What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5426009 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited as the

How much money was awarded in case 5426009?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,678.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5426009?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5426009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13592901-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5426009 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited as the

How much money was awarded in case 5426009?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,678.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5426009?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5426009?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13592901-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 209, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland 2104 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5426009 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5426009 — net $7,706.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of 1 April 2026	$7,678.57	Rent arrears as of 1 April 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,706.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,706.57

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5426009 — net $7,706.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears as of 1 April 2026	$7,678.57	Rent arrears as of 1 April 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$7,706.57
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$7,706.57

Order

[The tenant/s] must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited as the agent for Jjalling Vdding $7,706.57 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears as of 1 April 2026$7,678.57 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$7,706.57

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by a landlord against the tenant. The tenancy has ended, but the landlord seeks rent arrears. However, Mr Dalton disputes that there is in fact a tenancy, and therefore he says he is not liable to pay the claimed arrears.

BACKGROUND

In this decision, where I refer to ‘Mr Dalton’, I mean [The tenant/s], the respondent.
The evidence is that prior to any proposed tenancy arising with Mr Dalton, the tenant was with Mr Dalton’s brother, James Dalton, having moved in around October 2024 (according to Mr Dalton).
Mr Dalton states that he moved into the property in December 2024, or thereabouts and was paying rent to his brother.
A statement has been provided from James Dalton (discussed below), and if that is accepted, James Dalton says that he gave the landlord notice to end the tenancy, and introduced Mr Dalton to take over the tenancy in late 2025.
On 17 December 2025, Mr Dalton met with the property manager and signed a pre-tenancy application form, both parties agree that is the case. However, the landlord’s position is that Mr Dalton also signed a tenancy agreement, and while Mr Dalton agrees that the document carries his signature, he disputes that he completed it, or in fact agreed to it.
That tenancy agreement, is a standard form Tenancy Services tenancy agreement between Jjalling Vdding by way of a property manager, Wolfbrook Property Management and [The tenant/s]. This tenancy agreement records that the tenancy was to commence on 17 December 2025, as a periodic tenancy. The tenancy agreement has been signed by Mr Dalton, and each page has been initialled.
The evidence is that the tenant was not provided a copy of the tenancy agreement until 5 January 2026, that fact is agreed by both parties.
As will be discussed below, the tenant says that when there was no tenancy agreement provided, that he simply reverted to being a flatmate of his brother who continued to be living in the premises, and any money for rent was paid to his brother, who then paid it to the owner. Mr Dalton’s position is that his brother continued as the tenant.
Ultimately, when the landlord had not received any rent payments from Mr Dalton, an application was made to terminate the tenancy.
An earlier hearing was convened, from which the tenancy was terminated and rent arrears ordered. The tenant applied for a rehearing of that order, and that was granted, but for the rent arrears dispute only, because the tenancy had by that time come to an end.
A rehearing (new hearing) was then scheduled and conducted by myself, in Manukau today. In attendance was Mr Odedra representing the landlord, and Mr Dalton was also in attendance. James Dalton’s statement
A written signed statement has been provided from James Dalton, signed and dated by a JP on 18 March 2026.
James Dalton states that he moved into the tenancy in 2024, and that there was no signed agreement at the time, it was an agreement with a work colleague.
James Dalton states he gave 2 months’ notice to end the tenancy, and that he introduced his brother to the landlord and that his brother took over the premises. James Dalton states: Because the tenancy agreement wasn’t supplied and my brother was unable to get the financial assistance the owner of the apartment was messaging asking me to pay the rent in full. As I was still being charged full rent and there was no signed tenancy agreement given to my brother I kept collecting rent off him and paying the landlord.

LANDLORDS CASE

The landlord seeks an order that the tenant pay rent arrears of $7,678.57, being the rent arrears as of 1 April 2026.
Mr Odedra states that on 17 December 2026, he met with Mr Dalton to complete the pre-tenancy agreement and at the same time, the tenancy agreement.
The landlord says that while the tenancy agreement was signed on 17 December 2025, the tenancy agreement was only provided to the tenant on 5 January 2026.
The landlord says that the tenant moved in from at least 17 December 2025.
The landlord seeks rent arrears to 1 April 2026, which was the day that the tenant returned possession of the premises to the landlord.
As will be discussed below, Mr Dalton says that he signed a blank tenancy agreement form, and that any of the details in the tenancy agreement were written in later. Mr Odedra was clear in his response to that evidence that the full tenancy agreement provided to the Tribunal was completed on 17 December 2025, in Mr Dalton’s presence, where the agreement was signed.

TENANTS CASE

Mr Dalton’s position is that he does not owe the rent to the landlord, because he does not consider he is the legal tenant of the premises.
Mr Dalton says that he was not given a chance to ‘consummate’ the tenancy because he did not receive the tenancy agreement in time, and therefore the tenancy reverted to his brother. That is, the landlord continued the tenancy with James Dalton.
Mr Dalton states that he first moved into the tenancy in 2024 as a flatmate of his brother.
Mr Dalton said that in order to get support from WINZ, a signed copy of the tenancy agreement was required, and because the document was never provided, he did not get WINZ support, being a further reason that the Tenancy needed to revert to his brother, because he could not pay the rent.
Mr Dalton says that on 17 December 2025, Mr Odedra said that he would provide a copy of the tenancy agreement. A pre-tenancy agreement was presented to Mr Dalton that day, and he agrees that he completed and signed that document. However, Mr Dalton’s Strong evidence was that he did not complete the tenancy agreement, he had not been provided all of the pages. Mr Dalton agrees that he signed the document, but that the other information was put into the agreement later. In short, Mr Dalton says that he signed a blank tenancy agreement.
Mr Dalton further states that the owner of the premises requested that the rent payments continue to be made by Mr Dalton’s brother, as there was no tenancy agreement.
Mr Dalton states that there were facilities that he should have had available, such as an on-site gym, which was not provided.
Mr Dalton states that he believes that he has been taken advantage of, and has had a worsening of his significant underlying medical conditions. I also record, that Mr Dalton has provided a USB video showing a health event he had, which Mr Dalton confirmed was because of the stress he has been under, and also some other medical information. I have considered that information.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
It is the applicant that must prove their case. As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

ANALYSIS

The question to be determined is whether an order can be made for Mr Dalton to pay the rent arrears claimed. Mr Dalton’s position is that he did not in fact have any valid tenancy agreement. If Mr Dalton was correct in that, then there would be no basis for the Tribunal to order that the rent arrears be paid by him.
There are two questions I must determine: a. Is there a valid tenancy with Mr Dalton, if so b. Does Mr Dalton owe the landlord the rent claimed? Is Mr Dalton the landlord’s tenant?
For the reasons that follow, I find that Mr Dalton was the tenant at these premises from 17 December 2025, until the Tenancy subsequently terminated and possession was returned to the landlord on 1 April 2026.
The strongest evidence supporting that Mr Dalton was a tenant from 17 December 2025 is the written tenancy agreement that is signed by both parties. There is no expectation in law that contracts be in writing 1 , but written contracts are preferred, because that sets out for the record what the parties agreed. In this case, if the tenancy agreement was accepted, it showed that the landlord agreed to rent the premises to Mr Dalton for the stated rental, from 17 December 2025, and in turn Mr Dalton agreed to rent the premises on that basis. 1 Other than for the sale and purchase of land, which is not relevant here.
Mr Dalton agrees that he signed the document, but he says it was blank. The position taken by the property manager, is that the tenancy agreement was not blank, it was completed with Mr Dalton present, and he signed it on that basis.
I consider the more likely situation is that presented by the landlord, that is, the tenancy agreement was completed with both parties present, and signed at that time.
Were I to prefer Mr Dalton’s position, I would need to accept that Mr Dalton was consenting to sign a blank document, and Mr Dalton did not strike me as being the sort of person who would do such a thing. It is well recognised that blank legal documents should not be signed, and I have no reason to believe that Mr Dalton would have taken a different course.
I can see no arguable reason why the property manager would have got Mr Dalton to sign the blank agreement. Plainly Mr Dalton was looking to rent the tenancy, hence completing the pre-tenancy agreement. It makes no sense why the property manager would have got him to sign only the pre- tenancy document, but not completing the tenancy agreement.
Furthermore, the property manager’s evidence was strong that he did not alter or add other words into the written tenancy agreement at the time, I have no reason not to accept that.
It is also the case, that Mr Dalton has indicated he was expecting to have a copy of the written tenancy agreement provided. He said that when that was not received, and the landlord (the owner) was seeking money from his brother, he assumed that there was no tenancy and he reverted to believing he was a flatmate only. But to take that approach would presuppose that Mr Dalton believed there was a tenancy agreement completed, until the copy of the tenancy agreement was not received in the timeframe expected.
There is no doubt that a copy of the tenancy agreement was not provided to the tenant at the time the tenancy agreement was completed, but that is not at all unusual. The tenancy agreement was handwritten, and obviously, to provide the tenant a copy, there would need to be facilities like a computer and scanner or a photocopier available at the time, which presumably there was not. It is commonly seen that handwritten tenancy agreements are scanned and emailed, or posted, soon after the form is completed, but not immediately at the time of signing, particularly if the signing was away from an office environment.
In this case, the landlord provided a copy of the tenancy agreement on 5 January 2026. Even taking into consideration the intervening Christmas shutdown, I would have anticipated that the landlord could have got a copy to the tenant prior to Christmas, but ultimately a copy was provided in early January.
The tenant’s position seems to be, that because no written copy of the agreement was provided, there was no tenancy agreement. Unfortunately, that is not the case. The fact that no copy of the tenancy agreement was provided, does not void or negate a valid agreement. In fact, the RTA states At section 13C that: Tenancy agreements not unenforceable on grounds not in writing Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other enactment, no tenancy agreement, or variation or renewal of a tenancy agreement, shall be unenforceable on the grounds that it is not in writing.
What that provision means, is that even if there was no written tenancy agreement at all, the Tribunal could still conclude that there was a valid Tenancy.
Because this is a periodic tenancy, the only way that Tenancy could have come to an end, other than by order of the Tribunal, is it either the party gave notice to the other.
Furthermore, this is a case where Mr Dalton continued living in the tenancy, or to be put into a tenancy context, was in possession of the premises.
Mr Dalton argues that he paid the rent to his brother. Whether Mr Dalton did pay the rent to his brother or not, would not change the obligation that he has to the landlord, which was that Mr Dalton must pay the rent to the landlord, not a third party like his brother.
Mr Dalton also refers to the landlord (that is the owner) demanding money from his brother. In support of that argument, screenshots have been provided of text messages. It is not entirely clear the details around those text messages, but even if I accepted what Mr Dalton states, that those text messages were between his brother and the landlord, that does not prove that Mr Dalton does not have a Tenancy. It shows that the landlord has required that Mr Dalton’s brother pay money, not that the landlord has cancelled or voided the tenancy agreement with Mr Dalton.
For the above reasons, I find that the evidence favours the conclusion that there is a valid tenancy existing between the landlord and [The tenant/s].
I recognise that Mr Dalton is of the view that the landlord has committed a number of breaches in relation to obligations he had to Mr Dalton. I express no view on those matters. If Mr Dalton considers that there is a claim he has against the landlord, then he is able to file his own application with the Tribunal, and we can consider those matters another day.

Does Mr Dalton owe the landlord the rent claimed?

The landlord has provided a copy of the rent ledger. Mr Dalton has not suggested that there is any error in that rental ledger. The rent ledger shows the rent payments that would fall due between 6 January 2026, and 1 April 2026, which total $7,678.57. Mr Dalton has not made any rent payments, so the claimed amount must be ordered in full.
I record for completeness that no bond was paid, so no bond can be released to reduce that debt.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5426009 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 209, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland 2104

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5426009 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 209, 8 Lakewood Court, Manukau, Auckland 2104

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CASE

TENANTS CASE

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

Does Mr Dalton owe the landlord the rent claimed?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

BACKGROUND

LANDLORDS CASE

TENANTS CASE

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

ANALYSIS

Does Mr Dalton owe the landlord the rent claimed?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions