How much money was awarded in case 5446817?

Compensation: $1,914.29 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,928.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5446817?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5446817?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13219395-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5446817?

Compensation: $1,914.29 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,928.57 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5446817?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5446817?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13219395-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5446817 — Rent arrears

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5446817 about?

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

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5446817 — net $1,390.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 21 February 2026	$1,928.57	Rent arrears to 21 February 2026
Compensation for rent reduction	$1,914.29	Compensation for rent reduction
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,390.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,390.86

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

Prasanth Reddy Adapa must pay [The applicant/s] $1,445.14 immediately, as calculated below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,480.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The landlord/s] immediately.

The landlord’s claim for reconnection of the electricity is dismissed.

The tenant’s claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted remotely. [Mr T] appeared as property manager for the trust. He is referred to as the landlord in this decision.

The tenant has applied for release of the bond and to be released from a fixed- term tenancy.

The landlord has cross-applied for rent arrears, electricity reconnection fee and release of bond.

On 12 December 2025 the parties entered into a fixed-term tenancy due to start on 31 January 2026 and end on 22 January 2027.

On 18 December 2025, the tenant emailed the landlord saying that they had changed their mind with regards to the property because they had found another property. The tenant asked about the bond refund process.

The landlord replied that, as discussed by phone, this is a fixed-term tenancy in place until January 2027 and so they had to find a suitable replacement tenant. He explained the process and said that he was on Christmas holiday break until 5 January and would commence the advertising process then. The landlord advised the Tribunal that he was overseas over Christmas.

The landlord has found another tenant, who moved in on 22 February 2026. The tenant’s claims

The tenant seeks a refund of his bond and does not consider he is liable for the amount the landlord seeks. Fixed-term tenancy

The tenant changed his mind about the tenancy, but when parties sign a fixed- term tenancy, they are bound by the terms of the agreement until the end date.

Section 66 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that on application by a party to a fixed-term tenancy, the Tribunal may make an order reducing or varying the term of the tenancy, where it is satisfied that, because of an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances, the severe hardship which the applicant would suffer if the term of the tenancy were not reduced would be greater than the hardship which the other party to the tenancy would suffer if the term were reduced.

The tenant gave no evidence of unforeseen circumstances. As explained at the hearing, unforeseen circumstances are usually matters such as losing one’s job or being transferred to another town. The tenant’s application for reduction of fixed-term is not established. Rent arrears

The landlord has provided rent records which prove the amount owing up to 21 February 2026 is $1,928.57, being 3 weeks and 1 day from 31 January to 21 February 2026 inclusive.

The tenant says that the landlord should have readvertised the property sooner and should have dropped the rent sooner.

The landlord was told on 18 December that the tenant did not want to move into the premises. The landlord advertised the property on or about 6 January, when he got back from holiday.

Section 49 of the Residential Tenancies Act says that where any party to a tenancy agreement breaches any of the provisions of the agreement or of this Act, the other party shall take all reasonable steps to limit the damage or loss arising from that breach, in accordance with the rules of law relating to mitigation of loss or damage upon breach of contract.

Section 66 says that where a tenant abandons a fixed-term tenancy, the landlord is under no obligation to mitigate their loss.

By not moving into the property, the tenant has abandoned the tenancy. On that basis the landlord is under no obligation to mitigate their loss.

Even if this is not treated as an abandoned tenancy, I am satisfied that the landlord took reasonable steps to limit the loss arising from the tenant’s breach of contract. Having secured a 12-month fixed-term tenancy, it was reasonable that the landlord took a planned break over Christmas.

The property was initially readvertised at the same rate as the tenant had contracted to pay, but when there was no interest, it was readvertised at $580 a week. One person applied and the new tenancy was secured.

The tenant says that the landlord should have advertised it at the lower rate straight away. Given it was less than one month earlier when the tenant had signed the lease at $620, it was entirely reasonable that the landlord attempted to get a tenant signed up for the same rate.

I am satisfied that the landlord took reasonable steps to try to limit the loss resulting from the tenant’s reneging on a 12-month lease.

The fixed-term tenancy between these parties is terminated on 21 February 2026.

The tenant has not paid the rent owed up to and including 21 February 2026. He owes $1,928.57 plus the difference between the amount the tenant would have paid under the fixed-term and the amount the new tenant will pay for the period 22 February 2026 to 22 January 2027. That is 47 weeks and 6 days at $40 a week, which comes to $1,914.29. Electricity

The landlord claimed $175 for a reconnection fee for the electricity. He explained that the company would not keep the electricity connected when it was not in the name of a customer. If the tenant had moved in as planned, the power would have not have been disconnected.

The landlord produced an undated email from Commercial Utilities Ltd which said that if the property was disconnected, there would be a reconnection fee of $175.

Because there is no invoice or receipt showing that the $175 was paid, the landlord has not established that this amount was paid. This claim is dismissed.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. There is an order for suppression of the landlord’s name.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5446817 — net $1,390.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 21 February 2026	$1,928.57	Rent arrears to 21 February 2026
Compensation for rent reduction	$1,914.29	Compensation for rent reduction
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,390.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,390.86