What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5471666 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 5471666?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5471666?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5471666?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13772462-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5471666 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 5471666?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5471666?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5471666?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13772462-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5471666 — Rent arrears

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 is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord appeared by video and the tenant appeared by telephone.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy based on rent arrears.
The rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed and the landlord sought termination on this basis. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986,RTA.
As at the date of the hearing the tenant has repaid all the rent owing and remedied the breach. The landlord provided rent records which prove that there is no rent owing at date of the hearing.
A 90 day notice has been issued terminating the tenancy on 8 July 2026.
Following discussions between the parties the landlord sought termination on 30 June 2026, one week before the date given in the 90 day notice of termination.
The Tribunal may refuse to make an order under section 55(1) RTA only if the tenant has remedied the breach and the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach and it is unlikely that the tenant will commit any further breach of this kind. See section 55(2) RTA.
The tenant said that they had recently been unwell which affected work hours and rent payments. This has been rectified and support from a WINZ top up received and the tenant is receiving payments from a new boarder. The tenant provided a verbal itemised list of income sources.
The tenant assured the landlord that they can pay the rent for the remaining 20 days of their tenancy and questioned what a difference 8 days would make from the termination date sought at the hearing of 30 June 2026, to 90 day notice date of 8 July 2026. They said if the tenancy were terminated early, they could end up living in their car.
I have considered the parties submissions and find that the tenant has remedied the breach and assured the landlord that they will make rent payments on time and when due. The tenants updated position supports this claim. The bond held for the tenancy is $2320.00 which would more than cover the rent owing if the tenant the failed to pay any rent from the hearing date, although the tenant assured the Tribunal that this will not occur.
On these grounds I dismiss the landlord application. The tenancy is not terminated.
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The landlord has not been successful with their application. I have considered the parties interest and interest to the public and, also due to the nature of some of the issues discussed in the order, grant name suppression for the tenant.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord appeared by video and the tenant appeared by telephone.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy based on rent arrears.

The rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed and the landlord sought termination on this basis. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986,RTA.

As at the date of the hearing the tenant has repaid all the rent owing and remedied the breach. The landlord provided rent records which prove that there is no rent owing at date of the hearing.

A 90 day notice has been issued terminating the tenancy on 8 July 2026.

Following discussions between the parties the landlord sought termination on 30 June 2026, one week before the date given in the 90 day notice of termination.

The Tribunal may refuse to make an order under section 55(1) RTA only if the tenant has remedied the breach and the landlord has been compensated for any loss arising from the breach and it is unlikely that the tenant will commit any further breach of this kind. See section 55(2) RTA.

The tenant said that they had recently been unwell which affected work hours and rent payments. This has been rectified and support from a WINZ top up received and the tenant is receiving payments from a new boarder. The tenant provided a verbal itemised list of income sources.

The tenant assured the landlord that they can pay the rent for the remaining 20 days of their tenancy and questioned what a difference 8 days would make from the termination date sought at the hearing of 30 June 2026, to 90 day notice date of 8 July 2026. They said if the tenancy were terminated early, they could end up living in their car.

I have considered the parties submissions and find that the tenant has remedied the breach and assured the landlord that they will make rent payments on time and when due. The tenants updated position supports this claim. The bond held for the tenancy is $2320.00 which would more than cover the rent owing if the tenant the failed to pay any rent from the hearing date, although the tenant assured the Tribunal that this will not occur.

On these grounds I dismiss the landlord application. The tenancy is not terminated.

Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.

The landlord has not been successful with their application. I have considered the parties interest and interest to the public and, also due to the nature of some of the issues discussed in the order, grant name suppression for the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5471666 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5471666 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions