What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5389702 about?

The tribunal order states: Riverlands Real Estate Limited T/A Harcourts Riverlands Real Estate Ltd is

How much money was awarded in case 5389702?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5389702?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5389702?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12831043-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5389702 about?

The tribunal order states: Riverlands Real Estate Limited T/A Harcourts Riverlands Real Estate Ltd is

How much money was awarded in case 5389702?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5389702?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5389702?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12831043-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

33B Semple Street, Huntly 3700 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5389702 — Tenancy dispute

Order

Riverlands Real Estate Limited T/A Harcourts Riverlands Real Estate Ltd is granted possession of the premises at 33B Semple Street, Huntly 3700 at midnight on Friday 19 December 2025
The tenant must pay the landlord the filing fee of $28.00.
No other orders are made.

Reasons

Ms Keil appeared for the landlord. Unsuccessful attempts were made to contact the tenant on the phone number provided, and the application has proceeded in their absence.
The tenancy commenced on 27 January 2018 and was for a fixed term before becoming periodic. On 15 August 2025, the landlord served a ninety-day notice to terminate the tenancy on 13 November 2025. The notice was emailed to the tenant before 5pm.
The landlord states that approximately two weeks after the notice was issued, the tenant visited the landlord’s office and stated that they did not recognise the notice and would not be vacating the property.
Under section 136 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act), a notice sent to the tenant at an email address for service before 5pm is deemed to have been served the next working day. In this case, the notice provided at least 90 days’ notice and also complies with the other requirements for a valid notice set out in section 51(3) of the Act.
However, the tenancy agreement produced does not include an email address for service for the tenant.
The issue in this case is whether the notice, despite being valid for form, has been properly served.
Section 13AB of the Act states that an address for service is an address given by the tenant or landlord at which notices and documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted. Under section 13B, any variation of a tenancy agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties.
However, unless the variation changes the actual agreement, providing or updating an email address for service does not require a formal written variation.
The landlord has provided an electronic file note showing that on 18 July 2025, the tenant visited the landlord’s office and advised that they wished to “update” their email address. The email address provided is the one to which the termination notice was sent on 15 August 2025. The landlord stated that prior to this, they had corresponded with the tenant using another email address, which had been provided after the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord was unable to provide evidence of the previous email address, when it had been provided, or how it had been used.
Section 85(2) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall act in a manner that is fair and just and shall have regard to the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound by technicalities, legal forms, or rules of evidence.
This requires the Tribunal to consider fairness and the substantial merits of the case, rather than rigidly applying technical rules that could result in unfairness.
In this case, I am satisfied that the tenant updating their email address on 18 July 2025 is sufficient to establish that the email address provided was an address for service. The notice was sent to the updated email address. I am satisfied that the notice is valid in form and has been sent to the tenant at an address for service.
The tenancy ended on 13 November 2025, which is less than ninety-days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Act are satisfied.
The landlord is granted possession of the property at midnight Friday 19 December 2025.
The tenant is responsible for rent until the end of the tenancy. Costs
As the landlord has been wholly successful, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression
The landlord does not seek name suppression, and no orders are made.

Reasons

Ms Keil appeared for the landlord. Unsuccessful attempts were made to contact the tenant on the phone number provided, and the application has proceeded in their absence.

The tenancy commenced on 27 January 2018 and was for a fixed term before becoming periodic. On 15 August 2025, the landlord served a ninety-day notice to terminate the tenancy on 13 November 2025. The notice was emailed to the tenant before 5pm.

The landlord states that approximately two weeks after the notice was issued, the tenant visited the landlord’s office and stated that they did not recognise the notice and would not be vacating the property.

Under section 136 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act), a notice sent to the tenant at an email address for service before 5pm is deemed to have been served the next working day. In this case, the notice provided at least 90 days’ notice and also complies with the other requirements for a valid notice set out in section 51(3) of the Act.

However, the tenancy agreement produced does not include an email address for service for the tenant.

The issue in this case is whether the notice, despite being valid for form, has been properly served.

Section 13AB of the Act states that an address for service is an address given by the tenant or landlord at which notices and documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted. Under section 13B, any variation of a tenancy agreement must be in writing and signed by the parties.

However, unless the variation changes the actual agreement, providing or updating an email address for service does not require a formal written variation.

The landlord has provided an electronic file note showing that on 18 July 2025, the tenant visited the landlord’s office and advised that they wished to “update” their email address. The email address provided is the one to which the termination notice was sent on 15 August 2025. The landlord stated that prior to this, they had corresponded with the tenant using another email address, which had been provided after the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord was unable to provide evidence of the previous email address, when it had been provided, or how it had been used.

Section 85(2) of the Act states that the Tribunal shall act in a manner that is fair and just and shall have regard to the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound by technicalities, legal forms, or rules of evidence.

This requires the Tribunal to consider fairness and the substantial merits of the case, rather than rigidly applying technical rules that could result in unfairness.

In this case, I am satisfied that the tenant updating their email address on 18 July 2025 is sufficient to establish that the email address provided was an address for service. The notice was sent to the updated email address. I am satisfied that the notice is valid in form and has been sent to the tenant at an address for service.

The tenancy ended on 13 November 2025, which is less than ninety-days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Act are satisfied.

The landlord is granted possession of the property at midnight Friday 19 December 2025.

The tenant is responsible for rent until the end of the tenancy. Costs

As the landlord has been wholly successful, I must order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression

The landlord does not seek name suppression, and no orders are made.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5389702 — Tenancy dispute at 33B Semple Street, Huntly 3700

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5389702 — Tenancy dispute at 33B Semple Street, Huntly 3700

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions