What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9066984 about?

The tribunal order states: [The party] must pay Body Corporate 202682 $14,747.35 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 9066984?

Costs: Body corporate debt collectio…: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Costs: S.124 Solicitor'S Costs: $3,461.38 awarded to landlord; Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance…: $431.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Interest:: $508.66 awarded to landlord; Levy: $8,926.06 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9066984?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9066984?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12769239-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9066984 about?

The tribunal order states: [The party] must pay Body Corporate 202682 $14,747.35 immediately,

How much money was awarded in case 9066984?

Costs: Body corporate debt collectio…: $920.00 awarded to landlord; Costs: S.124 Solicitor'S Costs: $3,461.38 awarded to landlord; Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance…: $431.25 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Interest:: $508.66 awarded to landlord; Levy: $8,926.06 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9066984?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9066984?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12769239-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Onehunga, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 9066984 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 9066984 — net $14,747.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025	$431.25	Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025
Costs: Body corporate debt collection	$920.00	Costs: Body corporate debt collection
Levy	$8,926.06	Levy
Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs	$3,461.38	Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs
Interest: to 11 September 2025	$508.66	Interest: to 11 September 2025
Filing Fee	$500.00	Filing Fee
Net award	$14,747.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,747.35

Order

[The party] must pay Body Corporate 202682 $14,747.35 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Levy$8,926.06 Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs$3,461.38 Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025 $431.25 Interest: to 11 September 2025$508.66 Costs: Body corporate debt collection costs $920.00 Filing Fee$500.00 Total award$14,747.35 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $14,747.35

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Ms Donovan appeared for the body corporate. Mr Bowler attended for the owner. Adjournment
A preliminary matter must be addressed first.
On 24 November 2025, the day prior to this hearing, counsel for the owner applied to the Tribunal for an adjournment. Counsel submitted that the matter should be adjourned for two reasons • Counsel had only recently been instructed. • Other proceedings had been filed in the Tribunal between the same parties and that the proceedings should be combined (the other proceedings are under TT9063964).
The application was dismissed on the grounds that; • This claim had been filed in April 2025 and further delay would disadvantage the body corporate. • A preliminary case conference had already been held on this matter and timetabling orders issued. • This matter appeared to be a relatively straight forward levy arrears claim. • Counsel for the owner had sufficient time to take instructions from his client.
I indicated that I would be prepared to consider the adjournment application afresh at the commencement of today’s hearing.
At the hearing, counsel for the owner applied for an adjournment.
Counsel said that he had not received any further instructions from his client on the issue of unpaid levies.
Initially, counsel said that he had not been served with the body corporate’s submissions. On further investigation, counsel found that the submissions had been served. Counsel at that point accepted that the proceeding should continue, but that he wished to be given a further two days to file a written memorandum by way of response from the owner.
Counsel submitted that this matter and the owner’s application under TT 9063964 should be consolidated.
Counsel for the body corporate opposed the application for an adjournment.
A case conference was held on this matter on 9 September 2025. Counsel for the owner attended that hearing. Timetabling orders were made by the Tribunal. Those orders were sent to the respective parties.
The orders required the body corporate to file and serve its written submissions by no later than 12 September 2025.That order was complied with.
The owner’s response was to have been filed and served by no later than 3 October 2025. That order was not complied with. No reason was given for the failure to do so.
Counsel for the owner would have been aware of the proceedings under TT9063964.
A review of the Tribunal file for TT 9063964, shows that the only remaining issue in that matter is levy arrears.
For the reasons initially given and for the reasons above, the application for an adjournment is dismissed. The proceedings were issued in April 2025 and the body corporate is entitled to have them heard. The owner has had more than sufficient time to address the issues raised by the body corporate in their submissions. The application for a further two days to file a memorandum in response by the owner is also dismissed.

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

The body corporate has applied for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, costs and the filing fee from the unit owner.
A unit owner must pay all body corporate levies and outgoings payable for the unit. See sections 80(1)(f) and 121(1) Unit Titles Act 2010.
The body corporate has determined the roofing levies payable and unit owner's share has been calculated according to their utility interest.
The body corporate has fixed the due date for the levies to be paid, and the unit owner has not paid the levies by that date. See section 124(1) Unit Titles Act 2010. The body corporate has provided records to prove the amount claimed.
The amount claimed by the body corporate in this application is the remaining balance owing by the owner, as the owner has made a part payment towards the levies arrears.

Is the Unit owner liable for interest?

If a unit owner fails to pay levies by the due date, interest accrues on the unpaid balance. A body corporate may charge interest up to 10% per annum. See section 128 Unit Titles Act 2010.
The body corporate has resolved to charge interest at 10% per annum on unpaid levies. The Body Corporate has proved the amount of interest owing from the due date to 11 September 2025.

Is the Unit owner liable for costs?

Pursuant to section 124 UTA, and as resolved at meetings of the Body Corporate, the Body Corporate is entitled to recover any reasonable costs incurred by it in collecting unpaid levies as a debt due by the owner to the Body Corporate. In accordance with the judgments (of the District Court and Court of Appeal respectively) in Body Corporate 162791 v Cheah DC Auckland, CIV2014-004- 0120, 24 June 2014 and Body Corporate 162791 v Gilbert [2015] NZCA 185, the Tribunal must order that the reasonable costs incurred by the Body Corporate in recovering the levies, objectively assessed, be paid by a defaulting unit owner.
Counsel for the owner submitted that the costs were excessive given the amounts owing by way of levies. Having reviewed the costs and taking into consideration the higher courts directions on the issue of costs, as I must, I am satisfied that the costs are reasonable.
I have ordered appearance costs in favour of the body corporate for one half hour for the hearing on 9 September 2025 and one hour for today’s appearance.
As the body corporate has succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the owner to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 9066984 — net $14,747.35 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025	$431.25	Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025
Costs: Body corporate debt collection	$920.00	Costs: Body corporate debt collection
Levy	$8,926.06	Levy
Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs	$3,461.38	Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs
Interest: to 11 September 2025	$508.66	Interest: to 11 September 2025
Filing Fee	$500.00	Filing Fee
Net award	$14,747.35
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$14,747.35

Order

[The party] must pay Body Corporate 202682 $14,747.35 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Levy$8,926.06 Costs: s.124 solicitor's costs$3,461.38 Costs: Solicitors fees on appearance on 9 September 2025 and 25 November 2025 $431.25 Interest: to 11 September 2025$508.66 Costs: Body corporate debt collection costs $920.00 Filing Fee$500.00 Total award$14,747.35 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $14,747.35

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
Ms Donovan appeared for the body corporate. Mr Bowler attended for the owner. Adjournment
A preliminary matter must be addressed first.
On 24 November 2025, the day prior to this hearing, counsel for the owner applied to the Tribunal for an adjournment. Counsel submitted that the matter should be adjourned for two reasons • Counsel had only recently been instructed. • Other proceedings had been filed in the Tribunal between the same parties and that the proceedings should be combined (the other proceedings are under TT9063964).
The application was dismissed on the grounds that; • This claim had been filed in April 2025 and further delay would disadvantage the body corporate. • A preliminary case conference had already been held on this matter and timetabling orders issued. • This matter appeared to be a relatively straight forward levy arrears claim. • Counsel for the owner had sufficient time to take instructions from his client.
I indicated that I would be prepared to consider the adjournment application afresh at the commencement of today’s hearing.
At the hearing, counsel for the owner applied for an adjournment.
Counsel said that he had not received any further instructions from his client on the issue of unpaid levies.
Initially, counsel said that he had not been served with the body corporate’s submissions. On further investigation, counsel found that the submissions had been served. Counsel at that point accepted that the proceeding should continue, but that he wished to be given a further two days to file a written memorandum by way of response from the owner.
Counsel submitted that this matter and the owner’s application under TT 9063964 should be consolidated.
Counsel for the body corporate opposed the application for an adjournment.
A case conference was held on this matter on 9 September 2025. Counsel for the owner attended that hearing. Timetabling orders were made by the Tribunal. Those orders were sent to the respective parties.
The orders required the body corporate to file and serve its written submissions by no later than 12 September 2025.That order was complied with.
The owner’s response was to have been filed and served by no later than 3 October 2025. That order was not complied with. No reason was given for the failure to do so.
Counsel for the owner would have been aware of the proceedings under TT9063964.
A review of the Tribunal file for TT 9063964, shows that the only remaining issue in that matter is levy arrears.
For the reasons initially given and for the reasons above, the application for an adjournment is dismissed. The proceedings were issued in April 2025 and the body corporate is entitled to have them heard. The owner has had more than sufficient time to address the issues raised by the body corporate in their submissions. The application for a further two days to file a memorandum in response by the owner is also dismissed.

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

The body corporate has applied for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, costs and the filing fee from the unit owner.
A unit owner must pay all body corporate levies and outgoings payable for the unit. See sections 80(1)(f) and 121(1) Unit Titles Act 2010.
The body corporate has determined the roofing levies payable and unit owner's share has been calculated according to their utility interest.
The body corporate has fixed the due date for the levies to be paid, and the unit owner has not paid the levies by that date. See section 124(1) Unit Titles Act 2010. The body corporate has provided records to prove the amount claimed.
The amount claimed by the body corporate in this application is the remaining balance owing by the owner, as the owner has made a part payment towards the levies arrears.

Is the Unit owner liable for interest?

If a unit owner fails to pay levies by the due date, interest accrues on the unpaid balance. A body corporate may charge interest up to 10% per annum. See section 128 Unit Titles Act 2010.
The body corporate has resolved to charge interest at 10% per annum on unpaid levies. The Body Corporate has proved the amount of interest owing from the due date to 11 September 2025.

Is the Unit owner liable for costs?

Pursuant to section 124 UTA, and as resolved at meetings of the Body Corporate, the Body Corporate is entitled to recover any reasonable costs incurred by it in collecting unpaid levies as a debt due by the owner to the Body Corporate. In accordance with the judgments (of the District Court and Court of Appeal respectively) in Body Corporate 162791 v Cheah DC Auckland, CIV2014-004- 0120, 24 June 2014 and Body Corporate 162791 v Gilbert [2015] NZCA 185, the Tribunal must order that the reasonable costs incurred by the Body Corporate in recovering the levies, objectively assessed, be paid by a defaulting unit owner.
Counsel for the owner submitted that the costs were excessive given the amounts owing by way of levies. Having reviewed the costs and taking into consideration the higher courts directions on the issue of costs, as I must, I am satisfied that the costs are reasonable.
I have ordered appearance costs in favour of the body corporate for one half hour for the hearing on 9 September 2025 and one hour for today’s appearance.
As the body corporate has succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the owner to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 9066984 — Tenancy dispute in Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 9066984 — Tenancy dispute in Onehunga, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

Is the Unit owner liable for interest?

Is the Unit owner liable for costs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

Is the Unit owner liable for interest?

Is the Unit owner liable for costs?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions