Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5467229 — Rent arrears at 16 Nan Place, Pakuranga Heights, Auckland 2010
Decided 11 June 2026 · Published 11 June 2026 · Application 5467229
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Auckland
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
W Lang
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $3,099.43
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$3,000.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $99.43
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent arrears from 4 February 2026 to 12 June 2026 | $3,071.43 | Rent arrears from 4 February 2026 to 12 June 2026 | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $99.43 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $99.43 |
Claims and awards for application 5467229 — net $99.43 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears from 4 February 2026 to 12 June 2026
- Amount
- $3,071.43
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears from 4 February 2026 to 12 June 2026
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $99.43
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $99.43
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- The tenancy of Brett Grahame Holloway, Andrew Quaid Gupwell and Te Aroha Samantha Georgina Ihaka at 16 Nan Place, Pakuranga Heights, Auckland 2010 is terminated, and possession is granted to Fair Rentals Limited As Agent For Mazay Kumar & Nishi Patel, at 11.59pm on Friday 12 June 2026.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,000.00 (BN-25107887) to Fair Rentals Limited As Agent For Mazay Kumar & Nishi Patel immediately.
- Brett Grahame Holloway, Andrew Quaid Gupwell and TE Aroha Samantha Georgina Ihaka must pay Fair Rentals Limited As Agent For Mazay Kumar & Nishi Patel $99.43 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:
Reasons
- The hearing was held remotely. Rajath Singh attended the hearing for the landlord. None of the tenants were in the Teams waiting room at the start of the tenancy. I rang the tenants using the number on the application form. The number is the same as recorded on tenancy agreement; only one mobile number was given for all tenants. The call went to answer phone.
- I am satisfied the tenants received notice of the hearing and the landlord’s claim. The hearing continued in the absence of the tenants.
- The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond. The landlord withdrew its application for payment of overdue power bills at the hearing. As noted at the hearing the landlord needs to ensure for any future application for unpaid power bills, that the power costs being claimed falls within the time period of the tenancy 1 .
When did the tenancy commence?
- Before considering the application I needed to understand when the tenancy commenced. The landlord’s application records the tenancy started on 4 February 2026. The tenancy agreement also records that the tenancy commenced on the same date.
- However the rental summary shows rent being charged from 31 January 2026. The landlord had not provided any explanation to explain the inconsistency pof the rent summary commencement date to the date it had recorded on its application or the date recorded in the tenancy agreement.
- The landlord’s representative was not able to provide any documentation at the hearing which establish that the date had changed, or more significantly that the tenants had agreed that the date the tenancy had started was earlier than the date in the tenancy agreement. By recording 4 February 2026 in the tenancy application my view is that the landlord has held out that that this is the date the tenancy started.
- Therefore in determining the landlord’s application I have consider the tenancy started on 4 February 2026.
Should the tenancy terminate?
- The landlord has applied for termination on the basis that: 1 The power bill sought in the application is for power from 13 January 2026 to 4 February 2026. a) rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed 2 , and b) that the tenants have breached their obligation to pay rent, and that as a result a 14-day notice has been issued under which the breach was not remedied 3 . a) Was the rent at least 21 days in arrears on the date of the application?
- Where a landlord applies to terminate for breach, and rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the hearing date, the Tribunal must terminate the tenancy. See sections 55 and 56(2) RTA.
- The landlord filed its application on 13 March 2026. Rent is $750.00 a week. The amount of rent owing at 13 March was $1,821.43. That is, rent of $4,071.43 was due from 4 February to 13 March 2026 but the tenants only paid $2,250.00.
- Based on the weekly rent of $750.00, 21 days’ rent amounts to $2,250.00. Therefore the tenants arrears on 13 March of $1,821.43 are less than 21 days arrears. The landlord is not entitled to termination on this basis. b) Did the landlord fail to remedy the 14-day breach notice?
- The breach notice issued on 23 February expired on 9 March 2026. The rent summary establishes that the tenant was in arrears on 9 March and therefore had not remedied the breach notice.
- Section 56(2), RTA provides that where a landlord makes an application under s 56 and the Tribunal is satisfied that on the date of the hearing the landlord could have made an application under s 55, the Tribunal shall determine the matter as if it is an application under s 55.
- At the date of the hearing the landlord’s rent summary shows the tenants owe at least 21 days in arrears. As the landlord could have made an application under s55(1) to terminate the tenancy as at today’s date, the tenancy is terminated.
How much does the tenant owe?
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears and has provided rent records which prove the amount owing to the end of the tenancy. 2 See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). 3 See section 56(1), RTA Reimbursement of the Filing Fee
- As the landlord has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s55, s55(1), s56, s56(1), s56(2)
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5467229?
The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Brett Grahame Holloway, Andrew Quaid Gupwell and Te Aroha
How much money was awarded in case 5467229?
Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,071.43 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5467229?
The primary dispute was Rent arrears.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5467229?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13734374-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.