What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5421152 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5421152?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,645.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421152?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421152?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13268319-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5421152 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5421152?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,645.71 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421152?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421152?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13268319-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5421152 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421152. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 16.03.2026	$1,645.71		Rent arrears to 16.03.2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address.
[The tenant/s] must pay The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove $0.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay $1,673.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove immediately.
The Bond Centre is to hold the balance of the bond, being $806.29 ([Bond number suppressed]) at the Bond Centre.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Mr Singh and Ms Beca, representing the landlord, and [Tenant 1], representing both tenants, all attended the video conference hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The landlord sought to add a claim for outgoings during the hearing. The tenant did not consent to the landlord adding the claim for outgoings and so I cannot add this claim to the application or hear it.
At the start of the hearing, the landlord said the tenant gave notice to vacate the property on 16 March 2026, which was confirmed by the tenant. However, the landlord asked the Tribunal to still decide the landlord’s claim to terminate the tenancy, so this is dealt with below.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The amount of rent arrears was not at least 21 days in arrears either at the time that the landlord filed the application, nor at the hearing date. Therefore, the landlord cannot prove a claim for termination of the tenancy pursuant to section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
Pursuant to a claim under section 56 of the RTA to terminate the tenancy, a landlord must show that the tenant has committed a breach of any of the provisions of the tenancy agreement or the RTA, and, in the case of a breach capable of remedy, that the landlord gave the tenant a 14-day notice requiring the tenant to remedy the breach within a reasonable period, that the tenant failed to remedy the breach within the required period, and that the breach is of such a nature that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy.
The landlord issued a 14-day notice to the tenant dated 22 December 2025, requiring the tenant to remedy the breach of not paying rent by 6 January 2026. The landlord provided a copy of this 14-day notice.
From the rent summary provided, it does not appear that the tenant remedied the breach by 6 January 2026. However, the rent summary indicated the tenant made several large payments towards rent arrears not long after this, clearing a large portion of, but not all, the rent arrears owing.
The landlord did not provide any other 14-day notices.
The District Court in Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229, at paragraph [61] set out the factors which are relevant to whether it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, including: a. The history of the tenancy. b. Whether there has been 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 will deal with each of these factors in turn, as follows: a. There was little evidence provided by the landlord about the history of the tenancy, other than the rent summary. The tenancy began on 3 March 2023, three years ago. Over that period, the rent summary shows the tenant being mostly in credit with rent, aside from a few smaller amount exceptions. The tenant was in credit with rent as of 11 December 2025. Then there was a period of non-payment of rent. The tenant said at the hearing she had had her work hours cut and she notified the landlord about this and tried to negotiate alternatives. The rent summary shows that on 12 February 2026, the tenant began payments again towards rent arrears, making a large payment of $4,450.00 and three x $640.00 payments to bring the rent arrears down to $1,280.00 at the hearing date. b. The landlord did not provide any evidence about any repeated warnings to the tenant, other than the one 14-day notice dated 12 December 2025 provided. c. Given the rent summary, which appears to show the tenant actively maintaining rent mostly in credit for most of the tenancy up to around mid- December 2025, when the tenant said her work hours were cut and she notified the landlord of this, then the tenant began regular and a large payment to pay down the rent arrears. At the hearing, the tenant said she could likely clear the balance of rent arrears owing within the next few days after the hearing. From the evidence, I do not find it unlikely the tenant would fail to comply with their obligations in the future. d. The tenant said the breach of rent payments was due to work hours being cut, that the landlord was notified of this and the tenant sought to make other arrangements with the landlord, which the tenant said were rebuffed. e. There is little evidence about the conduct of the landlord. f. The breach of rent payments was grave, from the rent summary, as the rent arrears rose up to $4,480.00 at its highest during the period of non- payment, when the tenant said her work hours were cut. g. Given the payment history of the tenant for most of the tenancy, the efforts made by the tenant from 12 February 2026 to pay large amounts off the rent arrears owing, and the tenant’s willingness to pay off the balance owing within a short time after the hearing, and given only one 14-day notice was provided by the landlord, I do not find that termination is a proportionate response to the breach. h. Therefore, as I do not find it inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, and as there were no other grounds put forward by the landlord for termination, I dismiss the landlord’s claim for termination of the tenancy.
In any event, the parties confirmed the tenant gave notice to vacate the tenancy on 16 March 2026, the landlord confirmed they are willing to accept the short notice given by the tenant in this regard and the tenant confirmed they are leaving the property on 16 March 2026.

How much rent is owing?

The landlord provided rent records to show the rent arrears to 16 March 2026, when the tenant vacates the property, is $1,645.71. The tenant agreed to a consent order to pay rent arrears in this amount. Filing fee
Because The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove has been partly successful with the claim, I reimburse the filing fee. Refund of the bond
Generally, I would not deal with the bond when a termination claim has been dismissed, as the tenancy then is usually ongoing. However, given the tenant has provided notice to the landlord, which the landlord has accepted, and as the tenant is vacating the property on 16 March 2026, and as the landlord asked that the bond be considered to pay the order, I am prepared to make orders about the bond, despite the tenant not wishing to use the bond, but preferring to pay the order herself.
The Bond Centre is to pay $1,673.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove immediately.
The Bond Centre is to hold the balance of the bond, being $806.29 ([Bond number suppressed] at the Bond Centre, pending the landlord’s final inspection, as requested by the landlord. Suppression
The landlord did not request name suppression. The tenant requested name suppression.
As the tenant consented to an order being made that she owes the rent arrears claimed up to 16 March 2026, when the tenants will vacate the property, and given the tenant’s evidence of one of the tenant’s public-facing work, I find the tenants’ interests outweigh the public interest in publishing their names. Therefore, I order that the tenants’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address are not to be published. See section 95A(4) RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421152. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 16.03.2026	$1,645.71		Rent arrears to 16.03.2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address.
[The tenant/s] must pay The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove $0.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay $1,673.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove immediately.
The Bond Centre is to hold the balance of the bond, being $806.29 ([Bond number suppressed]) at the Bond Centre.

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Mr Singh and Ms Beca, representing the landlord, and [Tenant 1], representing both tenants, all attended the video conference hearing.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The landlord sought to add a claim for outgoings during the hearing. The tenant did not consent to the landlord adding the claim for outgoings and so I cannot add this claim to the application or hear it.
At the start of the hearing, the landlord said the tenant gave notice to vacate the property on 16 March 2026, which was confirmed by the tenant. However, the landlord asked the Tribunal to still decide the landlord’s claim to terminate the tenancy, so this is dealt with below.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

The amount of rent arrears was not at least 21 days in arrears either at the time that the landlord filed the application, nor at the hearing date. Therefore, the landlord cannot prove a claim for termination of the tenancy pursuant to section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
Pursuant to a claim under section 56 of the RTA to terminate the tenancy, a landlord must show that the tenant has committed a breach of any of the provisions of the tenancy agreement or the RTA, and, in the case of a breach capable of remedy, that the landlord gave the tenant a 14-day notice requiring the tenant to remedy the breach within a reasonable period, that the tenant failed to remedy the breach within the required period, and that the breach is of such a nature that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy.
The landlord issued a 14-day notice to the tenant dated 22 December 2025, requiring the tenant to remedy the breach of not paying rent by 6 January 2026. The landlord provided a copy of this 14-day notice.
From the rent summary provided, it does not appear that the tenant remedied the breach by 6 January 2026. However, the rent summary indicated the tenant made several large payments towards rent arrears not long after this, clearing a large portion of, but not all, the rent arrears owing.
The landlord did not provide any other 14-day notices.
The District Court in Vincent Dean Huff v City Central Property Management [2020] NZDC 19229, at paragraph [61] set out the factors which are relevant to whether it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, including: a. The history of the tenancy. b. Whether there has been 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 will deal with each of these factors in turn, as follows: a. There was little evidence provided by the landlord about the history of the tenancy, other than the rent summary. The tenancy began on 3 March 2023, three years ago. Over that period, the rent summary shows the tenant being mostly in credit with rent, aside from a few smaller amount exceptions. The tenant was in credit with rent as of 11 December 2025. Then there was a period of non-payment of rent. The tenant said at the hearing she had had her work hours cut and she notified the landlord about this and tried to negotiate alternatives. The rent summary shows that on 12 February 2026, the tenant began payments again towards rent arrears, making a large payment of $4,450.00 and three x $640.00 payments to bring the rent arrears down to $1,280.00 at the hearing date. b. The landlord did not provide any evidence about any repeated warnings to the tenant, other than the one 14-day notice dated 12 December 2025 provided. c. Given the rent summary, which appears to show the tenant actively maintaining rent mostly in credit for most of the tenancy up to around mid- December 2025, when the tenant said her work hours were cut and she notified the landlord of this, then the tenant began regular and a large payment to pay down the rent arrears. At the hearing, the tenant said she could likely clear the balance of rent arrears owing within the next few days after the hearing. From the evidence, I do not find it unlikely the tenant would fail to comply with their obligations in the future. d. The tenant said the breach of rent payments was due to work hours being cut, that the landlord was notified of this and the tenant sought to make other arrangements with the landlord, which the tenant said were rebuffed. e. There is little evidence about the conduct of the landlord. f. The breach of rent payments was grave, from the rent summary, as the rent arrears rose up to $4,480.00 at its highest during the period of non- payment, when the tenant said her work hours were cut. g. Given the payment history of the tenant for most of the tenancy, the efforts made by the tenant from 12 February 2026 to pay large amounts off the rent arrears owing, and the tenant’s willingness to pay off the balance owing within a short time after the hearing, and given only one 14-day notice was provided by the landlord, I do not find that termination is a proportionate response to the breach. h. Therefore, as I do not find it inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, and as there were no other grounds put forward by the landlord for termination, I dismiss the landlord’s claim for termination of the tenancy.
In any event, the parties confirmed the tenant gave notice to vacate the tenancy on 16 March 2026, the landlord confirmed they are willing to accept the short notice given by the tenant in this regard and the tenant confirmed they are leaving the property on 16 March 2026.

How much rent is owing?

The landlord provided rent records to show the rent arrears to 16 March 2026, when the tenant vacates the property, is $1,645.71. The tenant agreed to a consent order to pay rent arrears in this amount. Filing fee
Because The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove has been partly successful with the claim, I reimburse the filing fee. Refund of the bond
Generally, I would not deal with the bond when a termination claim has been dismissed, as the tenancy then is usually ongoing. However, given the tenant has provided notice to the landlord, which the landlord has accepted, and as the tenant is vacating the property on 16 March 2026, and as the landlord asked that the bond be considered to pay the order, I am prepared to make orders about the bond, despite the tenant not wishing to use the bond, but preferring to pay the order herself.
The Bond Centre is to pay $1,673.71 ([Bond number suppressed]) to The Rent Shop Limited As Agent For Vannak Pove immediately.
The Bond Centre is to hold the balance of the bond, being $806.29 ([Bond number suppressed] at the Bond Centre, pending the landlord’s final inspection, as requested by the landlord. Suppression
The landlord did not request name suppression. The tenant requested name suppression.
As the tenant consented to an order being made that she owes the rent arrears claimed up to 16 March 2026, when the tenants will vacate the property, and given the tenant’s evidence of one of the tenant’s public-facing work, I find the tenants’ interests outweigh the public interest in publishing their names. Therefore, I order that the tenants’ names and identifying details and the tenancy address are not to be published. See section 95A(4) RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421152 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421152 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much rent is owing?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

How much rent is owing?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions