Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5446829 — Rent arrears
Decided 7 May 2026 · Published 7 May 2026 · Application 5446829
- Rent arrears
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
- Akakoromaki Ngametua-Moe Nangaiti must pay [The applicant/s] $24,727.97 immediately, as follows:
Reasons
- On 14 April 2026 the Tribunal made an Order ending the tenancy on that date and directing that the bond of $5,200.00 be paid to the landlord.
- The Order noted that the amount of arrears owed meant that the Tribunal would need to consider whether the landlord had met its obligation to take reasonable mitigation steps.
- Section 49 RTA provides 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.”
- In Huang v Ashworh 1 the Tribunal had determined that the landlord should not be entitled to recover more than 3 months’ rent arrears.
- On appeal to the District Court 2 , the Court confirmed that a landlord has an obligation to mitigate rent arrears losses. In circumstances similar to this case, where the landlord had made several attempts to address the rent arears directly with the tenant, the Court said at paragraph [18], “I consider that [the landlord’s] attempts to resolve the issue of rent arrears without resorting to eviction were reasonable, especially for a tenancy that had lasted close to four years. But I qualify that: it is reasonable only up to a point. Where a tenant repeatedly breaches promises to make up arrears and instead additional arrears are incurred there comes a point when it is being naive or careless to your own interests to persist giving the tenant more time to pay. For that reason I do not consider that the full arrears can be claimed. In other words I'm satisfied of balance of probabilities that there was some fairly to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal (3 months).”
- The Tribunal must assess, in the circumstances of each case, whether the steps taken by a party to mitigate claimed losses, were reasonable.
- Here, the tenant’s last rent payment 15 October 2025. After that payment, the rent was $3,947.09 (20 days) in arrears.
- The evidence does not show formal recovery steps being taken until a 14 day notice was served on 16 February 2026, followed by this application being filed on 17 February 2026.
- The landlord is not responsible for delays arising from the time the application to the Tribunal was filed. The question is whether it was reasonable and in line with the landlord’s obligation to mitigate loss, to allow that amount of time to lapse, with arrears accumulating, before bringing this application.
- From the rent week ending 24 October 2025 when the rent was 27 days in arrears the landlord was entitled to seek termination of the tenancy. The application was not made until around 4 months’ later, during which time the amount of the arrears steadily increased.
- As was found by the District Court in Huang (above) the tenant’s persistent failure to pay the arrears and to pay the rent when due with the arrears increasing, meant that it would have been reasonable for the landlord to take steps to end the tenancy before it did. 1 Huang v Ashworth [2023] NZTT 4470826, 4599009 2 Huang v Ashworth [2024] NZDC 15726
- It is reasonable for a landlord to try other measures to have rent arears paid before filing a Tribunal application.
- Given the rent payment history for this tenancy, 8 weeks from the point the tenant was 21 days in arrears is, in my view, a more than reasonable period for the landlord to have determined whether there was any reasonable prospect of the arrears being cleared and the rent being paid when due. Neither of those things happened.
- I accordingly find that it would have been reasonable for the landlord to seek termination of the tenancy by 19 December 2025.
- I find that it would be unjust to allow the landlord to recover the unpaid rent for 8 weeks between then and when the application was filed, because that resulted from the landlord’s failure to take reasonable and available steps to mitigate the loss by seeking earlier termination of the tenancy.
- That does not apply to the water rates arrears which are a direct out of pocket cost to the landlord
- [The applicant/s][The applicant/s]