What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517954 about?

The tribunal order states: Holmwood Property Management is granted possession of the premises at

How much money was awarded in case 5517954?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517954?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517954?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13771059-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5517954 about?

The tribunal order states: Holmwood Property Management is granted possession of the premises at

How much money was awarded in case 5517954?

Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5517954?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5517954?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13771059-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 3, 38 Sugden Street, Spreydon, Christchurch Tenancy Tribunal Case 5517954 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5517954 — net $28.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$28.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$28.00

Order

Holmwood Property Management is granted possession of the premises at Unit/Flat Unit 3, 38 Sugden Street, Spreydon, Christchurch 8024 immediately.

Reasons

On 2 June 2026 the landlord filed an application for possession of the premises following termination of the tenancy and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Ms Courtney Brown, Group Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenants appeared. History of the tenancy
The tenancy commenced on 29 August 2025. The tenancy agreement states the fixed term is due to expire on 27 August 2026. 5517954 2
On 2 April 2026 management of the property changed from Property Brokers Limited to Holmwood Property Management.
Some time after the tenancy commenced the property was marketed for sale.
On Tuesday 21 April 2026 [The tenant/s] emailed the property manager as follows: “…We have found a property that we are interested in applying for that is available from May 10th. …When speaking previously, the landlord has said they would consider a release of contract if we found a location we wished to move to. …it would help us to get confirmation from the landlord if they would be alright with our moving out on or around the date of Sunday 10th of May…”.
On 22 April 2026 the property manager responded to the tenant by email: “…In regards to an early release you are in a fixed term until end August but I will let them know and see if they will mutually agree to end your lease early – I will let you know”.
On 23 April 2026 the property manager emailed the tenant: “…Have spoke with the owners and they are happy to release you early from your lease – the only things is the 10th is very close so they are happy with the 24th May..does this work? …Please let me know asap if the 24th of May works as a vacate date as they will be able to let potential buyers know as this affects settlements dates etc”.
The tenant replied: “Perfect, thanks for letting us know…”.
On 29 April 2026 the property manager emailed the tenants asking them to confirm if they would be vacating the property on 24 May 2026 and advising them there was an offer on the property.
Ms Moore replied: “We have applied for the property with the proposed date, the application is still in process but we will let you know as soon as we find out.”
On 20 May 2026 the property manager emailed the tenant asking for an update.
The tenant replied: “…We didn’t get the house we applied for but we will continue to apply to any properties as we have a few options we are looking at and we will keep you updated…”.
On 27 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manager: 5517954 3 “We have been accepted to move to a new property and would like to know if the landlords are okay with the vacate date being Tuesday 2nd of June. If not What is another date that we can put forward to the property. Please let me know as soon as possible as the property is waiting on word from us!”
The property manager responded to the tenants: “confirming the 2nd of June is fine with us.”
The property manager then sent a further email to the tenants stating: “…noticed some stains on the carpet…please confirm is you will get a carpet cleaner? I can prearrange this to be done when you lease but please note will come from the bond.” Ms Moore responded that she would attempt to clean the carpets but if unsuccessful she would let the property manager know.
On 28 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manager: “Just to confirm, we will spend out last day on the property on the 1st of June, as we pay rent from Friday. Would it work best to send through $302.85 for tomorrow’s payment to cover the 4 days? Or is there another process for this?” The property manager replied: “the total amount owing to the 2nd of June $378.57.”
On 29 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manger to advise their application for another rental property had fallen through and asked if they were still required to vacate the property on 1 June 2026.
On 2 June 2026 at 9.34am the property manager replied to the tenants: “…yes you are still required to vacate today due to the notice given and accepted – we have moved the new owners move in date to next week so need to be in the property tomorrow for the inspection to ensure all goes well…”. Ms Moore replied at 11:44am: “I understand…is there any possibility of an extension of a couple of days to sort everything out? We have only managed to pack half the house…we have nowhere to go …please let me know if there is anything that can be done.”
At 12:22pm Mr Coxon wrote to the property manager: “…it has come to my attention that you believe we need to be out of the house today. We don’t have a Full Written Format or any Signatures? Get back to me when you can so we can sort this out. As of right now, we intend to stay for the rest of our tenancy agreement.” 5517954 4
At 1:25pm the property manager advised the tenants by email that they need to vacate the property in accordance with the notice they gave. They were informed that cleaners had been booked and the end of tenancy inspection would proceed the following day.
At 2:37pm the property manager emailed the tenants: “Emailing both as I am getting separate emails from each of you so please reply to all. There was a mutual agreement to end your lease on 2 June…we expected you to be out with me doing the inspection tomorrow. As there is a mutual agreement you can not change your mind and stay until the end of your August lease term….” Landlord’s position
The landlord seeks possession of the property stating the parties agreed to early termination of the fixed term as evidenced by the email correspondence provided. The agreed terms were: a. The parties agreed the final date of the tenancy would be 2 June 2026. b. The tenants liability to pay rent ended on 2 June 2026 and the parties agreed the total amount of rent owing to the end of tenancy was $378.57. c. The tenants would clean the carpets to remove stains. If unsuccessful, the tenants would notify the property manager who would arrange for the carpets to be professionally cleaned and the cost would be deducted from the bond.
The tenants have failed to vacate the property after being unsuccessful in their application for a new rental property. A possession order is required to recover possession of the premises to allow the sale and purchase of the property to proceed. Tenant’s position
The tenant’s position is that Ms Moore’s email correspondence with the landlord was merely an enquiry about the potential to end the fixed term early. Ms Moore said her enquiry about final rent payments was merely getting their “ducks in a row” and should not be viewed by the Tribunal as an agreement between the parties for surrender of the tenancy.
Ms Moore said that as first-time tenants they felt their property manager should have provided them with greater information and advice about their situation.
Mr Coxon challenged the ability of the landlord to rely on the emails as evidence of the terms of surrender. He states that he was never informed of the 5517954 5 arrangements between the property manager and Ms Moore to end the tenancy and did not consent to the surrender. Analysis and decision
The starting point is that this was a fixed term tenancy. The tenants were joint tenants. This carries with it consequences at law. One of a number of tenants cannot terminate his or her occupancy, and each is jointly and severally liable for payment of rent and performance of obligations1.
The landlord’s position is the parties agreed to end the fixed term early with the last day of the tenancy being 2 June 2026. The terms of surrender were agreed in a series of emails between the parties.
The tenants position is that no terms of surrender were agreed for early termination of their tenancy. Their correspondence with the Property Manager was information gathering only. The property manager failed to provide sufficient advise to them about their position and, that if terms of surrender had been agreed, Mr Coxon was not informed and did not consent of them.

Did the parties agree to early termination of the fixed term?

Having heard from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that when Ms Moore corresponded with the property manager to end the fixed term early, she was acting on behalf of both tenants. This is because the language used by Ms Moore in her correspondence with the property manager referred to: a. “We have found a property that we are interested in applying for…”. b. “We have been accepted to move to a new property and would like to know if the landlords are okay with the vacate date being Tuesday 2nd of June...”; and c. “we will spend out last day on the property on the 1st of June, as we pay rent from Friday…”.
The Tribunal is not persuaded by Mr Coxon’s argument that the property manager failed to gain his consent to end the fixed term early, that he was not aware of the terms of surrender and did not consent to them. 1 Michael Weaver v Breeanna Rose Simic MacDonald, Jared Wyber, Willow Amy Mae Forbes, Jessica Claudia Petrini, Davinia Hine Hou Stopforth, Sidney Elize Woledge [2021] NZTT Wellington 4302394, 4303135 at [38]. 5517954 6
It is clear from the correspondence the parties agreed to end the fixed term early. The terms of surrender were as set out in para [23 a – c] above. Specifically the tenancy ended on 2 June 2026.
The tenants have not vacated the property as agreed and they are in breach of their obligations under section 40(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies act 1986 (the “Act”). This requires the tenants to quite the premises at the end of the tenancy.

Should a possession order be made?

The landlord has applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy.
The tenancy ended on 2 June 2026, which is less than 90 days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Act are satisfied. Other matters
Because Holmwood Property Management has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenants seek name suppression. Under section 95A of the Act a party who has been either wholly or substantially successful is entitled to name suppression unless the Tribunal finds that there are reasons relating to the conduct of the party not to do so. In this case the tenants have not been successful and their application for suppression is declined.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5517954 — net $28.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$28.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$28.00

Order

Holmwood Property Management is granted possession of the premises at Unit/Flat Unit 3, 38 Sugden Street, Spreydon, Christchurch 8024 immediately.

