What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5496056 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 5496056?

Break Lease Fee: $799.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,623.93 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $52.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5496056?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5496056?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13848656-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5496056 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 5496056?

Break Lease Fee: $799.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $3,623.93 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $52.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5496056?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5496056?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13848656-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 8 Paul Place, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5496056 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5496056 — net $1,723.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026	$3,623.93	Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Water rates	$52.51	Water rates
Break lease fee	$799.25	Break lease fee
Net award	$1,723.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,723.69

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant and Landlord name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $1,723.69 immediately, being half rent arrears to 1 July 2026, reimbursement of filing fee, water bills and break lease fee, as calculated and shown below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026)$3,623.93 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Water rates$52.51 Break lease fee$799.25 Total award$4,503.69 Minus Bond-$2,780.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,723.69
The bond centre is to refund the bond of $2780.00 immediately to Rent Now Property Management Limited as agent for Aryan Raghav Sinha.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This was a landlord application. This was a 12-month fixed term tenancy that commenced on 5 July 2025 and was to end on 19 July 2026.
The tenant became unwell and had to undergo surgery and a period of recuperation, where she was unable to work. The tenant and her partner could not pay the rent during this time which caused rent arrears.
The tenant advised the landlord of this, and the parties agreed that the tenant could terminate early if she paid a break lease fee and rent until the end of the tenancy or until a new tenant took possession.
The tenant and her family moved out of the property on 12 April 2026. Rent arrears and water bills:
The landlord has applied for rent arrears and water bills and has provided rent records and water invoices which prove the amount of $7247.86 in rent and $52.51 in water bills owing on 1 July 2026.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for rent arrears and water bills. The landlord is to be reimbursed the full cost of the water bills, but I must consider whether or not the full amount of rent arrears should be awarded. Mitigation of Loss – Section 49, Residential Tenancies Act 1986
The landlord seeks rent for the period from the tenant’s early termination of the fixed-term tenancy until the end of the fixed term. The tenant vacated due to illness and financial hardship, and the landlord advertised the property, interviewed 10–12 applicants, and received 3– 4 applications, of which 1–2 applications were sent to the owner for consideration. The applications presented to the owner were rejected. The landlord has not provided reasons for these rejections.
Section 49 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 requires a landlord to take all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss when a tenant ends a tenancy early. This means the landlord must make genuine efforts to re- let the property as soon as possible and cannot claim for loss that could reasonably have been avoided.
The Tribunal must be satisfied that the landlord’s actions in considering and rejecting applicants were reasonable. If suitable applicants were rejected without good reason, the landlord may be found to have failed to mitigate their loss, and their claim for rent may be limited to the date when a suitable replacement tenant could reasonably have been expected to move in.
In this case, while the landlord has shown that the property was advertised and applicants were interviewed, there is no evidence or explanation provided for the rejection of applicants by the owner. Without such evidence, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss. The Tribunal may therefore infer that the landlord has not met their duty under section 49. Case Law:
In the case of Fisher v Rose NZDC 22990 the District Court confirmed that the parties must act reasonably to resolve disputes, including mitigation of loss.
The Tribunal has consistently held that landlords must provide evidence of their efforts to re-let and the reasons for rejecting any applicants. If the landlord cannot provide reasonable grounds for rejecting applicants, the Tribunal may infer that the landlord has not taken all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss.
The Tribunal is entitled to take an inquisitorial approach (see Lucas v Patterson DCR 76) and may ask the landlord to provide evidence or explanation for the rejection of applicants. If the landlord cannot provide this, the Tribunal may draw an adverse inference.
The landlord’s claim for rent to half the amount sought. The landlord has not provided any details about when the applications were presented to the owner and when they were rejected without explanation. [insert date], being the date when a suitable tenant could reasonably have been expected to take possession, had the landlord acted reasonably in considering the applications received.
I am satisfied that the landlord should receive $3623.93 for rent arrears. Break lease fee:
The landlord provided a detailed invoice for the cost of the work carried out to obtain a new tenant to take over the tenancy. This invoice identifies the advertising, and the costs associated with that, and the number of viewings and related administration costs associated with that.
I consider that these costs are reasonable and should be paid by the tenant for the early termination of the tenancy agreement.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for the break lease fee of $799.25. Suppression/Filing Fee/Bond:
The landlord sought suppression in their application and the tenant during the hearing. S95A of the RTA allows the Tribunal to order that the name or identifying details of a party not be published, if the Tribunal is satisfied that publication would be unfair or cause undue hardship.
In this case, I am satisfied that publication of the tenant’s name would be unfair and would cause undue hardship in the circumstances. Accordingly, I order, under s95A of the RTA that the tenant’s name and any identifying details are suppressed and must not be.
As the landlord has been largely successful, I am granting suppression of their name and details.
The Bond centre is to refund the bond to the landlord immediately, to offset the debt owed by the tenant to the landlord.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5496056 — net $1,723.69 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026	$3,623.93	Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Water rates	$52.51	Water rates
Break lease fee	$799.25	Break lease fee
Net award	$1,723.69
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,723.69

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant and Landlord name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $1,723.69 immediately, being half rent arrears to 1 July 2026, reimbursement of filing fee, water bills and break lease fee, as calculated and shown below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears (½ to 1 July 2026)$3,623.93 Filing fee reimbursement$28.00 Water rates$52.51 Break lease fee$799.25 Total award$4,503.69 Minus Bond-$2,780.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$1,723.69
The bond centre is to refund the bond of $2780.00 immediately to Rent Now Property Management Limited as agent for Aryan Raghav Sinha.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This was a landlord application. This was a 12-month fixed term tenancy that commenced on 5 July 2025 and was to end on 19 July 2026.
The tenant became unwell and had to undergo surgery and a period of recuperation, where she was unable to work. The tenant and her partner could not pay the rent during this time which caused rent arrears.
The tenant advised the landlord of this, and the parties agreed that the tenant could terminate early if she paid a break lease fee and rent until the end of the tenancy or until a new tenant took possession.
The tenant and her family moved out of the property on 12 April 2026. Rent arrears and water bills:
The landlord has applied for rent arrears and water bills and has provided rent records and water invoices which prove the amount of $7247.86 in rent and $52.51 in water bills owing on 1 July 2026.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for rent arrears and water bills. The landlord is to be reimbursed the full cost of the water bills, but I must consider whether or not the full amount of rent arrears should be awarded. Mitigation of Loss – Section 49, Residential Tenancies Act 1986
The landlord seeks rent for the period from the tenant’s early termination of the fixed-term tenancy until the end of the fixed term. The tenant vacated due to illness and financial hardship, and the landlord advertised the property, interviewed 10–12 applicants, and received 3– 4 applications, of which 1–2 applications were sent to the owner for consideration. The applications presented to the owner were rejected. The landlord has not provided reasons for these rejections.
Section 49 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 requires a landlord to take all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss when a tenant ends a tenancy early. This means the landlord must make genuine efforts to re- let the property as soon as possible and cannot claim for loss that could reasonably have been avoided.
The Tribunal must be satisfied that the landlord’s actions in considering and rejecting applicants were reasonable. If suitable applicants were rejected without good reason, the landlord may be found to have failed to mitigate their loss, and their claim for rent may be limited to the date when a suitable replacement tenant could reasonably have been expected to move in.
In this case, while the landlord has shown that the property was advertised and applicants were interviewed, there is no evidence or explanation provided for the rejection of applicants by the owner. Without such evidence, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss. The Tribunal may therefore infer that the landlord has not met their duty under section 49. Case Law:
In the case of Fisher v Rose NZDC 22990 the District Court confirmed that the parties must act reasonably to resolve disputes, including mitigation of loss.
The Tribunal has consistently held that landlords must provide evidence of their efforts to re-let and the reasons for rejecting any applicants. If the landlord cannot provide reasonable grounds for rejecting applicants, the Tribunal may infer that the landlord has not taken all reasonable steps to mitigate their loss.
The Tribunal is entitled to take an inquisitorial approach (see Lucas v Patterson DCR 76) and may ask the landlord to provide evidence or explanation for the rejection of applicants. If the landlord cannot provide this, the Tribunal may draw an adverse inference.
The landlord’s claim for rent to half the amount sought. The landlord has not provided any details about when the applications were presented to the owner and when they were rejected without explanation. [insert date], being the date when a suitable tenant could reasonably have been expected to take possession, had the landlord acted reasonably in considering the applications received.
I am satisfied that the landlord should receive $3623.93 for rent arrears. Break lease fee:
The landlord provided a detailed invoice for the cost of the work carried out to obtain a new tenant to take over the tenancy. This invoice identifies the advertising, and the costs associated with that, and the number of viewings and related administration costs associated with that.
I consider that these costs are reasonable and should be paid by the tenant for the early termination of the tenancy agreement.
I am satisfied that the landlord has proven their claim for the break lease fee of $799.25. Suppression/Filing Fee/Bond:
The landlord sought suppression in their application and the tenant during the hearing. S95A of the RTA allows the Tribunal to order that the name or identifying details of a party not be published, if the Tribunal is satisfied that publication would be unfair or cause undue hardship.
In this case, I am satisfied that publication of the tenant’s name would be unfair and would cause undue hardship in the circumstances. Accordingly, I order, under s95A of the RTA that the tenant’s name and any identifying details are suppressed and must not be.
As the landlord has been largely successful, I am granting suppression of their name and details.
The Bond centre is to refund the bond to the landlord immediately, to offset the debt owed by the tenant to the landlord.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5496056 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 8 Paul Place, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5496056 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 2, 8 Paul Place, Pakuranga, Auckland 2010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions