Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5487349 — Tenancy dispute
Decided 30 Apr 2026 · Published 30 Apr 2026 · Application 5487349
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
J Setefano
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 Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s and Landlord’s names and identifying details.
- [The landlord/s] are granted possession of the premises at [Tenancy address suppressed] on Wednesday 13 May 2026 at 5pm.
Reasons
- This is an application by the landlord for possession of the premises and compensation.
- The application was filed on 13 April 2026. The hearing was conducted by video conference on 29 April 2026. Both parties attended and were heard. Background
- On 10 December 2025, the landlord issued a 90-day termination notice requiring the tenant to vacate the premises by 10 March 2026.
- The landlord advised that the property was to be vacated to allow for renovations and preparation for sale following retirement.
- The tenant has remained in occupation beyond the termination date.
- The landlord seeks possession of the premises and compensation of $800 for weeding and tidying of the section. The Landlord’s Position
- The landlord submits that the tenancy has lawfully ended and that the tenant has failed to vacate.
- In relation to service, the landlord gave evidence that the notice was delivered to the premises. The landlord’s wife attended the property, observed a sign requesting that visitors not disturb the occupant, and left the notice at the address. The landlord also stated that a follow-up text message was sent to the tenant.
- The landlord claims that a significant amount of weeding and tidying of the section was carried out in December 2025.
- The landlord seeks possession, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee. The Tenant’s Position
- The tenant states that she did not receive the termination notice.
- The tenant also raises concerns regarding the condition of the property and its impact on her health and wellbeing. She advised that she is actively seeking alternative accommodation and may pursue further claims.
- The tenant disputes the landlord’s claim for compensation. Issues
- The issues for determination are whether the termination notice was properly served, whether the tenancy has lawfully ended, whether the landlord is entitled to possession, and how the compensation claim should be addressed. Relevant Law
- Under section 51 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, a landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving not less than 90 days’ written notice.
- Service of notices may be effected by delivering the notice to the tenant at the premises.
- Under section 64 of the Act, where a tenancy has ended and the tenant remains in possession, the Tribunal may make an order for possession.
- Under section 95A of the Act, the Tribunal may make an order prohibiting publication of names where it is satisfied that publication would be likely to cause hardship that outweighs the public interest in open justice. Analysis Service of Notice
- The tenant disputes receiving the termination notice.
- The landlord gave evidence that the notice was delivered to the premises and left there after observing a sign requesting that visitors not disturb the occupant. The landlord also gave evidence that a follow-up text message was sent.
- While the text message was not produced, I found the landlord’s evidence to be credible and consistent. I prefer the landlord’s evidence.
- Further, the tenant’s communications to the Tribunal indicate that she knew, or ought reasonably to have known, that the tenancy had been terminated.
- Service by leaving the notice at the premises is a valid method under the Act. Actual receipt is not required where proper delivery has occurred.
- I am satisfied, on the balance of probabilities, that the notice was properly served. Validity of Termination and Possession
- The notice issued on 10 December 2025 provided for termination on 10 March 2026. This satisfies the statutory notice period.
- There is no evidence that the notice was defective.
- I therefore find that the tenancy lawfully ended on 10 March 2026, which is less than 90 days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Act are satisfied.
- The tenant remains in occupation without right.
- The tenant’s concerns regarding the condition of the property and health impacts are not part of a formal application before the Tribunal and do not invalidate the termination notice. Should the tenant wish to pursue her claims, it is open to her to file her own application through Tenancy Services which will be heard separately.
- At the hearing, the landlord agreed to allow additional time for the tenant to vacate. In light of that agreement, it is appropriate to make a possession order effective 5:00 pm on Wednesday 13 May 2026. Compensation
- The landlord seeks $800 for weeding and tidying of the section.
- No supporting evidence was provided to substantiate the claim.
- The claim was disputed by the tenant.
- In the circumstances, I am not in a position to fairly determine this aspect of the claim.
- I therefore defer the compensation claim. It remains open to the landlord to file a separate application, with appropriate supporting evidence, if he wishes to pursue this matter. Filing Fee and Suppression
- As the landlord has been substantially successful with the claim, I order reimbursement of the filing fee and grant name suppression.
- In respect of the tenant, I am also satisfied that suppression is justified. The tenant has raised personal health concerns and is actively seeking alternative accommodation, including engagement with social housing providers. Publication of the tenant’s identity in connection with this proceeding could reasonably be expected to prejudice her housing prospects and exacerbate her current vulnerability. This risk goes beyond the ordinary consequences of Tribunal proceedings and amounts to undue hardship.
- Accordingly, suppression of the names and identifying details of both the landlord and the tenant is granted.