What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5389429 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 8 Cleghorn Avenue, Mount Roskill,

How much money was awarded in case 5389429?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5389429?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5389429?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12859858-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5389429 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of [The tenant/s] at 8 Cleghorn Avenue, Mount Roskill,

How much money was awarded in case 5389429?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5389429?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5389429?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12859858-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 Cleghorn Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5389429 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, but the tenant did not attend. The tenant was served with the notice of hearing and has not communicated with the Tribunal to seek an adjournment. I am proceeding with the hearing in her absence.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach were, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Where the breach is not capable of remedy, the landlord is not expressly required to serve a 14-day breach notice on the tenant. A breach is not capable to remedy where the thing done, or its effect, cannot be undone.

However, unless the breach is serious, the Tribunal usually requires the landlord to have warned the tenant about the likely consequences of continued breach before it will exercise its discretion to terminate.

The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to live at her home. On 8 th October 2025, the landlord was advised that the tenant was no longer living in her home. On 9 th October, the landlord went to conduct a home visit. The tenant was not home, the property had overgrown lawns, the mailbox was full, and the front door lock was insecure.

The tenant received notices from the landlord to return to the home. The landlord received notification that the tenant was staying with her family. On 30 October 2025, the landlord conducted a second home visit, and the property looked abandoned, and the tenant was not present.

The landlord continued to communicate with the tenant, without success.

The breach is not capable of remedy because the tenant has not returned to the property in the last two months and has not communicated with the landlord.

It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy in this case, as the tenant has already vacated the property. The primary purpose of a termination is to allow the landlord to regain possession of the premises and with the tenant already moved out, it served no purpose to keep the tenancy in place.

In the context of social housing where there is a significant demand for accommodation, it is particularly important that properties are made available for allocation to those who need the property.

Accordingly, it is fair and appropriate to make a termination order in these circumstances.

The tenancy is terminated immediately at 4.00pm on 11 December 2025.

Reasons

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach were, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord continued to communicate with the tenant, without success.

The breach is not capable of remedy because the tenant has not returned to the property in the last two months and has not communicated with the landlord.

In the context of social housing where there is a significant demand for accommodation, it is particularly important that properties are made available for allocation to those who need the property.

Accordingly, it is fair and appropriate to make a termination order in these circumstances.

The tenancy is terminated immediately at 4.00pm on 11 December 2025.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5389429 — Tenancy dispute at 8 Cleghorn Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5389429 — Tenancy dispute at 8 Cleghorn Avenue, Mount Roskill, Auckland 1041

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions