What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5392359?

The tribunal order states: Edmund Cera must pay Kaso Property Management Limited $771.46

How much money was awarded in case 5392359?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $743.46 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5392359?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5392359?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13042790-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5392359?

The tribunal order states: Edmund Cera must pay Kaso Property Management Limited $771.46

How much money was awarded in case 5392359?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $743.46 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5392359?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5392359?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13042790-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

57 Becker Drive, Weymouth, Auckland 2103 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5392359 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

57 Becker Drive, Weymouth, Auckland 2103 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5392359 — Tenancy dispute | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5392359 — net $771.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 29 January 2026	$743.46	Water rates to 29 January 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$771.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$771.46

Claims and awards for application 5392359 — net $771.46 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Water rates to 29 January 2026

Amount: $743.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates to 29 January 2026

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $771.46

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $771.46

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Water Rates

Order

Edmund Cera must pay Kaso Property Management Limited $771.46 immediately, as calculated in the table below.
The landlord’s claim for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held today by telephone.
The landlord filed its application on the 19 November 2025 seeking termination of the tenancy as the tenant was 21 days in arrears, rent arrears, water rates owing , reimbursement of the bond and the filing fee.
At the time of filing the landlord provided a rent ledger and a copy of the water rates that the landlord claimed were owing by the tenant.
A few days before the hearing the landlord provided the Tribunal with an updated rent summary, water ledger and invoices.
The updated rent ledger showed a payment of rent of $820.00 on the 3 November 2025 that was not recorded in the landlord’s rent ledger which was provided with the application on the 19 November 2025. This meant that the rent ledger filed 19 November showed the tenant as being more than 3 weeks in arrears when in fact as at the 19 November he was only 2 and half weeks in arrears. The tenant also made a payment to the landlord on the 19 November that paid all the rent arrears.
When I asked the landlord why the payment was not included in the rent ledger filed on the 19 November, he told me that it had not been received, but that they tenant queried it and that the landlord had found the payment after the 19 November.
The landlord was not seeking termination today, but I record that I would not have granted termination in any case, as the rent was not 21 days in arrears on the 19 November 2025, when the application was made.
The parties confirmed that the rent was up to date at today’s date.
The tenant confirmed that he owed the water rates, and the landlord provided invoices and a statement which proved the amount owing. The water rates are awarded.
Because Kaso Property Management Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant sought name suppression at today’s hearing. The tenant has not been successful in his defence of the water rates claim. Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 sets out when the Tribunal can grant name suppression. I do not consider that the reasons that the tenant gave me as to why he wanted name suppression to be sufficient, because they related to why he had been unable to pay his rent and water rates not as to why I should grant name suppression and therefore name suppression is declined.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5392359 — net $771.46 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Water rates to 29 January 2026	$743.46	Water rates to 29 January 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$771.46
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$771.46

Claims and awards for application 5392359 — net $771.46 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Water rates to 29 January 2026

Amount: $743.46
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Water rates to 29 January 2026

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $28.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Net award

Landlord $771.46

Total payable by Tenant to Landlord

Landlord $771.46

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Filing Fee Water Rates

Order

Edmund Cera must pay Kaso Property Management Limited $771.46 immediately, as calculated in the table below.
The landlord’s claim for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held today by telephone.
The landlord filed its application on the 19 November 2025 seeking termination of the tenancy as the tenant was 21 days in arrears, rent arrears, water rates owing , reimbursement of the bond and the filing fee.
At the time of filing the landlord provided a rent ledger and a copy of the water rates that the landlord claimed were owing by the tenant.
A few days before the hearing the landlord provided the Tribunal with an updated rent summary, water ledger and invoices.
The updated rent ledger showed a payment of rent of $820.00 on the 3 November 2025 that was not recorded in the landlord’s rent ledger which was provided with the application on the 19 November 2025. This meant that the rent ledger filed 19 November showed the tenant as being more than 3 weeks in arrears when in fact as at the 19 November he was only 2 and half weeks in arrears. The tenant also made a payment to the landlord on the 19 November that paid all the rent arrears.
When I asked the landlord why the payment was not included in the rent ledger filed on the 19 November, he told me that it had not been received, but that they tenant queried it and that the landlord had found the payment after the 19 November.
The landlord was not seeking termination today, but I record that I would not have granted termination in any case, as the rent was not 21 days in arrears on the 19 November 2025, when the application was made.
The parties confirmed that the rent was up to date at today’s date.
The tenant confirmed that he owed the water rates, and the landlord provided invoices and a statement which proved the amount owing. The water rates are awarded.
Because Kaso Property Management Limited has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant sought name suppression at today’s hearing. The tenant has not been successful in his defence of the water rates claim. Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 sets out when the Tribunal can grant name suppression. I do not consider that the reasons that the tenant gave me as to why he wanted name suppression to be sufficient, because they related to why he had been unable to pay his rent and water rates not as to why I should grant name suppression and therefore name suppression is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5392359 — Tenancy dispute at 57 Becker Drive, Weymouth, Auckland 2103

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5392359 — Tenancy dispute at 57 Becker Drive, Weymouth, Auckland 2103

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions