give the other party notice that the tenancy was not continuing, and the notice was given within the effective period.
I find there is no breach of section 60AA. Exemplary damages are not available to the tenant.

Was the notice retaliatory?

Section 50 sets out the criteria in which tenancies are terminated.
Under subsection (1) a fixed term tenancy shall terminate at the expiry of the term or subject to other sections, not applicable here.
Section 54 applies in relation to a notice given by a landlord that complies with the requirements of section 51 or in the case of a boarding house section 66U.
As the notice not to continue with the tenancy after the end of the fixed term was given pursuant to section 60A(2)(c) I consider section 54 does not apply and the notice is not retaliatory.
The claim by the tenant fails.
Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant to deal with the pressures associated with renewing fixed term tenancies, provided the landlord complies with their legal obligations, as I have found is the case here, no remedies are available to them because there is no breach.
As the tenants were unsuccessful with their claim no filing fee is available to them.
Suppression is granted pursuant to section 95A(4) because the tenant applied for suppression for both parties and I consider, in these circumstances, it is in both parties interest to grant suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5356082 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5356082 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the notice to terminate the tenancy valid?

Was the notice retaliatory?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the notice to terminate the tenancy valid?

Was the notice retaliatory?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions