What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5422626 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 5422626?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5422626?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5422626?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13217952-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5422626 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 5422626?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5422626?

The primary dispute was Cleanliness.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5422626?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13217952-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5422626 — Cleanliness

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant has filed a claim seeking a refund of the bond and a refund of rent paid. The landlord has made a cross application disputing the tenant’s claim for a rent refund. Background

The fixed term tenancy commenced on 17 June 2025 and was due to end on 16 June 2026.

On around 18 November 2025 the tenant requested to leave the tenancy early due to a change in circumstances. There were some discussions between the parties, and the landlord proposed two options to the tenant of either paying rent until a new tenant was found or fixing an agreed end date, balancing the landlord’s need for rent and the tenant’s need for a clear end date.

The parties agreed to fixing an end date and an arrangement was reached where the tenant would pay rent until the period ending 27 January 2026 (with the last payment on 13 January 2026) and advertising costs of around $400.00. The correspondence between the parties confirmed that the tenancy would end on 27 January 2026, with the final inspection and bond processing occurring after this date.

The tenant moved out of the property on around 25 November 2025 (one week after giving notice) and paid rent up until the agreed date of 27 January 2026.

The tenant doesn’t dispute the early termination arrangement, however, she says that she should not have to pay rent until 27 January 2026, as she believes that after she vacated, the property was either re-tenanted or the landlord was living at the property. She seeks a rent refund to reflect this occupation.

The tenant also seeks a refund of the bond. The landlord advised that he had held the bond until the end of the tenancy but was now happy to agree to the bond being refunded in full.

The landlord submits that he has been in the property on various occasions to carry out cleaning and maintenance works but has not re-tenanted or personally moved into the property. The law

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) recognises fixed terms tenancies as binding until their end date, unless lawfully varied or terminated through an agreement or Tribunal order. There is a high threshold for reducing fixed terms on legal grounds such as unforeseen hardship. The Tribunal does not lightly interfere with agreed termination dates unless statutory grounds are met.

There is no obligation for a landlord to agree to reduce a fixed term tenancy.

Where a landlord does agree to a termination of a fixed term tenancy, they are entitled to recover from the outgoing tenant any expenses reasonably incurred by the landlord in respect of the termination. 1 1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), s44A(1).

Where the Tribunal makes an order to reduce the tenancy, it can also order award reasonable compensation for any losses suffered by the landlord in that reduction. 2

In many Tribunal cases, reasonable losses and compensation have included for example, reletting fees, rent in lieu of notice and rent until a new tenancy commences.

Here, the landlord did agree to reduce the fixed term tenancy, but as it was approaching the Christmas period, he also agreed to a fixed end date. In the end, both parties agreed to this, and that agreement must be treated as a binding variation or surrender of the property on agreed terms. Moving out early does not change the agreement or tenant rent obligations.

Although the tenant contends that either the landlord (or others) were staying at the property, and I have been provided with a photograph of the landlord at the property in the evening, I do not consider that I have adequate evidence to show that the property had been tenanted (or occupied by the landlord) or that any occupation by the landlord excluded the tenant or amounted to the landlord resuming possession to the extent that it negated the arrangement.

The landlord stated that he was at the property carrying out maintenance work when the photograph was taken, and I accept that to be reasonable.

There is no reason for the Tribunal to intervene in the agreement or arrangement reached between the parties.

In addition, the tenant stated that the landlord had not advertised and did not seem to be seriously trying to find a replacement tenant. Even if that were true, it is not relevant here, as the arrangement was not reliant on a new tenant being found.

I consider that the tenant has not proven the claim for a rent refund and the claim is therefore dismissed.

However, and as discussed at the hearing, I have refunded the bond to the tenant. 2 RTA, s66(2).

Both parties sought name suppression, and as the landlord has been successful in the rent refund claim and the tenant has successfully received the bond refund, this is granted. 3 R Harvey-Lane 3 March 2026 3 RTA, s95A.

Reasons