Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5361002 — Rent arrears at Room G, Flat C1, 9 The Avenue, Albany, Auckland 0632
Decided 13 January 2026 · Published 13 January 2026 · Application 5361002
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
- Harassment
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Greene
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.
Order
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $660.00 (BN-00116417) to Buildcorp Management Limited immediately.
- The term of the fixed-term tenancy of Suyog Venugopal at Room G, Flat C1, 9 The Avenue, Albany, Auckland 0632 is reduced and now ends on 20 September 2025.
- Suyog Venugopal must pay Buildcorp Management Limited $370.00 immediately being the cost of advertising for a new tenant.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Waddingham represented the landlord.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $1,540.00 to 3 November 2025, after which a new tenancy started, and for advertising costs.
- The tenant has applied for a reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 29 January 2026.
- To determine the landlord’s claim, I must first decide tenant’s application.
When can a fixed term tenancy be reduced?
- The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced 1 .
Should the term of this tenancy be reduced?
- On 19 September 2025, a neighbouring tenant came to the premises to apologise for a previous incident bringing a bottle of alcohol with him. He knocked on the window continuously and then took out what this tenant thought was a gun and pointed it at him. He left but then came back again behaving in a manner that was upsetting and possibly threatening.
- The tenant reported the incident to his property manager who informed the police. The tenant was so scared by what had occurred he left the tenancy and went to stay with a friend. He has since moved to an Airbnb.
- The neighbouring tenant visited the premises a few days later, aware that a police complaint had been made. He again acted threateningly. This tenant was not present on that occasion, having already left the premises
- The landlord offered to relocate the tenant to another tenancy in a different location, but he did not take up that offer because he did not want to share with others, given his emotional distress over the gun incident.
- Although the Tribunal received no direct evidence that a gun was involved, it is the tenant’s perception here that is the focus. In evidence he said he firmly believed that the neighbouring tenant had threatened him with a gun.
- Based on the tenant’s evidence that he believed he had been threatened with a gun, the Tribunal finds that the first statutory criterion is met: there was an 1 See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 unforeseen change in the tenant’s circumstances. His expectation of safety in his home was destroyed.
- The tenant would suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy were not reduced. He had to pay rent to his friend while he resided there (less than his rent at these premises) and is now paying rent at the Airbnb he rents (more than the rent he was paying). If required to pay both amounts of rent, even up to 3 November 2025, he would suffer severe hardship.
- The tenant is an international student. He was genuinely concerned for his safety and in a situation where he had limited support. Evidence from his counsellor confirms that vulnerability.
- The landlord would suffer some hardship in the form of lost rent if the term if the term of the tenancy is reduced. However, the landlord is a company and has multiple rental properties managed by its agent. It is better placed to bear a rental loss than a vulnerable international student.
- I find that the tenant’s hardship would be greater than the landlord’s hardship.
- I therefore reduce the term of the tenant so that it now ends on 20 September 2025, the end of the rent period after the tenant left the tenancy on 19 September. Compensation
- Where the Tribunal reduces a fixed-term tenancy, it may order the tenant to pay the landlord reasonable compensation for any resulting loss 2 .
- I award compensation of $660.00 (the amount of the bond) to the landlord, because the tenant left the tenancy immediately after the incident and stopped paying rent. The landlord should have some compensation for the tenancy ending so abruptly.
- I also order the tenant to pay the advertising costs the landlord incurred finding a new tenant. He accepted it was reasonable for him to pay that expense. Result
- The fixed term tenancy between the parties now ends on 20 September 2025. The tenant must pay compensation of $660.00 to the landlord for its loss of the tenancy (the contract). The bond will be paid to the landlord in full.
- The tenant must pay the landlord $370.00 for the advertising costs it incurred. 2 See section 66(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986
- No order is made for reimbursement of the filing fees the parties paid. Each has been partly successful. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other. Name suppression
- On my enquiry, neither party sought an order for name suppression.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s2, s66(1), s66(2), s9
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
- Dispute theme: harassment
Property management
- BUILDCORP MANAGEMENT LIMITED (applicant)
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5361002?
The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $660.00 (BN-00116417) to Buildcorp
How much money was awarded in case 5361002?
Verified claim lines are listed on this page.
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5361002?
The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Harassment.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5361002?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12960550-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.