Reasons

On 2 June 2026 the landlord filed an application for possession of the premises following termination of the tenancy and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The hearing proceeded by way of video conference. Ms Courtney Brown, Group Manager, appeared for the landlord. The tenants appeared. History of the tenancy
The tenancy commenced on 29 August 2025. The tenancy agreement states the fixed term is due to expire on 27 August 2026. 5517954 2
On 2 April 2026 management of the property changed from Property Brokers Limited to Holmwood Property Management.
Some time after the tenancy commenced the property was marketed for sale.
On Tuesday 21 April 2026 [The tenant/s] emailed the property manager as follows: “…We have found a property that we are interested in applying for that is available from May 10th. …When speaking previously, the landlord has said they would consider a release of contract if we found a location we wished to move to. …it would help us to get confirmation from the landlord if they would be alright with our moving out on or around the date of Sunday 10th of May…”.
On 22 April 2026 the property manager responded to the tenant by email: “…In regards to an early release you are in a fixed term until end August but I will let them know and see if they will mutually agree to end your lease early – I will let you know”.
On 23 April 2026 the property manager emailed the tenant: “…Have spoke with the owners and they are happy to release you early from your lease – the only things is the 10th is very close so they are happy with the 24th May..does this work? …Please let me know asap if the 24th of May works as a vacate date as they will be able to let potential buyers know as this affects settlements dates etc”.
The tenant replied: “Perfect, thanks for letting us know…”.
On 29 April 2026 the property manager emailed the tenants asking them to confirm if they would be vacating the property on 24 May 2026 and advising them there was an offer on the property.
Ms Moore replied: “We have applied for the property with the proposed date, the application is still in process but we will let you know as soon as we find out.”
On 20 May 2026 the property manager emailed the tenant asking for an update.
The tenant replied: “…We didn’t get the house we applied for but we will continue to apply to any properties as we have a few options we are looking at and we will keep you updated…”.
On 27 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manager: 5517954 3 “We have been accepted to move to a new property and would like to know if the landlords are okay with the vacate date being Tuesday 2nd of June. If not What is another date that we can put forward to the property. Please let me know as soon as possible as the property is waiting on word from us!”
The property manager responded to the tenants: “confirming the 2nd of June is fine with us.”
The property manager then sent a further email to the tenants stating: “…noticed some stains on the carpet…please confirm is you will get a carpet cleaner? I can prearrange this to be done when you lease but please note will come from the bond.” Ms Moore responded that she would attempt to clean the carpets but if unsuccessful she would let the property manager know.
On 28 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manager: “Just to confirm, we will spend out last day on the property on the 1st of June, as we pay rent from Friday. Would it work best to send through $302.85 for tomorrow’s payment to cover the 4 days? Or is there another process for this?” The property manager replied: “the total amount owing to the 2nd of June $378.57.”
On 29 May 2026 Ms Moore emailed the property manger to advise their application for another rental property had fallen through and asked if they were still required to vacate the property on 1 June 2026.
On 2 June 2026 at 9.34am the property manager replied to the tenants: “…yes you are still required to vacate today due to the notice given and accepted – we have moved the new owners move in date to next week so need to be in the property tomorrow for the inspection to ensure all goes well…”. Ms Moore replied at 11:44am: “I understand…is there any possibility of an extension of a couple of days to sort everything out? We have only managed to pack half the house…we have nowhere to go …please let me know if there is anything that can be done.”
At 12:22pm Mr Coxon wrote to the property manager: “…it has come to my attention that you believe we need to be out of the house today. We don’t have a Full Written Format or any Signatures? Get back to me when you can so we can sort this out. As of right now, we intend to stay for the rest of our tenancy agreement.” 5517954 4
At 1:25pm the property manager advised the tenants by email that they need to vacate the property in accordance with the notice they gave. They were informed that cleaners had been booked and the end of tenancy inspection would proceed the following day.
At 2:37pm the property manager emailed the tenants: “Emailing both as I am getting separate emails from each of you so please reply to all. There was a mutual agreement to end your lease on 2 June…we expected you to be out with me doing the inspection tomorrow. As there is a mutual agreement you can not change your mind and stay until the end of your August lease term….” Landlord’s position
The landlord seeks possession of the property stating the parties agreed to early termination of the fixed term as evidenced by the email correspondence provided. The agreed terms were: a. The parties agreed the final date of the tenancy would be 2 June 2026. b. The tenants liability to pay rent ended on 2 June 2026 and the parties agreed the total amount of rent owing to the end of tenancy was $378.57. c. The tenants would clean the carpets to remove stains. If unsuccessful, the tenants would notify the property manager who would arrange for the carpets to be professionally cleaned and the cost would be deducted from the bond.
The tenants have failed to vacate the property after being unsuccessful in their application for a new rental property. A possession order is required to recover possession of the premises to allow the sale and purchase of the property to proceed. Tenant’s position
The tenant’s position is that Ms Moore’s email correspondence with the landlord was merely an enquiry about the potential to end the fixed term early. Ms Moore said her enquiry about final rent payments was merely getting their “ducks in a row” and should not be viewed by the Tribunal as an agreement between the parties for surrender of the tenancy.
Ms Moore said that as first-time tenants they felt their property manager should have provided them with greater information and advice about their situation.
Mr Coxon challenged the ability of the landlord to rely on the emails as evidence of the terms of surrender. He states that he was never informed of the 5517954 5 arrangements between the property manager and Ms Moore to end the tenancy and did not consent to the surrender. Analysis and decision
The starting point is that this was a fixed term tenancy. The tenants were joint tenants. This carries with it consequences at law. One of a number of tenants cannot terminate his or her occupancy, and each is jointly and severally liable for payment of rent and performance of obligations1.
The landlord’s position is the parties agreed to end the fixed term early with the last day of the tenancy being 2 June 2026. The terms of surrender were agreed in a series of emails between the parties.
The tenants position is that no terms of surrender were agreed for early termination of their tenancy. Their correspondence with the Property Manager was information gathering only. The property manager failed to provide sufficient advise to them about their position and, that if terms of surrender had been agreed, Mr Coxon was not informed and did not consent of them.

Did the parties agree to early termination of the fixed term?

Having heard from the parties and considering all of the evidence the Tribunal is satisfied that when Ms Moore corresponded with the property manager to end the fixed term early, she was acting on behalf of both tenants. This is because the language used by Ms Moore in her correspondence with the property manager referred to: a. “We have found a property that we are interested in applying for…”. b. “We have been accepted to move to a new property and would like to know if the landlords are okay with the vacate date being Tuesday 2nd of June...”; and c. “we will spend out last day on the property on the 1st of June, as we pay rent from Friday…”.
The Tribunal is not persuaded by Mr Coxon’s argument that the property manager failed to gain his consent to end the fixed term early, that he was not aware of the terms of surrender and did not consent to them. 1 Michael Weaver v Breeanna Rose Simic MacDonald, Jared Wyber, Willow Amy Mae Forbes, Jessica Claudia Petrini, Davinia Hine Hou Stopforth, Sidney Elize Woledge [2021] NZTT Wellington 4302394, 4303135 at [38]. 5517954 6
It is clear from the correspondence the parties agreed to end the fixed term early. The terms of surrender were as set out in para [23 a – c] above. Specifically the tenancy ended on 2 June 2026.
The tenants have not vacated the property as agreed and they are in breach of their obligations under section 40(1)(e) of the Residential Tenancies act 1986 (the “Act”). This requires the tenants to quite the premises at the end of the tenancy.

Should a possession order be made?

The landlord has applied for possession of the premises following the termination of the tenancy.
The tenancy ended on 2 June 2026, which is less than 90 days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Act are satisfied. Other matters
Because Holmwood Property Management has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenants seek name suppression. Under section 95A of the Act a party who has been either wholly or substantially successful is entitled to name suppression unless the Tribunal finds that there are reasons relating to the conduct of the party not to do so. In this case the tenants have not been successful and their application for suppression is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517954 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Unit 3, 38 Sugden Street, Spreydon, Christchurch

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5517954 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat Unit 3, 38 Sugden Street, Spreydon, Christchurch

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the parties agree to early termination of the fixed term?

Should a possession order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the parties agree to early termination of the fixed term?

Should a possession order be made?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions