Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5482409 — Rent arrears
Decided 20 Apr 2026 · Published 20 Apr 2026 · Application 5482409
- Rent arrears
Party names are redacted in the official published order. This page summarises the dispute only — not individual identities.
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Adjudicator
B King
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
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
- The landlord’s application is dismissed.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing which was held by videoconference.
- The landlord seeks orders confirming termination of the tenancy and for payment of rent arrears.
- The tenant seeks payment of the bond to him. He has not filed an application but the landlord agrees that issue should be determined. Background
- The parties were landlord and tenant under a residential tenancy agreement.
- It was a periodic tenancy and could be ended by the tenant giving 21 days’ notice. 1
- Section 51(4) RTA provides that, “In a notice to terminate a tenancy, no special form of words shall be required; and no such notice shall be held invalid for any failure to comply strictly with the requirements of subsection (3) so long as the notice is in writing, the intention to terminate the tenancy on a particular date or on the expiry of a particular period is stated clearly in the notice, and that any non-compliance is not such as to mislead or affect unjustly the interests of the recipient.”
- On 17 March 2026 the tenant e-mailed the landlord, “...I have arranged alternative housing and will be vacating the premises Sunday 22 March.”
- That was an unequivocal written notice of the tenant’s intent to end the tenancy and when he would be vacating. It was effective to bring the tenancy to an end. Twenty-one day’s notice was required so the tenant would have been required to continue paying rent until 7 April 2026, despite having moved out before then.
- The landlord’s application claimed the tenant had abandoned the premises, which, with respect, the tenant clearly hadn’t.
- After subsequent communications between the parties, on 29 March 2026 the landlord e-mailed the tenant, “Yesterday I completed your outgoing inspection, received the key and now confirm you’ve vacated. Thanks for leaving the place clean and tidy and fully vacating......The tenancy is terminated as of yesterday Saturday 28 March. Rent was paid up to that date so there is no balance due. Please confirm by reply that we are in agreement on the above and that will conclude the tenancy.” (my emphasis)
- The highlighted passage is relevant because the landlord’s position is that by failing to provide that reply confirmation, the tenant did not do what was required to bring the tenancy to an end on that date.
- With respect, I find that the landlord is incorrect for three reasons; a. by agreement, the landlord recovered possession of the premises on 28 March. He completed that outgoing inspection on that date which is inconsistent with a continuing tenancy. By possession having been retaken by the landlord, the tenancy ended on that date; b. the tenant replied to the e-mail on 30 March saying, “Yes, I have fully moved out and completed a final inspection with you on Saturday.” While the landlord may have preferred or expected a different form of wording, in my view that reply can only be interpreted as the tenant giving the landlord 1 S.51(2A) RTA the confirmation the landlord had requested, that the tenancy was at an end; c. I understand that some difficulties between the parties made the landlord more than usually anxious to make sure there was no doubt about the tenancy having ended before using the premises for other purposes. However, having said to the tenant “The tenancy is terminated as of yesterday Saturday 28 March. Rent was paid up to that date so there is no balance due.” It would not be just, in my view, to allow the landlord to resile from that representation, to require an agreement that was not necessary as a matter of law, to bring the agreement to an end.
- For those reasons, I find that the tenancy ended on 28 March 2026. As there were no rent or other amounts owing: a. the landlord’s compensation claims is dismissed; and b. the bond must be paid to the tenant.
- No order is made about the filing fee.