What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5513093 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names and

How much money was awarded in case 5513093?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5513093?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Healthy homes, Harassment, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5513093?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13871009-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5513093 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names and

How much money was awarded in case 5513093?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5513093?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Healthy homes, Harassment, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5513093?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13871009-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5513093 — Rent arrears

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.
The Tribunal records that the parties have agreed that the fixed term tenancy will not continue as a periodic tenancy and will end on 09 August 2026.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via video link.
On 22 May 2026, the landlord filed a claim seeking termination of the tenancy on three grounds: i. Three anti-social behaviour notices, ii. Three recidivist notices for rent arrears, iii. Assaulting or threatening to assault an agent of the landlord.
The landlord stated that they became the owner of the property on 11 November 2025. The property had belonged to a family member. The tenant was in occupation prior to the landlord becoming the owner. The landlord stated that the property requires some work to meet the Healthy Homes standards. They state that on 11 May 2026 they entered into a fixed term tenancy agreement with the occupants with a view of formalising their tenure and improving the property.
[Tenant] is the landlord’s cousin. There is a whanau connection. Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (Act) provides that its provisions do not apply where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
In the case of Voss v Voss [2022] NZDC 667, the Court held a family connection alone is insufficient. For the exclusion in 5(1)(n) to apply, there will be two concurrent occupations, such as situations where the owner or landlord continue to use the premises principally as a place of residence alongside the tenant.
The landlord does not use the property principally as their place of residence; and in fact, usually resides overseas. The exclusion in section 5(1)(n) does not apply.
The landlord stated they considered WINZ as their agent. However, in these circumstances agency requires someone with authority to act on behalf of the landlord dealing with tenancy matters, not just the collection of rent. For the purposes of the Act WINZ cannot be considered the landlord’s agent, as they clearly did not have the authority to manage the tenancy on behalf of the landlord.
The landlord stated that unfortunately the tenant had been uncooperative and obstructive, impeding access.
The landlord has produced text messages sent to the tenant, including messages about the rent being underpaid, part payments, concerns about rent arrears and maintenance matters, statements that non-compliance will result in Tribunal proceedings, and a text ending the fixed-term tenancy immediately.
The landlord stated that they had arranged with the tenant for a builder to visit the property and provide a quote. They state the contractor knocked on the door at the agreed time, but there was no answer. The landlord stated that the builder called them and that they told the builder to go to the rear of the property. The landlord stated that the builder did so and discovered the tenants hiding.
The builder remained on the phone with the landlord, who stated they could hear what was happening. The landlord stated that the tenants abused the builder, and they heard the tenant, in a raised voice, tell the builder: “We were asleep,” “Come back another time,” “Come back when I tell you,” and “You don’t have the right.” The landlord stated that during the interaction, the tenant took the builder’s phone. The landlord stated that the builder has filed a complaint and provided police with a statement. When asked, the landlord stated that they had not heard an assault or threats to assault being made. The landlord provided a text message sent by the tenant to the landlord after the incident stating, “Get f..ked I told bitch u using c..t.” Law
Section 55(1) (aa) of the Act concerns recidivist rent arrears in periodic tenancies. The provision allows a landlord to apply to the Tribunal for termination if, within a 90-day period, the tenant has on three separate occasions been at least 5 working days late with rent and has been given the required written notices. The notices must each contain the dates on which rent is overdue, the amount of overdue rent, and the tenant’s right to apply to the Tribunal to challenge the notice.
Under section 55A of the Act, a landlord of a periodic tenancy may apply to the Tribunal to terminate the tenancy due to anti-social behaviour. The landlord must establish that on three separate occasions within a 90-day period, the tenant or someone at the premises with the tenant’s permission engaged in anti-social behaviour. On each occasion, the landlord must have given the tenant written notice describing the specific behaviour, who engaged in it (if known), and the date, time, and location.
Under Section 55(1)(c) of the Act, a landlord may apply to the Tribunal for immediate termination of a tenancy if the tenant has assaulted, threatened to assault, or has caused or permitted any person to assault or threaten to assault certain people. These people include the landlord or any member of the landlord’s family and any agent of the landlord. Analysis and decision
The tenancy is fixed term, and the landlord is therefore unable to have recourse to the provisions relating to anti-social behaviour and recidivist rent arrears, which apply only to periodic tenancies. Furthermore, even if the landlord had been able to rely on these provisions, no notices were issued.
Concerning the builder’s incident. The builder was at the material time acting as an agent of the landlord. However, no statement from the builder has been provided. The police acknowledgement letter provided is just that, it is an acknowledgement that a complaint has been made, not the truth of the allegation or that the incident amounts to an offence. The landlord did not witness any assault or threats of assault. While the expletive text message may be anti-social, it did not constitute an assault or threat to the landlord.
The claims for termination are dismissed. Other matters
At the conclusion of the hearing, and after hearing the evidence, I stepped out of the hearing room to allow the parties to discuss the tenancy. On my return, the parties advised that they had agreed the tenancy would end at the expiry of the fixed term and would not continue as a periodic tenancy past 09 August 2026. Under section 60A(2)(b) of the Act, parties to a fixed-term tenancy may agree that the tenancy will not continue as a periodic tenancy. I have recorded that the parties have reached this agreement. Name suppression
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenant has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression.
Section 95A (4) of the Act allows the Tribunal, on the application of any party to the proceedings, or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and the public interest, to order that all or part of the evidence, or the name or any identifying particulars of any witnesses or party, not be published.
The tenants have a whanau connection with the previous owner, and the new owner, who is the landlord. One of the tenants and the landlord share the same surname. During the hearing, I sensed an attachment and entitlement to the property on the part of the tenant, which sat uncomfortably with their rights and obligations as a tenant. I also note that if the landlord is to continue to offer the property for rent, they should familiarise themselves with the provisions of the Act and appoint a suitably qualified agent.
While I am satisfied that the facts and reasoning of this decision are in the public interest, I am not satisfied that this interest necessarily extends to the name of the landlord. Upon careful consideration, I am satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to depart from the principle of open justice and to exercise the discretion in section 95A (4). The Tribunal also orders suppression of the landlord’s name.

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s and tenant’s names and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.
The Tribunal records that the parties have agreed that the fixed term tenancy will not continue as a periodic tenancy and will end on 09 August 2026.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing via video link.
On 22 May 2026, the landlord filed a claim seeking termination of the tenancy on three grounds: i. Three anti-social behaviour notices, ii. Three recidivist notices for rent arrears, iii. Assaulting or threatening to assault an agent of the landlord.
The landlord stated that they became the owner of the property on 11 November 2025. The property had belonged to a family member. The tenant was in occupation prior to the landlord becoming the owner. The landlord stated that the property requires some work to meet the Healthy Homes standards. They state that on 11 May 2026 they entered into a fixed term tenancy agreement with the occupants with a view of formalising their tenure and improving the property.
[Tenant] is the landlord’s cousin. There is a whanau connection. Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (Act) provides that its provisions do not apply where the premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
In the case of Voss v Voss [2022] NZDC 667, the Court held a family connection alone is insufficient. For the exclusion in 5(1)(n) to apply, there will be two concurrent occupations, such as situations where the owner or landlord continue to use the premises principally as a place of residence alongside the tenant.
The landlord does not use the property principally as their place of residence; and in fact, usually resides overseas. The exclusion in section 5(1)(n) does not apply.
The landlord stated they considered WINZ as their agent. However, in these circumstances agency requires someone with authority to act on behalf of the landlord dealing with tenancy matters, not just the collection of rent. For the purposes of the Act WINZ cannot be considered the landlord’s agent, as they clearly did not have the authority to manage the tenancy on behalf of the landlord.
The landlord stated that unfortunately the tenant had been uncooperative and obstructive, impeding access.
The landlord has produced text messages sent to the tenant, including messages about the rent being underpaid, part payments, concerns about rent arrears and maintenance matters, statements that non-compliance will result in Tribunal proceedings, and a text ending the fixed-term tenancy immediately.
The landlord stated that they had arranged with the tenant for a builder to visit the property and provide a quote. They state the contractor knocked on the door at the agreed time, but there was no answer. The landlord stated that the builder called them and that they told the builder to go to the rear of the property. The landlord stated that the builder did so and discovered the tenants hiding.
The builder remained on the phone with the landlord, who stated they could hear what was happening. The landlord stated that the tenants abused the builder, and they heard the tenant, in a raised voice, tell the builder: “We were asleep,” “Come back another time,” “Come back when I tell you,” and “You don’t have the right.” The landlord stated that during the interaction, the tenant took the builder’s phone. The landlord stated that the builder has filed a complaint and provided police with a statement. When asked, the landlord stated that they had not heard an assault or threats to assault being made. The landlord provided a text message sent by the tenant to the landlord after the incident stating, “Get f..ked I told bitch u using c..t.” Law
Section 55(1) (aa) of the Act concerns recidivist rent arrears in periodic tenancies. The provision allows a landlord to apply to the Tribunal for termination if, within a 90-day period, the tenant has on three separate occasions been at least 5 working days late with rent and has been given the required written notices. The notices must each contain the dates on which rent is overdue, the amount of overdue rent, and the tenant’s right to apply to the Tribunal to challenge the notice.
Under section 55A of the Act, a landlord of a periodic tenancy may apply to the Tribunal to terminate the tenancy due to anti-social behaviour. The landlord must establish that on three separate occasions within a 90-day period, the tenant or someone at the premises with the tenant’s permission engaged in anti-social behaviour. On each occasion, the landlord must have given the tenant written notice describing the specific behaviour, who engaged in it (if known), and the date, time, and location.
Under Section 55(1)(c) of the Act, a landlord may apply to the Tribunal for immediate termination of a tenancy if the tenant has assaulted, threatened to assault, or has caused or permitted any person to assault or threaten to assault certain people. These people include the landlord or any member of the landlord’s family and any agent of the landlord. Analysis and decision
The tenancy is fixed term, and the landlord is therefore unable to have recourse to the provisions relating to anti-social behaviour and recidivist rent arrears, which apply only to periodic tenancies. Furthermore, even if the landlord had been able to rely on these provisions, no notices were issued.
Concerning the builder’s incident. The builder was at the material time acting as an agent of the landlord. However, no statement from the builder has been provided. The police acknowledgement letter provided is just that, it is an acknowledgement that a complaint has been made, not the truth of the allegation or that the incident amounts to an offence. The landlord did not witness any assault or threats of assault. While the expletive text message may be anti-social, it did not constitute an assault or threat to the landlord.
The claims for termination are dismissed. Other matters
At the conclusion of the hearing, and after hearing the evidence, I stepped out of the hearing room to allow the parties to discuss the tenancy. On my return, the parties advised that they had agreed the tenancy would end at the expiry of the fixed term and would not continue as a periodic tenancy past 09 August 2026. Under section 60A(2)(b) of the Act, parties to a fixed-term tenancy may agree that the tenancy will not continue as a periodic tenancy. I have recorded that the parties have reached this agreement. Name suppression
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenant has been wholly successful and is granted name suppression.
Section 95A (4) of the Act allows the Tribunal, on the application of any party to the proceedings, or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and the public interest, to order that all or part of the evidence, or the name or any identifying particulars of any witnesses or party, not be published.
The tenants have a whanau connection with the previous owner, and the new owner, who is the landlord. One of the tenants and the landlord share the same surname. During the hearing, I sensed an attachment and entitlement to the property on the part of the tenant, which sat uncomfortably with their rights and obligations as a tenant. I also note that if the landlord is to continue to offer the property for rent, they should familiarise themselves with the provisions of the Act and appoint a suitably qualified agent.
While I am satisfied that the facts and reasoning of this decision are in the public interest, I am not satisfied that this interest necessarily extends to the name of the landlord. Upon careful consideration, I am satisfied that there are sufficient grounds to depart from the principle of open justice and to exercise the discretion in section 95A (4). The Tribunal also orders suppression of the landlord’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5513093 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5513093 — Rent arrears

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions