What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5471214 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5471214?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $825.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5471214?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5471214?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13448545-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5471214 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5471214?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $825.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5471214?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5471214?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13448545-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5471214 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5471214 — net $853.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11/12/2025	$825.00	Rent arrears to 11/12/2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$853.00
Bond	$2,100.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$853.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
The application by the tenant for exemplary damages is dismissed.
[The tenant/s] must pay Dunedin City Properties Limited As Agent For Mark Edwards And Helen Wright $853.00 from the bond.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Dunedin City Properties Limited As Agent For Mark Edwards And Helen Wright: $853.00 [The tenant/s]: $1,247.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
On 22/1/2026 the tenant sought a refund of the $2,100.00 bond which she had paid and exemplary damages for the landlord entering the premises without consent.
In response on 18/3/2026 the landlord applied for eleven days rent arrears of $825.00 due to lack of appropriate notice.
Originally the tenancy was for a fixed term from 7/10/2024 to 6/10/2025 and rolled over to a periodic tenancy at the end of the term at $525.00 rent per week.
The tenancy was originally in the name of two tenants but due to the circumstances neither party wished the other tenant to be involved in the applications. Tenant’s case

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
There is no dispute that the landlord entered the premises on 16/7/2025 to deliver a clip for the shower and undertake a routine inspection.
The landlord submitted they had issued a notice for the inspection to be on 18/7/2025 and had made a mistake by entering the premises and undertaking the inspection early, for which they had apologised and offered compensation, which was refused.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act by entering the premises without consent or notice.

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

As I have found the landlord committed an unlawful act by entering the premises without consent or notice I must consider the issue of exemplary damages.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Exemplary damages under the Act are different from compensation. The provision of such damages is designed to punish and deter; Attorney-General (Commissioner of Crown Lands) v Little Bo Peep Sheep Company Ltd (HC CIV 2010-412-134).
In making an award of exemplary damages I need to consider the four matters set out in section 109(3), the first of which is intent.
For intent there must be actual knowledge of the breach. In a recent case the District Court confirmed that intentional means “in the sense of deliberately and in full knowledge” TMT New Zealand Limited TA Strata Property Management v Sweeney and Sundahl [2021] NZDC 16182.
There is no dispute that the landlord intentionally entered the premises on one occasion, nor that the landlord had subsequently apologised and offered compensation.
The entry by the landlord was initially to deliver a shower clip and after notice had been given of a pending inspection scheduled for two days later.
Having considered the factors set out in section 109(3), particularly the lack of any effect of the unlawful act on the tenant, the apology, length of time since the incident, and the public interest I consider it would not be just to award any exemplary damages.
The tenant’s claim for exemplary damages fails. Landlord’s case

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

The landlord submitted that the tenant gave two days notice on 20/11/2025 due to family violence issues.
However, the landlord via an email on 21/11/2025 declined to accept the short notice because the tenant had three weeks prior advised of domestic difficulties, that the other tenant was in prison and there was no evidence of future risk to any occupants of the premises.
The landlord agreed to accept 21 days notice from 20/11/2025 and offered to relook at the situation if further evidence could be provided.
In response the tenant relied on the discussion with her property manager about her circumstances and a letter dated 26/1/2026 from a support agency confirming her circumstances met the criteria under the Family Violence Act 2018.
Section 56B sets out the criteria for withdrawal from a periodic tenancy following family violence.
A tenant may withdraw from the tenancy by giving at least two days notice, accompanied by qualifying evidence that the tenant was a victim of family violence while a tenant of the premises.
Subsection (2) provides that if there are no other tenants under the tenancy at the time of the withdrawal, the tenancy terminates.
Family violence has the meaning given to it by section 9 of the Family Violence Act 2018 and includes psychological as well as physical abuse.
There is no dispute that at the time of giving the two day notice the tenant did not provide any qualifying evidence.
The evidence from the support agency was not provided until eight weeks after the tenant had vacated and four days after she made her application to the Tribunal.
The landlord’s position is that despite being advised of domestic issues no qualifying evidence was provided by the tenant at the time of giving notice.
Further the landlord submitted they had gone out their way to accommodate the tenant’s situation by allowing the tenancy to roll over to a periodic tenancy thus only needing twenty one days notice.
I find the tenant is liable for rent arrears to 1/12/2025, being twenty one days after she gave notice.
Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant the requirements of section 56B are clear that notice must be in the approved form and accompanied by qualifying evidence, neither of which the tenant provided when she gave notice.
The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is successful and an award for these has been made from the bond.
As the landlord has been successful with the application, I have awarded the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the tenant pursuant to section 95A(4) because I consider it is in her interests to do so due to part of the proceedings relating to section 56B.
The landlord did not seek suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5471214 — net $853.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 11/12/2025	$825.00	Rent arrears to 11/12/2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$853.00
Bond	$2,100.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$853.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
The application by the tenant for exemplary damages is dismissed.
[The tenant/s] must pay Dunedin City Properties Limited As Agent For Mark Edwards And Helen Wright $853.00 from the bond.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,100.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Dunedin City Properties Limited As Agent For Mark Edwards And Helen Wright: $853.00 [The tenant/s]: $1,247.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
On 22/1/2026 the tenant sought a refund of the $2,100.00 bond which she had paid and exemplary damages for the landlord entering the premises without consent.
In response on 18/3/2026 the landlord applied for eleven days rent arrears of $825.00 due to lack of appropriate notice.
Originally the tenancy was for a fixed term from 7/10/2024 to 6/10/2025 and rolled over to a periodic tenancy at the end of the term at $525.00 rent per week.
The tenancy was originally in the name of two tenants but due to the circumstances neither party wished the other tenant to be involved in the applications. Tenant’s case

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
There is no dispute that the landlord entered the premises on 16/7/2025 to deliver a clip for the shower and undertake a routine inspection.
The landlord submitted they had issued a notice for the inspection to be on 18/7/2025 and had made a mistake by entering the premises and undertaking the inspection early, for which they had apologised and offered compensation, which was refused.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act by entering the premises without consent or notice.

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

As I have found the landlord committed an unlawful act by entering the premises without consent or notice I must consider the issue of exemplary damages.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Exemplary damages under the Act are different from compensation. The provision of such damages is designed to punish and deter; Attorney-General (Commissioner of Crown Lands) v Little Bo Peep Sheep Company Ltd (HC CIV 2010-412-134).
In making an award of exemplary damages I need to consider the four matters set out in section 109(3), the first of which is intent.
For intent there must be actual knowledge of the breach. In a recent case the District Court confirmed that intentional means “in the sense of deliberately and in full knowledge” TMT New Zealand Limited TA Strata Property Management v Sweeney and Sundahl [2021] NZDC 16182.
There is no dispute that the landlord intentionally entered the premises on one occasion, nor that the landlord had subsequently apologised and offered compensation.
The entry by the landlord was initially to deliver a shower clip and after notice had been given of a pending inspection scheduled for two days later.
Having considered the factors set out in section 109(3), particularly the lack of any effect of the unlawful act on the tenant, the apology, length of time since the incident, and the public interest I consider it would not be just to award any exemplary damages.
The tenant’s claim for exemplary damages fails. Landlord’s case

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

The landlord submitted that the tenant gave two days notice on 20/11/2025 due to family violence issues.
However, the landlord via an email on 21/11/2025 declined to accept the short notice because the tenant had three weeks prior advised of domestic difficulties, that the other tenant was in prison and there was no evidence of future risk to any occupants of the premises.
The landlord agreed to accept 21 days notice from 20/11/2025 and offered to relook at the situation if further evidence could be provided.
In response the tenant relied on the discussion with her property manager about her circumstances and a letter dated 26/1/2026 from a support agency confirming her circumstances met the criteria under the Family Violence Act 2018.
Section 56B sets out the criteria for withdrawal from a periodic tenancy following family violence.
A tenant may withdraw from the tenancy by giving at least two days notice, accompanied by qualifying evidence that the tenant was a victim of family violence while a tenant of the premises.
Subsection (2) provides that if there are no other tenants under the tenancy at the time of the withdrawal, the tenancy terminates.
Family violence has the meaning given to it by section 9 of the Family Violence Act 2018 and includes psychological as well as physical abuse.
There is no dispute that at the time of giving the two day notice the tenant did not provide any qualifying evidence.
The evidence from the support agency was not provided until eight weeks after the tenant had vacated and four days after she made her application to the Tribunal.
The landlord’s position is that despite being advised of domestic issues no qualifying evidence was provided by the tenant at the time of giving notice.
Further the landlord submitted they had gone out their way to accommodate the tenant’s situation by allowing the tenancy to roll over to a periodic tenancy thus only needing twenty one days notice.
I find the tenant is liable for rent arrears to 1/12/2025, being twenty one days after she gave notice.
Unfortunate as it may be for the tenant the requirements of section 56B are clear that notice must be in the approved form and accompanied by qualifying evidence, neither of which the tenant provided when she gave notice.
The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is successful and an award for these has been made from the bond.
As the landlord has been successful with the application, I have awarded the filing fee.
Suppression is granted to the tenant pursuant to section 95A(4) because I consider it is in her interests to do so due to part of the proceedings relating to section 56B.
The landlord did not seek suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5471214 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5471214 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Award balance

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord enter the premises without consent or notice?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord enter the premises without consent or notice?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Does the tenant owe rent arrears?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions