Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5466248 — Tenancy dispute at 31 Waimai Avenue, Weymouth, Auckland 2103
Decided 27 March 2026 · Published 27 March 2026 · Application 5466248
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
K Henry
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
No individual claim amounts were reconciled for this order. View the official Ministry of Justice PDF for full detail.
Order
- The application for termination under the expedited abandonment process is not granted.
- The application is referred to Tenancy Services for a full hearing to be scheduled.
- The landlord’s application for suppression is dismissed.
Reasons
- The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for abandonment through the expedited process under section 91AA of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA.)
- The landlord’s name has been amended to reflect what is recorded in the tenancy agreement.
Are there grounds for an expedited application?
- The two requirements for the expedited process are: a. The tenant does not want to contest the abandonment application. b. The information provided by the landlord with the application is sufficient to enable the Tribunal to determine it properly without a hearing (either on the basis of the information alone or with only minor clarifications).
- If the requirements for the expedited process are met, the Tribunal may terminate the tenancy where the premises have been abandoned and rent is in arrear at the hearing date. (See section 61 of the RTA.) A tenancy is abandoned where the tenant leaves the premises without reasonable excuse, not intending to return or to meet their obligations, and fails to notify the landlord.
- I am not satisfied that both conditions for the expedited process are met. The landlord advises that the keys were returned to him via a neighbour of the premises who had received the keys from another neighbour of the premises.
- The landlord has provided photographs of the garage taken by a neighbour. The landlord has said in the application that the remainder of the premises were empty. However, there are no photographs to show this, and it appears that it was not the landlord but a neighbour of the premises who viewed the premises.
- In circumstances where the landlord does not have sufficient photographic evidence and where it was not the landlord who visited the premises, I would expect to see a signed statement of the person who accessed the premises setting out the state of the premises (i.e. that there was no food in the kitchen, all personal belongings had been removed etc.).
- The information provided by the landlord with this application is not sufficient to enable the Tribunal to determine it properly without a hearing.
- The landlord had applied for suppression. However, as the landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful with this application, the application for suppression is dismissed.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s61, s91AA
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5466248?
The tribunal order states: The application for termination under the expedited abandonment process is not
How much money was awarded in case 5466248?
Verified claim lines are listed on this page.
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5466248?
The dispute type was not classified.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5466248?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13361007-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.