What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5418549 about?

The tribunal order states: Property Management Specialists Limited possession order is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5418549?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418549?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418549?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12944929-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5418549 about?

The tribunal order states: Property Management Specialists Limited possession order is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5418549?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418549?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418549?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12944929-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

32B Dart Place, Fernhill, Queenstown 9300 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5418549 — Rent arrears

Order

Property Management Specialists Limited possession order is dismissed.
The 90 day notice purporting to end the tenancy was not served on the tenant at her address for service and is therefore invalid.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy pursuant to 90 day notice.
The tenant says that the notice is invalid and should be set aside.
On 7 August 2025 the landlord issued 90 day purporting to end the tenancy on 7 November 2025. The notice states that the premises are to be put on the market for sale and the owner requires vacant possession for this to occur.

Is the notice technically correct?

Section 50(1) of the RTA enables a landlord to issue 90-day notice to end a tenancy, without providing reasons. It is only if a landlord issues 42-day notice that reasons must be provided.
Section 51(3) sets out the requirements of a termination notice including that it must be in writing and specify the date by which the tenant must vacate.
The technical requirements are met.

Was the notice correctly served on the tenant?

Section 136 (1) of the Act sets out the requirements for effective service of notices in relation to a tenancy.
Of relevance it states that notices may be transmitted to an email address or facsimile number given by the landlord or the tenant “as an address for service”.
Section 136(9) provides that where any document is transmitted by email, in accordance with this section after 5pm on any day, it shall be deemed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have been given or served on the next working day after the date on which it is transmitted.
Section 136A of the Act provides that where the Act requires notice to be given of anything and prescribes a following period within which, or the expiry of which, a thing is required or permitted to be done, or change in the parties rights, obligations, interests or status is to take effect, the period : (a) commences on the first day after the notice is given or deemed to be given under section 136; and (b) ends on the close of the last day of the period.
Section 13AB of the Act states that an address for service means any address given by the landlord or tenants under this Act as an address for service at which notices and other documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted by or on behalf of the landlord or tenant, as the case may be.
A party that is required to give an address for service must give an address of a physical place in New Zealand; and may, in addition, specify an email address, as one of the party’s addresses for service.
Section 16 of the Act enables a party to change an address for service by notifying the other party of the change.
On 23 March 2023 the tenant signed a tenancy agreement as one tenant of a joint tenancy of 5 tenants. She confirmed on that agreement that her email address was deetaylor005@gmail.com and this was to be used as her address for service in relation to tenancy matters.
On 25 October 24 she confirmed her email address was deetaylor005@gmail.com and that it could continue to be used as an address for service, when she signed a tenancy variation document and became the sole tenant.
Around March 2023 the tenant had advised the landlord that she had a new email address (associated with an i-phone she had begun to use) magnetic86@icloud.com
The landlord said after this she used both the icloud and gmail email addresses to communicate with the tenant. The parties also communicated via messenger and text.
On 5 August 2025 the landlord advised the tenant (in a text) that the owners wanted to sell the property and were “going to give notice for vacant possession”.
The tenant expressed her disappointment and said she would “wait to hear”.
On 7 August 2025 the landlord sent a notice to end the tenancy to the tenant’s icloud email address. For unknown reasons, it was not copied to the tenant’s email/gmail account that she had confirmed was her address for service.
The tenant says she did not receive the 90 day notice as she was no longer using the iPhone by then and rarely checked that email. She says it was not until 23 October 2025 that she saw the notice to end the tenancy when it was hand delivered to her.
There is no dispute that the landlord delivered the 90 day notice to end the tenancy to the tenant on 23 October 2025. The notice was in a bundle of documents associated with separate Tribunal proceedings to end the tenancy because of rent arrears.

Was the 7 August 2025 notice correctly served on the tenant?

I am unable to find that the notice to end the tenancy was validly served on the tenant when it was sent on 7 August 2025 only to the alternative email address she had provided and not to her email address for service.
I accept her evidence that she did not receive the notice as she no longer had an iphone by that date and rarely checked the email as she no longer used it and that she was not aware of the 90 day notice until it was delivered to her in October 2025.
In October 2024 the tenant had specifically confirmed in writing on the tenancy agreement variation that her gmail address was to be used as her address for service.
In other words, she had never advised the landlord to use her iCloud address as a new address for service or that her original email address was no longer operative.
The 90 day notice was not sent to the email address for service the tenant had provided. It was not therefore correctly served until it was hand delivered on 23 October 2025.
The landlord requested the Tribunal amend the notice to give 90 day notice effective from 23 October 2025 and therefore make a possession order ending the tenancy on 23 January 2026.
The tenant did not agree with this approach.
The landlord may make an application to vary the notice, but that will require a separate application.
As things stand the 90-day notice issued on 7 August to end the tenancy on 7 November 2025 is invalid as it was not correctly served on the tenant until 23 October 2025.
The application for a possession order on the basis that the tenant has not vacated in accordance with that notice must therefore be dismissed.
As the application is not successful the tenant’s name is to be supressed.

