What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9069304 about?

The tribunal order states: Lumos Investments Limited must pay Body Corporate 534969 $5,643.90

How much money was awarded in case 9069304?

Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Hour X2 Plus GST: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Interest: $259.40 awarded to landlord; Section 24 Costs Including GST Disbu…: $3,136.50 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Levies: $126.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9069304?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9069304?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12732705-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9069304 about?

The tribunal order states: Lumos Investments Limited must pay Body Corporate 534969 $5,643.90

How much money was awarded in case 9069304?

Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees: $1,046.50 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Hour X2 Plus GST: $575.00 awarded to landlord; Interest: $259.40 awarded to landlord; Section 24 Costs Including GST Disbu…: $3,136.50 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Levies: $126.50 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9069304?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9069304?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12732705-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Mangere, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 9069304 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 9069304 — net $5,643.90 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Section 24 costs including GST disbursements	$3,136.50	Section 24 costs including GST disbursements
hour x2 plus GST	$575.00	hour x2 plus GST
Unpaid Levies	$126.50	Unpaid Levies
Interest to 17 September 2025	$259.40	Interest to 17 September 2025
Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees	$1,046.50	Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees
Filing Fee	$500.00	Filing Fee
Net award	$5,643.90
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,643.90

Order

Lumos Investments Limited must pay Body Corporate 534969 $5,643.90 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Unpaid Levies$126.50 Interest to 17 September 2025$259.40 Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees$1,046.50 Section 24 costs including GST & disbursements $3,136.50 Appearance at the hearing ($250.00 per hour x2 plus GST) $575.00 Filing Fee$500.00 Total award$5,643.90 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $5,643.90

Reasons

A hearing was convened on 17 September 2025 by video conference. Ms Donovan attended as the representative for the applicant. Mr Darabana attended by telephone for the respondent.
The Body Corporate has applied for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, costs and the filing fee from the Unit Owner.
The matter was adjourned as the Tribunal required clarification of whether the respondent did in fact send a written notice in March 2023 requesting a change of email address. Having reviewed the further evidence from the respondent and the submissions from the applicant the Tribunal makes the following determination.

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

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 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 respondent has paid operational levies in full. However, a long-term maintenance levy of $126.50 remains outstanding.
The respondent argues that payments made should have extinguished this debt. The evidence shows that a payment of $323.31 was received on 30 November 2023. The Body Corporate applied this payment to the April 2023 long-term maintenance levy, consistent with appropriation principles.
Payments may be applied to the corresponding levy. I accept the Body Corporate’s evidence that $126.50 remains outstanding.

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.
AGM resolutions from 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 authorising 10% interest were produced. This satisfies section 128. I accept the calculations produced and award $259.40.

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.
The Body Corporate claims $1,046.50 in debt collection fees. These include monitoring levy arrears, sending reminders, and communications. Invoices were produced.
Section 124 entitles recovery of “reasonable costs” in recovery. While the amount exceeds the levy debt, reasonableness is not assessed by proportionality to the arrears alone, but by whether the costs were genuinely and necessarily incurred in recovery. The reminders and monitoring undertaken were appropriate. I find the costs are recoverable.
The Body Corporate claims $3,136.50 for legal fees and disbursements incurred in instructing Price Baker Berridge to pursue recovery. Supporting invoices and time records were produced.
In BC 346799 v Gueirard & Vu, the District Court endorsed solicitor/client recovery under section 124. The fees claimed are supported by detailed records and are not excessive for the work involved. I am satisfied these costs were reasonably incurred and are recoverable.
The Body Corporate also claims $575 for attendance at hearing ($250/hour × 2 hours plus GST). I accept that these attendance costs are part of the recovery process and are recoverable.
As the Body Corporate has succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the respondent to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Dispute
The respondent disputes liability for collection costs and interest, citing an alleged failure by the Body Corporate Manager, Strata Title Administration (“STA”), to update his email address following a change request made in March 2023. Mr Darabana produced a copy of the March 2023 email.
The Body Corporate, through memorandum dated 24 September 2025, confirmed that the email was eventually forwarded in August 2024 and the address updated thereafter.
However, the Body Corporate argues that the respondent’s original email address remained active and was still used by him, including for receiving levy notices and for making payments between March 2023 and August 2024. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s submission that the respondent continued to access and receive levy notices during this period, and that all levy payments were consistently made late.
Under section 85 of the UTA and regulation 4 of the Unit Titles Regulations 2011, a Body Corporate must maintain up-to-date contact details for Unit Owners. A written request must be made to amend contact records. The Tribunal finds the respondent has now produced a copy of such a written request from March 2023.
However, following the principles outlined in Sestan v Auckland District Health Board CIV-2006-404-006868 Nov 16, 2006 and AJ Burr Ltd v Blenheim Borough Council, the failure by STA to update its register, while not ideal, does not render the subsequent collection actions invalid. This is because the respondent did receive invoices and continued to use the email address at issue. His failure to pay levies on time predates and continues after the March 2023 change request.
The Tribunal finds that the respondent’s default is not attributable to STA’s failure to promptly process the email change. The statutory regime under the UTA permits recovery of reasonable collection and legal costs where a unit owner has failed to meet levy obligations. The charges claimed are reasonable, proportionate, and well-supported by evidence.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 9069304 — net $5,643.90 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Section 24 costs including GST disbursements	$3,136.50	Section 24 costs including GST disbursements
hour x2 plus GST	$575.00	hour x2 plus GST
Unpaid Levies	$126.50	Unpaid Levies
Interest to 17 September 2025	$259.40	Interest to 17 September 2025
Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees	$1,046.50	Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees
Filing Fee	$500.00	Filing Fee
Net award	$5,643.90
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,643.90

Order

Lumos Investments Limited must pay Body Corporate 534969 $5,643.90 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Unpaid Levies$126.50 Interest to 17 September 2025$259.40 Body Corporate Debt Collection Fees$1,046.50 Section 24 costs including GST & disbursements $3,136.50 Appearance at the hearing ($250.00 per hour x2 plus GST) $575.00 Filing Fee$500.00 Total award$5,643.90 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $5,643.90

Reasons

A hearing was convened on 17 September 2025 by video conference. Ms Donovan attended as the representative for the applicant. Mr Darabana attended by telephone for the respondent.
The Body Corporate has applied for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, costs and the filing fee from the Unit Owner.
The matter was adjourned as the Tribunal required clarification of whether the respondent did in fact send a written notice in March 2023 requesting a change of email address. Having reviewed the further evidence from the respondent and the submissions from the applicant the Tribunal makes the following determination.

Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?

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 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 respondent has paid operational levies in full. However, a long-term maintenance levy of $126.50 remains outstanding.
The respondent argues that payments made should have extinguished this debt. The evidence shows that a payment of $323.31 was received on 30 November 2023. The Body Corporate applied this payment to the April 2023 long-term maintenance levy, consistent with appropriation principles.
Payments may be applied to the corresponding levy. I accept the Body Corporate’s evidence that $126.50 remains outstanding.

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.
AGM resolutions from 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 authorising 10% interest were produced. This satisfies section 128. I accept the calculations produced and award $259.40.

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.
The Body Corporate claims $1,046.50 in debt collection fees. These include monitoring levy arrears, sending reminders, and communications. Invoices were produced.
Section 124 entitles recovery of “reasonable costs” in recovery. While the amount exceeds the levy debt, reasonableness is not assessed by proportionality to the arrears alone, but by whether the costs were genuinely and necessarily incurred in recovery. The reminders and monitoring undertaken were appropriate. I find the costs are recoverable.
The Body Corporate claims $3,136.50 for legal fees and disbursements incurred in instructing Price Baker Berridge to pursue recovery. Supporting invoices and time records were produced.
In BC 346799 v Gueirard & Vu, the District Court endorsed solicitor/client recovery under section 124. The fees claimed are supported by detailed records and are not excessive for the work involved. I am satisfied these costs were reasonably incurred and are recoverable.
The Body Corporate also claims $575 for attendance at hearing ($250/hour × 2 hours plus GST). I accept that these attendance costs are part of the recovery process and are recoverable.
As the Body Corporate has succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the respondent to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Dispute
The respondent disputes liability for collection costs and interest, citing an alleged failure by the Body Corporate Manager, Strata Title Administration (“STA”), to update his email address following a change request made in March 2023. Mr Darabana produced a copy of the March 2023 email.
The Body Corporate, through memorandum dated 24 September 2025, confirmed that the email was eventually forwarded in August 2024 and the address updated thereafter.
However, the Body Corporate argues that the respondent’s original email address remained active and was still used by him, including for receiving levy notices and for making payments between March 2023 and August 2024. The Tribunal accepts the applicant’s submission that the respondent continued to access and receive levy notices during this period, and that all levy payments were consistently made late.
Under section 85 of the UTA and regulation 4 of the Unit Titles Regulations 2011, a Body Corporate must maintain up-to-date contact details for Unit Owners. A written request must be made to amend contact records. The Tribunal finds the respondent has now produced a copy of such a written request from March 2023.
However, following the principles outlined in Sestan v Auckland District Health Board CIV-2006-404-006868 Nov 16, 2006 and AJ Burr Ltd v Blenheim Borough Council, the failure by STA to update its register, while not ideal, does not render the subsequent collection actions invalid. This is because the respondent did receive invoices and continued to use the email address at issue. His failure to pay levies on time predates and continues after the March 2023 change request.
The Tribunal finds that the respondent’s default is not attributable to STA’s failure to promptly process the email change. The statutory regime under the UTA permits recovery of reasonable collection and legal costs where a unit owner has failed to meet levy obligations. The charges claimed are reasonable, proportionate, and well-supported by evidence.

Tenancy Tribunal case 9069304 — Tenancy dispute in Mangere, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 9069304 — Tenancy dispute in Mangere, 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

Property management

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

Property management

Frequently asked questions