What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395102 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5395102?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395102?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12966442-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395102 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5395102?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395102?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395102?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12966442-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

3 Taupata Street, Mount Eden, Auckland 1024 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5395102 — Tenancy dispute

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Baseden represented the landlord.
The tenants, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler, applied to be released from the fixed term tenancy.
The tenants, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler, entered into a fixed term tenancy for the premises commencing on 7 December 2024 and ending on 28 February 2026.
In mid to late October 2025, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler advised the landlord that they had purchased a house with a settlement date on 5 December and they would be vacating the premises in early December. On 28 November they confirmed that their vacating date would be 9 December 2025, and they applied to be applied to be released from the fixed term tenancy from that date. They say that at the time of entering into the sale and purchase agreement they believed that the tenancy was for a 12-month fixed term expiring on 7 December 2025. They accept that they signed the tenancy agreement with the expiry date of 28 February 2026 but say that there was no discussion about the expiry date, and they were not told before receiving the agreement for signing that the tenancy was to expire on 28 February, not 7 December. They also say that the landlord agreed to help them find another tenant including advertising the tenancy but they have not done so, and that they found a proposed assignee for the tenancy but the landlord refused to consent to the assignment.

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

While I accept that Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler genuinely believed that the expiry date of the tenancy was 7 December 2025 when they entered into the sale and purchase agreement, I have no hesitation in finding that the actual expiry date is 28 February 2026.
Both Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler signed the agreement and initialled each page, including the page that records the start and end date of the tenancy. They are therefore bound by the terms of the signed written agreement, even if they did not read it before signing.

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

A fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice. A tenant who leaves a fixed term tenancy before its expiry is liable to pay rent until the end of the fixed term or until a new tenant is found, whichever is the earlier: section 61(3)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). There is no obligation on a landlord to take steps to mitigate a tenant’s loss when he or she leaves a fixed term tenancy before its expiry: section 64(4) of the Act. Thus, the landlord can simply sit back and do nothing to find a new tenant and claim rent from the tenant until the fixed term ends (although most landlords, sensibly, do take steps to find a new tenant as quickly as possible to assist a departing tenant or to minimise their loss).
While a fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice, the Tribunal may reduce the term of a fixed term tenancy where the applicants (here Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler) prove that: • there has been an unforeseen change in their circumstances; • that unforeseen change will result in severe hardship if the tenancy is not ended; and • the severe hardship the applicant would suffer if the term were not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party would suffer if the term was reduced.
Where the Tribunal does reduce the term of the tenancy, the Tribunal may, pursuant to section 66(2), order the applicants to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for their loss.
The term “unforeseen” in the context of section 66 can be aligned with such concepts as ‘unexpected’, ‘without warning’. In a legal context, it can also be taken as the reverse of what is ‘foreseen’, thus being ‘not liable to result’, ‘unlikely’, ‘not a real danger’, ‘not a serious possibility’ or ‘not a real risk’.
The purchasing of a property with a settlement date before the expiry of the tenancy was not an unforeseen occurrence as that term is defined. On the contrary, it was a choice made by Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler to enter the purchase agreement with a settlement date of 5 December without first checking the actual expiry date of this tenancy, or otherwise ensuring that they would not be bound under this tenancy agreement to pay rent until the end of the fixed term.
As mentioned, the landlord is under no legal obligation to take steps to find another tenant for the premises. The email correspondence does indicate that the landlord agreed to assist to find another tenant by advertising the tenancy, but it appears that this was conditional upon the tenants agreeing to pay the costs of doing so. There is no evidence to support that the tenants did so agree or that they paid any of the costs associated with the landlord advertising the tenancy or assisting with finding another tenant. Moreover, even if the landlord has advertised the tenancy, I accept Mr Baseden’s evidence that, given the time of year it would be difficult to find another tenant for the tenancy, particularly given the short period left until the tenancy expired (the landlord does not want to extend the tenancy beyond 28 February as he is wanting to sell the property).

A tenant may assign the tenancy with the prior consent of the landlord and in accordance with any reasonable conditions attached to that consent, and the landlord must not withhold consent unreasonably: section 48B of the Act.
The proposed tenant Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler found to take over the tenancy wanted a long-term tenancy, beyond the expiry of this tenancy. However, as mentioned, the landlord did not want to extend or renew the tenancy beyond its expiry on 28 February and therefore did not consent to the proposed assignment.
I find that the landlord did not withhold his consent to the assignment unreasonably. A landlord is not legally required to extend or renew a tenancy and the evidence establishes that, had the tenants remained in the tenancy, the landlord would have given notice to them of his intention to not continue with the tenancy. Thus, the only tenancy that could have been assigned by Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler is one that expired on 28 February 2026.
I therefore find that Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler have not established grounds for reducing the term of the fixed term tenancy and their application is dismissed.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Baseden represented the landlord.
The tenants, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler, applied to be released from the fixed term tenancy.
The tenants, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler, entered into a fixed term tenancy for the premises commencing on 7 December 2024 and ending on 28 February 2026.
In mid to late October 2025, Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler advised the landlord that they had purchased a house with a settlement date on 5 December and they would be vacating the premises in early December. On 28 November they confirmed that their vacating date would be 9 December 2025, and they applied to be applied to be released from the fixed term tenancy from that date. They say that at the time of entering into the sale and purchase agreement they believed that the tenancy was for a 12-month fixed term expiring on 7 December 2025. They accept that they signed the tenancy agreement with the expiry date of 28 February 2026 but say that there was no discussion about the expiry date, and they were not told before receiving the agreement for signing that the tenancy was to expire on 28 February, not 7 December. They also say that the landlord agreed to help them find another tenant including advertising the tenancy but they have not done so, and that they found a proposed assignee for the tenancy but the landlord refused to consent to the assignment.

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

While I accept that Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler genuinely believed that the expiry date of the tenancy was 7 December 2025 when they entered into the sale and purchase agreement, I have no hesitation in finding that the actual expiry date is 28 February 2026.
Both Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler signed the agreement and initialled each page, including the page that records the start and end date of the tenancy. They are therefore bound by the terms of the signed written agreement, even if they did not read it before signing.

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

A fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice. A tenant who leaves a fixed term tenancy before its expiry is liable to pay rent until the end of the fixed term or until a new tenant is found, whichever is the earlier: section 61(3)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act). There is no obligation on a landlord to take steps to mitigate a tenant’s loss when he or she leaves a fixed term tenancy before its expiry: section 64(4) of the Act. Thus, the landlord can simply sit back and do nothing to find a new tenant and claim rent from the tenant until the fixed term ends (although most landlords, sensibly, do take steps to find a new tenant as quickly as possible to assist a departing tenant or to minimise their loss).
While a fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by notice, the Tribunal may reduce the term of a fixed term tenancy where the applicants (here Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler) prove that: • there has been an unforeseen change in their circumstances; • that unforeseen change will result in severe hardship if the tenancy is not ended; and • the severe hardship the applicant would suffer if the term were not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party would suffer if the term was reduced.
Where the Tribunal does reduce the term of the tenancy, the Tribunal may, pursuant to section 66(2), order the applicants to pay reasonable compensation to the other party for their loss.
The term “unforeseen” in the context of section 66 can be aligned with such concepts as ‘unexpected’, ‘without warning’. In a legal context, it can also be taken as the reverse of what is ‘foreseen’, thus being ‘not liable to result’, ‘unlikely’, ‘not a real danger’, ‘not a serious possibility’ or ‘not a real risk’.
The purchasing of a property with a settlement date before the expiry of the tenancy was not an unforeseen occurrence as that term is defined. On the contrary, it was a choice made by Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler to enter the purchase agreement with a settlement date of 5 December without first checking the actual expiry date of this tenancy, or otherwise ensuring that they would not be bound under this tenancy agreement to pay rent until the end of the fixed term.
As mentioned, the landlord is under no legal obligation to take steps to find another tenant for the premises. The email correspondence does indicate that the landlord agreed to assist to find another tenant by advertising the tenancy, but it appears that this was conditional upon the tenants agreeing to pay the costs of doing so. There is no evidence to support that the tenants did so agree or that they paid any of the costs associated with the landlord advertising the tenancy or assisting with finding another tenant. Moreover, even if the landlord has advertised the tenancy, I accept Mr Baseden’s evidence that, given the time of year it would be difficult to find another tenant for the tenancy, particularly given the short period left until the tenancy expired (the landlord does not want to extend the tenancy beyond 28 February as he is wanting to sell the property).

A tenant may assign the tenancy with the prior consent of the landlord and in accordance with any reasonable conditions attached to that consent, and the landlord must not withhold consent unreasonably: section 48B of the Act.
The proposed tenant Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler found to take over the tenancy wanted a long-term tenancy, beyond the expiry of this tenancy. However, as mentioned, the landlord did not want to extend or renew the tenancy beyond its expiry on 28 February and therefore did not consent to the proposed assignment.
I find that the landlord did not withhold his consent to the assignment unreasonably. A landlord is not legally required to extend or renew a tenancy and the evidence establishes that, had the tenants remained in the tenancy, the landlord would have given notice to them of his intention to not continue with the tenancy. Thus, the only tenancy that could have been assigned by Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler is one that expired on 28 February 2026.
I therefore find that Ms Faloon and Mr Raszler have not established grounds for reducing the term of the fixed term tenancy and their application is dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395102 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Taupata Street, Mount Eden, Auckland 1024

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395102 — Tenancy dispute at 3 Taupata Street, Mount Eden, Auckland 1024

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Claims & awards

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

Did the landlord unreasonably refuse consent to the assignment of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Is the expiry date of the tenancy 7 December 2025 or 28 February 2026?

Should the tenancy be ended before its expiry?

Did the landlord unreasonably refuse consent to the assignment of the tenancy?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Property management

Frequently asked questions