Order

Property Management Specialists Limited possession order is dismissed.
The 90 day notice purporting to end the tenancy was not served on the tenant at her address for service and is therefore invalid.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy pursuant to 90 day notice.
The tenant says that the notice is invalid and should be set aside.
On 7 August 2025 the landlord issued 90 day purporting to end the tenancy on 7 November 2025. The notice states that the premises are to be put on the market for sale and the owner requires vacant possession for this to occur.

Is the notice technically correct?

Section 50(1) of the RTA enables a landlord to issue 90-day notice to end a tenancy, without providing reasons. It is only if a landlord issues 42-day notice that reasons must be provided.
Section 51(3) sets out the requirements of a termination notice including that it must be in writing and specify the date by which the tenant must vacate.
The technical requirements are met.

Was the notice correctly served on the tenant?

Section 136 (1) of the Act sets out the requirements for effective service of notices in relation to a tenancy.
Of relevance it states that notices may be transmitted to an email address or facsimile number given by the landlord or the tenant “as an address for service”.
Section 136(9) provides that where any document is transmitted by email, in accordance with this section after 5pm on any day, it shall be deemed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have been given or served on the next working day after the date on which it is transmitted.
Section 136A of the Act provides that where the Act requires notice to be given of anything and prescribes a following period within which, or the expiry of which, a thing is required or permitted to be done, or change in the parties rights, obligations, interests or status is to take effect, the period : (a) commences on the first day after the notice is given or deemed to be given under section 136; and (b) ends on the close of the last day of the period.
Section 13AB of the Act states that an address for service means any address given by the landlord or tenants under this Act as an address for service at which notices and other documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted by or on behalf of the landlord or tenant, as the case may be.
A party that is required to give an address for service must give an address of a physical place in New Zealand; and may, in addition, specify an email address, as one of the party’s addresses for service.
Section 16 of the Act enables a party to change an address for service by notifying the other party of the change.
On 23 March 2023 the tenant signed a tenancy agreement as one tenant of a joint tenancy of 5 tenants. She confirmed on that agreement that her email address was deetaylor005@gmail.com and this was to be used as her address for service in relation to tenancy matters.
On 25 October 24 she confirmed her email address was deetaylor005@gmail.com and that it could continue to be used as an address for service, when she signed a tenancy variation document and became the sole tenant.
Around March 2023 the tenant had advised the landlord that she had a new email address (associated with an i-phone she had begun to use) magnetic86@icloud.com
The landlord said after this she used both the icloud and gmail email addresses to communicate with the tenant. The parties also communicated via messenger and text.
On 5 August 2025 the landlord advised the tenant (in a text) that the owners wanted to sell the property and were “going to give notice for vacant possession”.
The tenant expressed her disappointment and said she would “wait to hear”.
On 7 August 2025 the landlord sent a notice to end the tenancy to the tenant’s icloud email address. For unknown reasons, it was not copied to the tenant’s email/gmail account that she had confirmed was her address for service.
The tenant says she did not receive the 90 day notice as she was no longer using the iPhone by then and rarely checked that email. She says it was not until 23 October 2025 that she saw the notice to end the tenancy when it was hand delivered to her.
There is no dispute that the landlord delivered the 90 day notice to end the tenancy to the tenant on 23 October 2025. The notice was in a bundle of documents associated with separate Tribunal proceedings to end the tenancy because of rent arrears.

Was the 7 August 2025 notice correctly served on the tenant?

I am unable to find that the notice to end the tenancy was validly served on the tenant when it was sent on 7 August 2025 only to the alternative email address she had provided and not to her email address for service.
I accept her evidence that she did not receive the notice as she no longer had an iphone by that date and rarely checked the email as she no longer used it and that she was not aware of the 90 day notice until it was delivered to her in October 2025.
In October 2024 the tenant had specifically confirmed in writing on the tenancy agreement variation that her gmail address was to be used as her address for service.
In other words, she had never advised the landlord to use her iCloud address as a new address for service or that her original email address was no longer operative.
The 90 day notice was not sent to the email address for service the tenant had provided. It was not therefore correctly served until it was hand delivered on 23 October 2025.
The landlord requested the Tribunal amend the notice to give 90 day notice effective from 23 October 2025 and therefore make a possession order ending the tenancy on 23 January 2026.
The tenant did not agree with this approach.
The landlord may make an application to vary the notice, but that will require a separate application.
As things stand the 90-day notice issued on 7 August to end the tenancy on 7 November 2025 is invalid as it was not correctly served on the tenant until 23 October 2025.
The application for a possession order on the basis that the tenant has not vacated in accordance with that notice must therefore be dismissed.
As the application is not successful the tenant’s name is to be supressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418549 — Rent arrears at 32B Dart Place, Fernhill, Queenstown 9300

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418549 — Rent arrears at 32B Dart Place, Fernhill, Queenstown 9300

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the notice technically correct?

Was the notice correctly served on the tenant?

Was the 7 August 2025 notice correctly served on the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the notice technically correct?

Was the notice correctly served on the tenant?

Was the 7 August 2025 notice correctly served on the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions