What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5503705 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must refund the bond of $2,000 to the tenant.

How much money was awarded in case 5503705?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5503705?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: State of repair, Cleanliness, Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5503705?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13844276-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5503705 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must refund the bond of $2,000 to the tenant.

How much money was awarded in case 5503705?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5503705?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: State of repair, Cleanliness, Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5503705?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13844276-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

25A Beatty Street, Levin, Levin 5510 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5503705 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5503705. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
1. Steven Micallef must refund the bond of	$2,000.00		1. Steven Micallef must refund the bond of

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5503705. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
1. Steven Micallef must refund the bond of	$2,000.00		1. Steven Micallef must refund the bond of

Order

[The landlord/s] must refund the bond of $2,000 to the tenant.
The remaining applications of both parties are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Athena Houtas, who had communicated on behalf of the landlord with the tenant was also in attendance.
On 18 December 2025 the parties entered into a fixed-term tenancy for 12 months from 8 January 2026 to 8 January 2027.
On 24 January 2026 the tenant applied for: a. Reduction of fixed term b. Refund of bond $2,000 c. Compensation of $4,420 for the following: i. Cleaning 6 hours ii. Refund of one week’s rent iii. Failure to comply with HHS iv. No curtains or blinds v. Some poor workmanship issues vi. Lack of fibre internet. vii. Moving in and moving out costs.
On 11 May 2026 the landlord applied for $9,000 rent arrears and refund of the bond.
The email address provided for the landlord was inaccurate, meaning he had not received the full application and so an earlier hearing was adjourned.
The onus of proof is on each party to produce the evidence to support their claims. The standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities.

Who is the landlord?

The tenant’s application was brought against Mr Micallef and Ms Houtas.
Ms Houtas wished to make it clear that she had assisted Mr Micallef with the tenancy, but she is not formally an agent of the landlord. This is relevant because in her application, the tenant named Ms Houtas as a landlord.
It is understandable that the tenant named Ms Houtas given that she had a number of text communications and phone calls with her.
The definition of landlord in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) includes agent. 1
Ms Houtas is not recorded in the tenancy agreement as an agent or landlord. She did not sign the tenancy agreement.
It is recorded in the tenancy agreement, under “other contact addresses” “Athena” and a mobile phone number. There is no dispute that Ms Houtas at all times she acted on instructions from Mr Micallef, but she did not sign the agreement or record herself as an agent. I find that she was a contact for the tenant and a representative for the landlord, but in this instance, I do not find that she was a landlord for the purposes of section 2 of the Act. Background
The landlord is a builder. On his behalf, Ms Houtas advertised a new two- bedroom property for rent. On 5 December 2025 the parties met at the property and the tenant was told about a three-bedroom property soon to be available.
Ms Magaoge applied for the three-bedroom house, and in a text on 15 December Ms Houtas confirmed that the house was hers. On 17 December 2025, Ms Houtas sent a further text confirming the street address and said that 1 Section 2 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 sets out various definitions. she would complete the pages that need to be signed on the lease with the banking details and email them. She offered to organise another viewing before the tenant moved in.
Ms Magaoge replied that she would like to change the start date from 12 January to Thursday 8 January 2026 and that was agreed to.
The tenancy agreement was signed on 18 December by Mr Micallef as landlord and Ms Magaoge as tenant with a start date of 8 January 2026. It was a fixed- term until 8 January 2027. The tenant paid one week’s rent in advance ($500) on 18 December.
There is a dispute about the extent of the documentation signed. The tenant uploaded a tenancy agreement. It is three pages of a standard Tenancy Services agreement: page 6 with the parties’ details, page 7 with the dates of the tenancy and the signatures and page 26 which has not been completed or signed. It is the page that is the end of an entry inspection report.
The landlord uploaded four pages of a standard agreement: the three pages referred to above, but with the rent and bond receipt completed and signed by Mr Micallef, and a fourth page being page 4 of a standard agreement which sets out some of the standard terms including information about termination.
At the hearing, the landlord produced pages 8 to 26 of a standard agreement. The tenant said she had not received this before. Page 8 is the insurance statement which has been left blank. Pages 9 to 24 are the Healthy Homes Compliance statement which have been only partially completed and signed on 7 January. Pages 25 and 26 are the property inspection report which has not been fully completed or signed. That includes the bond and rent receipt which remain unsigned on this version.
I find it unlikely that the tenant received more than 3 pages of the tenancy agreement. That is consistent with the 17 December text referred to above when Ms Houtas said that she would complete the pages that need to be signed on the lease with the banking details and email them. However, nothing turns on this finding.
On 5 January 2026, Ms Magaoge paid the bond of $2,000. Ms Houtas texted her with the ICP number so that the tenant could organise her power before move in. Ms Houtas confirmed that internet was available, that Mr Micallef would put in a shed and he would drop the key off the next day. She said that once the tenant had move in she would arrange an inspection with her.
The tenant obtained the keys and on 8 January 2026 took possession of the house. She says that she went on 8 January and undertook some cleaning. She moved in on 9 January and moved out the next day.
On 24 January the tenant filed her application with the Tribunal.
The landlord’s application was filed on 10 May 2026. Claims relating to fixed-term tenancy
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 7 January 2027.
The landlord has cross-applied for $9,000 in unpaid rent for the period the property was vacant after the tenant moved out.

Should the fixed-term be reduced?

Ms Magaoge has listed a number of items she was unhappy with on moving into the property.
On 10 January 2026 after a series of text exchanges with Ms Houtas about the internet, Ms Magaoge sent a text saying: We have only spend (sic) one night here and unfortunately we will have to move out. I have so many concerns and the internet is my biggest worry. Please let me know how we can navigate this situation.
A series of texts from Ms Houtas followed regarding the internet. The parties spoke on the phone for 7 minutes at 2.04pm. The tenant says that she was told that she had to give notice and drop off the keys with the landlord. Ms Houtas agrees that the conversation was about giving notice and dropping off the keys. She did not understand the landlord’s rights in fixed-term tenancy at that stage.
In a text sometime after 2.18pm on 10 January, Ms Houtas said: If you could serve your notice today so Steve can organise your bond refund and return of keys next week. Please disconnect the power from your name also.
In a text on 13 January 2026, Ms Houtas said: Steve will be available on Thursday after midday to collect the keys. I will have to retain the 1 weeks rent which was the deposit as the property was removed from the market. As you can imagine if it went through the tenancy tribunal you would have to pay rent until a new tenant is found as you have breached the lease. If you could provide your bank account for your full bond refund. I will also provide a letter stating you have terminated the lease and if you could sign this too please.
The keys were returned on Thursday 15 January 2026.
On Monday 19 January Ms Magaoge sent Ms Houtas a text following up on the bond refund. Ms Houtas replied that the landlord had said that he would transfer the funds the following week. She pointed out that it was a public holiday.
From then on the text communication between Ms Magaoge and Ms Houtas deteriorated.
On 21 January 2026 the landlord sent the tenant a letter offering settlement of $1000 to be withheld for advertising, lease preparation and loss of rent. If the offer was not accepted, the landlord would file in the Tenancy Tribunal for rent and compensation for breaching the fixed term lease. Discussion
When parties enter into a fixed-term tenancy, neither party can terminate the tenancy unilaterally unless some specific circumstances apply. 2 The parties may agree to reduce the fixed-term, or either party may apply to the Tribunal to reduce it under section 66.
Section 66 of the Act says that the Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced. See section 66(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant says that she wanted to end the tenancy because of: a. Misrepresentations by the landlord. She had thought that because the property was new, it would be finished better. b. It was not clean. c. There were no latches on the wardrobe door. d. There was a blind missing and the other curtains and blinds were flimsy. e. The lawns were messy and full of weeds. f. She had trouble getting the internet connected. g. There was no heatpump. h. She thought that the house was cold and wondered if there was no insulation. i. The bathroom fan did not work. j. The kitchen tiles were uneven. 2 These include assault by a tenant on a landlord, unlawful residential tenancy, mortgagee taking possession, uninhabitable premises, withdrawal under family violence provisions, death of a tenant. See section 51(1)(a), (ab), (ac).
[The party] of the matters listed amount to an unforeseen change in Ms Magaoge’s circumstances. They provide no basis whatsoever for reduction of a fixed-term tenancy.
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 sets out the rights and responsibilities of the landlord and tenant. A failure to comply with the Act does not trigger a right to unilaterally terminate a tenancy without complying with the notice provisions of the Act.
The tenant has not provided any evidence of an unforeseen change in her circumstances. There is no ground to reduce the fixed-term tenancy, and the starting point is that she is liable for ongoing rent. Should the tenant pay $9,000 in rent?
Although there are no grounds to order reduction of the fixed-term under section 66, for the following reasons, I find that the landlord agreed to an early termination and is therefore not entitled to compensation.
On 10 January, the landlord asked for “notice” but did not specify how long. Without receiving any notice or written agreement to reduce the fixed term, the landlord agreed to receive the keys and asked the tenant to disconnect the power.
On 13 January Ms Houtas referred to the fact that the tenant had broken her lease and if it went through Tribunal, Ms Magaoge would have to pay rent, but she goes on to say that she will provide a letter stating that the tenant had terminated the lease. The reference to further rent is hypothetical. She does not say that the landlord will be seeking rent.
In a second text that day, Ms Houtas said:
The reduction of fixed-term lease process was not completed, but the keys were dropped off, and as late as 19 January, Ms Houtas’s texts still referred to a refund of bond.
A summary of the communication between 10 January and 19 January is: • The tenant said on 10 January that she would move out. • The landlord (via Ms Houtas) asked her to give her notice, hand back the keys and the bond refund would be organised. The tenant was asked to disconnect the power. • Ms Houtas said on 13 January that the landlord would retain one week’s rent. • There were further discussions about dropping off the keys and refund of bond. • The keys were returned on 15 January. • On 19 January Ms Houtas said that the bond would be refunded later that week.
It was not until 21 January that the landlord gave any indication that Ms Magaoge’s withdrawal from the lease was a problem. By that stage the tenant had dropped off the keys. Mr Micallef told the Tribunal that he had not even realised that it was a fixed-term tenancy or the implications of it until he obtained advice from Tenancy Services.
I find that the landlord is “estopped” from now claiming rent. The equitable doctrine of estoppel allows a court to prevent someone from going back on their word, where the other party has acted in reliance on that.
Based on the communications and actions of the parties, until 21 January: a. The parties had agreed that the tenant was being released from the fixed- term tenancy. b. The tenant had every reason to believe that she could move out without any further liability for rent. c. The tenant moved out and gave back the keys. d. The landlord is now trying to resile from the agreement.
In summary, even though the landlord is correct that under the law, that the tenant is liable for the ongoing rent, under the principles of equity, he is prevented from bringing this claim because he has previously agreed to release her from that liability.
The landlord’s claim for rent arrears is therefore dismissed.

Is the tenant entitled to any compensation?

The tenant has multiple claims arising from 8 to 10 January.
On 9 January Ms Magaoge sent a text to Ms Houtas about a number of things: a. She asked when a heat pump would be installed. b. She thought her children would be hurt playing on the lawn because of the weeds and said that she did not think her lawn mower would be able to keep it neat. c. The front door handle was loose. d. She said that the closet and laundry doors were flying open. She said that she had spoken to Steve and he had said he would install latches on them. e. She also said that there was an uneven floor tile in from of the fridge opening. She said this normally causes the tiles to crack in the long term and so she was just bringing it to their attention. Heatpump
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). [The tenant/s] considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS heating standard.
The heating standard requires landlords to provide one or more ‘qualifying heaters’, with a capacity to heat the living room to a required level. The heating standard defines what a qualifying heater would be and confirms that certain types of heaters are unacceptable heaters for the purpose of the HHS.
The heating standard requires that heaters in the particular tenancy have a minimum heating capacity. An on-line calculator has been produced in order to determine what level of heating is required for any particular premises, and that can be found at https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/heating-tool/
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
On 9 January 2026, in response to the tenant’s text, Ms Houtas said that the heat pump would be installed. The landlord accepts that no heating had been installed in the property by the start of the tenancy on 8 January. It was a breach of the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS) to let the property without a source of heat in the living room.
The tenant says that it was very cold on 9 January and that her child became sick as a result of spending one night there.
I find it very unlikely that the tenant’s child became sick after spending one night in the home. I also find it very unlikely that the house was cold. It was the middle of summer in a newly-built house, and in her text replying on 9 January, the tenant said, “The heat pump is not a worry now just when the weather gets cold”.
The tenant has not established that she is entitled to any compensation for spending one night in a home on 9 January without heating. Insulation
The tenant thought that the house was cold and therefore asks the Tribunal to draw an inference that the premises were not insulated, as required under the HHS. She has provided no evidence to support her assertion.
The tenant has not established on the balance of probabilities that the home was not insulated. Grass
The tenant claimed that the grass was weeds, not lawn. She did not think it would be safe for her children.
In response to the tenant’s text of 9 January, Ms Houtas said that in the past grass has not been maintained by tenants and it has died. She said that he could put topsoil on and seeds down, but grass needs to be watered and maintained.
Ms Magaobe replied, “With regards to the grass, I’m not too fussy but it just looked a bit rough. Steve can just monitor it and give his expertise but I would water and trim to maintain it if he chooses to go ahead with grass seeds”.
Ms Magaobe provided some close up photographs showing weeds in the lawn. The landlord also provided a photograph showing the whole lawn. It appears that the lawn was quite dry and patchy. I agree there were a lot of weeds and the lawn had not been evenly mown.
The tenant has not established that the landlord breached an obligation under the Act. She entered into a agreement to rent a three-bedroom house. It is not clear on what basis she thought she would have an immaculate lawn, but in any event, the landlord offered to provide a solution.
Even if there was a breach, the tenant has not established that she is entitled to any compensation for an unsatisfactory lawn during her one-night stay at the property. This claim is dismissed. Cleanliness
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 which says that a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness.
The tenant says that the property was filthy and unacceptable. Her evidence to support this is photograph of a full vacuum cannister. She says that there were marks on the window and some nails on the floor. She provided no photographs of the nails. She provided no photographs showing the overall state of the property. She says that she spent six hours cleaning on 8 January.
The landlord says that because it was a new build, and the carpet was new, and there may have been some fluff. He acknowledges that there had not been a deep clean but he thought that the premises were reasonably clean.
The tenant has not proved on the balance of probabilities that the premises were not reasonably clean. I do not accept that the property required six hours’ cleaning. I acknowledge that there may have been some fluff from the new carpet, but there are no photos showing that the premises were not reasonably clean.
Moreover, the tenant did not contact the landlord on 8 January to report this. The landlord was given no opportunity to rectify the issue or agree to any compensation for the tenant’s decision to clean the property.
This claim is dismissed. Other maintenance
Under section 45 the landlord is required to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
On Friday 9 January the tenant raised the issues of the latches on the laundry door and the closets and the loose front door handle. She received a reply that day that the landlord would see to them and would look at the floor tile. She decided on 10 January to move out, before he had had an opportunity to look at them.
These were all minor issues and the landlord had made it clear that he intended to look at and/or fix all issues. The tenant has not established that she is entitled to any compensation for any inconvenience for the one night she spent at the property.
At the hearing she said that the bathroom extractor fan did not work. She did not raise this with the landlord at any time. The landlord was provided no opportunity to look at this. I note that the photograph provided appears to be of a bathroom heater, not an extractor fan in any event.
The tenant has not established on the balance of probabilities that there was a fault with the ventilation. Internet
[The tenant/s] claims that her rights have been breached because she could not get the internet working. She says that her job depends on having internet and so on Saturday 10 January she decided she could not stay at the property.
Under section 45B, a landlord must, except in certain circumstances, permit the installation of a fibre connection in the premises if— a. there is no fibre connection in the premises; and b. it is possible to install a fibre connection in the premises; and c. the tenant requests a fibre connection; and d. the fibre connection can be installed at no cost to the landlord (for example, because the cost is covered by the UFB Initiative).
A landlord who is required to permit the installation of a fibre connection must take all reasonable steps to facilitate the installation within a reasonable period of time and respond to the tenant’s request or that of a network operator within 21 days of receiving a request.
The landlord says that there is fibre at the property.
At 8.41am on 10 January the tenant texted Ms Houtas saying that Chorus needed the owner to call them to activate the fibre line. At 9.41am Ms Houtas replied, saying that she had never had this request before and said she would email written authority so it could be provided to Chorus. This was followed by a text saying she had just emailed the authority to Ms Magaobe.
At 1.37, the tenant sent the following texts to Ms Houtas:
Ms Houtas replied immediately with the following series of texts:
These texts show a landlord very keen to assist a tenant with her internet connection on a Saturday.
The landlord filed a photo which shows the Chorus modem/router
The tenant has failed to establish: a. There was no fibre. b. If there was no fibre that the landlord failed to permit the installation or take reasonable steps to facilitate the installation. c. That the landlord was in any way responsible for, or contributed to, the tenant’s inability to connect to the internet on 10 January. d. That she is entitled to any compensation from the landlord for her inability to connect to the internet.
This claim is dismissed. Other
The tenant also complained that the curtains were flimsy and there was a blind missing.
The landlord agreed that one window had a blind missing and he was happy to replace it.
There is no obligation to provide blinds and curtains.
The tenant had thought that because the property was new, it would be finished better. The fact that the property did not meet her expectations is not a misrepresentation or a breach of the Residential Tenancies Act. She agreed to rent a three-bedroom newly built home and that is what happened. Any maintenance or repair issues could be dealt with under the provisions of the Act.
The landlord’s documentation was poor. I do not accept that the full tenancy agreement was provided to the tenant, but even if it was, it has not been properly completed.
The landlord was also in breach of the Act by letting the property without ensuring compliance with the HHS.
However, overall, the landlord showed willing to assist with the tenant’s move into the property and address any concerns. All of the communication during the tenant’s move in and stay at the premises was very prompt, courteous and helpful. I find that the tenant had no reason to be concerned about the tenancy.
Overall, the tenant’s claims had no merit. I do not accept for a moment that the premises were unliveable, as claimed in her application to the Tribunal. She is not entitled to any compensation for her decision to move into the tenancy or move out. She is not entitled to any rent refund for the one week that she had possession of the premises and the keys.
Neither party has had substantial success and so there is no order for reimbursement of the filing fee.
It does not appear that the bond was lodged. Therefore, the landlord is ordered to refund the bond to the tenant.
If the bond has been lodged, and it is not released to the tenant, then either party may apply to have this order amended to include an order that the Bond Centre release the bond to the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5503705 — Rent arrears at 25A Beatty Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5503705 — Rent arrears at 25A Beatty Street, Levin, Levin 5510

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Who is the landlord?

Should the fixed-term be reduced?

Is the tenant entitled to any compensation?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Who is the landlord?

Should the fixed-term be reduced?

Is the tenant entitled to any compensation?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions