How much money was awarded in case 5400839?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $480.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5400839?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5400839?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13093005-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5400839?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $480.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5400839?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5400839?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13093005-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5400839 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5400839 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5400839 — net $508.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 9.2.26	$480.00	Rent arrears to 9.2.26
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$508.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$508.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.

The tenancy of Daniel Teitiba at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on Wednesday 11 February 2026.

Daniel Teitiba must pay [The landlord/s] $508.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by phone call.

The tenant was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered. I am satisfied the tenant was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in his absence.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent and reimbursement of the filing fee. Termination

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. 1

Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.

The tenant breached their obligations by failing to pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 2

The landlord served a notice to remedy a breach on the tenant on 13 November 2025. The tenant did not remedy the breach.

The landlord wants the tenancy to end. I do note that the landlord suggested that the hearing is adjourned to monitor the tenant’s repayment of the rent arrears, however in the absence of the tenant at the hearing to explore this further I declined to adjourn the matter.

In Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management 3 the Court needed to consider the extent of section 56(1)(c), which requires consideration of whether the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy. The Court set out a range of factors that would be relevant, being: a) The history of the tenancy. b) Whether there had been a persistent failure after repeated warnings. c) Whether the history of breaches was such it was unlikely the tenant would comply with their obligations in the future. d) Whether the breach was inadvertent or deliberately committed. e) The conduct of the landlord. f) The gravity of the breach. g) Whether termination is a proportionate response to the breach.

I have considered these factors, and I find it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. This is because: 1 See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 2 See section 40 (1) (a) RTA 3 Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229 (Judge Rowe) at [61]., a. There has been a history of the tenant not paying rent when it is due. b. I consider this to be a serious breach of the tenant’s obligations. c. The tenant has not attended the hearing. I therefore have no basis to find that the tenant will comply with his obligation to pay rent when it is due moving forward. d. Rent is now 7 days behind when it should be in advance. e. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy as the rent remains in arrears,

I consider that termination is a proportionate response to the breach. The tenancy is terminated.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant must pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 4 The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing as at the hearing date. Bond

The landlord withdrew the claim for the bond. Filing fee

Because the landlord has succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee. Suppression

The landlord sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5400839 — net $508.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 9.2.26	$480.00	Rent arrears to 9.2.26
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$508.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$508.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The tenancy of Daniel Teitiba at [Tenancy address suppressed] is terminated, and possession is granted to [The landlord/s], at 11.59pm on Wednesday 11 February 2026.
Daniel Teitiba must pay [The landlord/s] $508.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing by phone call.
The tenant was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered. I am satisfied the tenant was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in his absence.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent and reimbursement of the filing fee. Termination
The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. 1
Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that the tenant has failed to do so.
The tenant breached their obligations by failing to pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 2
The landlord served a notice to remedy a breach on the tenant on 13 November 2025. The tenant did not remedy the breach.
The landlord wants the tenancy to end. I do note that the landlord suggested that the hearing is adjourned to monitor the tenant’s repayment of the rent arrears, however in the absence of the tenant at the hearing to explore this further I declined to adjourn the matter.
In Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management 3 the Court needed to consider the extent of section 56(1)(c), which requires consideration of whether the breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy. The Court set out a range of factors that would be relevant, being: a) The history of the tenancy. b) Whether there had been a persistent failure after repeated warnings. c) Whether the history of breaches was such it was unlikely the tenant would comply with their obligations in the future. d) Whether the breach was inadvertent or deliberately committed. e) The conduct of the landlord. f) The gravity of the breach. g) Whether termination is a proportionate response to the breach.
I have considered these factors, and I find it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. This is because: 1 See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 2 See section 40 (1) (a) RTA 3 Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229 (Judge Rowe) at [61]., a. There has been a history of the tenant not paying rent when it is due. b. I consider this to be a serious breach of the tenant’s obligations. c. The tenant has not attended the hearing. I therefore have no basis to find that the tenant will comply with his obligation to pay rent when it is due moving forward. d. Rent is now 7 days behind when it should be in advance. e. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy as the rent remains in arrears,
I consider that termination is a proportionate response to the breach. The tenancy is terminated.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenant must pay the rent as and when it is due and payable under the tenancy agreement. 4 The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing as at the hearing date. Bond
The landlord withdrew the claim for the bond. Filing fee
Because the landlord has succeeded with the claim, I must reimburse the filing fee. Suppression
The landlord sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5400839 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5400839 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions