What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5503580 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal has no jurisdiction therefore the application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5503580?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5503580?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5503580?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13766201-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5503580 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal has no jurisdiction therefore the application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5503580?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5503580?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5503580?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13766201-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

26A Churchill Road, Judea, Tauranga 3110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5503580 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

Mr Bateman seeks his bond of $1,280.00.

There is an issue as to whether or not this is a flatting type arrangement and thus excluded from the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

If the tenancy is excluded from the Residential Tenancies Act, the application goes no further as the Tribunal will not have jurisdiction to hear and determine the claim. Background

[The tenant/s] entered into a flat/house sharing agreement (in writing) with Leah Hunter commencing 31 December 2025. Max agreed to pay a bond of $1,280.00 to the head tenant (Leah) and weekly rent of $320.00. Max moved out on 29 March 2026 and is seeking a refund of his bond.

Kevin Hunter appeared on behalf of the Trust. Kevin is Leah’s father. Kevin confirmed that the bond was lodged with the Bond Centre for safekeeping, but he is not a landlord to Max. Leah Hunter is the head tenant and she entered into the flat sharing agreement with Max.

Does the application fall under the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal?

There are 3 categories of person who occupy residential premises namely boarders/flatmates, squatters, or tenants.

Section 77(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear claims between landlords and tenants relating to any tenancy to which the Act applies. Section 4 RTA provides that the Act applies to all residential tenancies unless specifically excluded.

A boarder or flatmate is a person who lives with the owner of the premises or legal occupier (head tenant), and who has an agreement or licence from said owner or legal occupier to live there.

I find that the arrangement between the parties is not a tenancy agreement subject to the RTA, and the Tenancy Tribunal does not have any jurisdiction to determine the claim.

The arrangement involved an intention for the parties to live co-operatively as flatmates with Mr Bateman liable to Ms Hunter for his share of the rent and the parties sharing common living areas with 2 other flatmates. I am satisfied that the living arrangement was indicative of a flatting type agreement and therefore excluded from the terms of the Residential Tenancies Act.

The signed flatmate agreement specifically provides that in the event of any dispute, the parties agree that the dispute will be determined by the Disputes Tribunal.

As the arrangement between the parties is excluded from the jurisdiction of the Residential Tenancies Act and therefore the Tenancy Tribunal, this application is dismissed.

A copy of this order will be sent to Leah Hunter.

Reasons