What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9077204 about?

The tribunal order states: 444 Trustees Limited Gary Strangman must pay Body Corporate 19392

How much money was awarded in case 9077204?

Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Interest: $2,366.52 awarded to landlord; Interest: $587.07 awarded to landlord; Legal Costs: $1,072.00 awarded to landlord; Legal Costs: $2,857.50 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Levies: $23,482.77 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9077204?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9077204?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14165971-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 9077204 about?

The tribunal order states: 444 Trustees Limited Gary Strangman must pay Body Corporate 19392

How much money was awarded in case 9077204?

Filing Fee: $500.00 awarded to landlord; Interest: $2,366.52 awarded to landlord; Interest: $587.07 awarded to landlord; Legal Costs: $1,072.00 awarded to landlord; Legal Costs: $2,857.50 awarded to landlord; Unpaid Levies: $23,482.77 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 9077204?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 9077204?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14165971-UTA_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Fernhill, Queenstown Tenancy Tribunal Case 9077204 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 9077204 — net $30,865.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Unpaid levies	$23,482.77	Unpaid levies
Collection costs	$1,072.00	Collection costs
Legal costs	$2,857.50	Legal costs
Filing fee	$500.00	Filing fee
Interest to 11 May 2026	$2,366.52	Interest to 11 May 2026
Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026	$587.07	Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026
Net award	$30,865.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$30,865.86

Order

444 Trustees Limited Gary Strangman must pay Body Corporate 19392 $30,865.86 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Unpaid levies$23,482.77 Collection costs$1,072.00 Legal costs$2,857.50 Filing fee$500.00 Interest to 11 May 2026$2,366.52 Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026$587.07 Total award$30,865.86 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $30,865.86

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by video conference on 8 August 2026. Mr Donaldson appeared for the applicant, Body Corporate 19392. Mr Strangman appeared for the respondent, 444 Trustees Limited
This matter comes before the Tribunal as a rehearing of the Body Corporate’s application for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, collection costs, legal costs and the filing fee under the Unit Titles Act 2010 (UTA).
On 27 May 2026, the Tribunal issued a decision ordering the respondent, Trust Ltd, to pay the applicant Body Corporate $30,278.79, comprising unpaid levies, penalty interest, collection costs, legal costs and the filing fee.
Following that decision, the respondent applied for a rehearing which was granted.
Accordingly, this matter has been reheard afresh. Although I have had regard to the evidence previously filed, I have determined the application on the basis of all evidence and submissions presented at the rehearing

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 application relates to levies struck for the financial years ending 2024, 2025 and 2026, together with the levy authorised for the period commencing 1 April 2026.
The applicant produced copies of the minutes of the Annual General Meetings held on 29 June 2023, 2 August 2024 and 12 June 2025. Those minutes demonstrate that the Body Corporate validly resolved to approve the operational fund and long-term maintenance fund budgets, determined the levies payable by unit owners, and apportioned those levies according to each owner’s utility interest.
The evidence further establishes that levy notices were issued in accordance with those resolutions and that the respondent’s share of those levies became payable on the dates specified in the notices.
The applicant also produced the relevant account statements, levy notices and financial records identifying the outstanding balance.
The minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on 12 June 2025 include a resolution approving operational fund levies of $102,030 and long-term maintenance fund levies of $65,000 and authorising levy notices to issue for the periods commencing 1 July 2025 and 1 January 2026. The applicant produced evidence of those levies.
The evidence also establishes that the Body Corporate resolved to raise a further levy from 1 April 2026 for the first half of the following financial year to ensure sufficient cash flow pending adoption of the next annual budget. I remain satisfied that this levy was authorised by the Body Corporate resolution and was validly issued.
Importantly, during the rehearing the respondent did not dispute that the levies remain unpaid. Nor did the respondent challenge the validity of the Annual General Meeting resolutions, the method by which the levies were calculated, or the accuracy of the amounts claimed.
Instead, the respondent explained that payment had deliberately been withheld because of longstanding concerns regarding the conduct of the Body Corporate, including complaints relating to management decisions, maintenance issues and the manner in which various matters had been dealt with over several years.
I accept that the respondent genuinely holds those concerns. However, they do not provide a legal defence to the present application.
The statutory obligation to pay body corporate levies arises under sections 80 and 121 of the Unit Titles Act 2010. Once levies have been properly authorised and struck by the Body Corporate, a Unit Owner must pay those levies when they fall due.
The Unit Titles Act does not permit a Unit Owner to withhold payment of properly authorised levies because they are dissatisfied with the performance of the Body Corporate, disagree with maintenance decisions, or have other grievances concerning Body Corporate management.
While a unit owner may have legitimate complaints regarding the administration of the Body Corporate or alleged failures to carry out maintenance obligations, those matters are separate legal issues from the statutory obligation to pay levies. Such complaints do not extinguish or suspend the obligation imposed by sections 80 and 121 of the Act.
In the present case, the respondent has not filed any counterclaim seeking relief arising from the alleged maintenance failures or other Body Corporate conduct. Accordingly, there is no cross-application before me requiring determination.
Nothing in this decision prevents the respondent from pursuing any remedies that may be available under the Unit Titles Act in separate proceedings should the respondent consider the Body Corporate has breached its statutory duties. However, those issues are not before the Tribunal in this application and cannot operate as a set-off or defence to the Body Corporate’s statutory entitlement to recover properly authorised levies.
Having considered all of the evidence presented at the rehearing, I am satisfied that the applicant has established the unpaid levies claimed.

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 evidence establishes that the Body Corporate resolved to charge interest at the rate of 10% per annum on overdue levies.
At the earlier hearing, an issue arose because some invoices had initially been generated using an incorrect interest rate of 14%. The applicant subsequently reviewed those calculations, corrected the error and filed amended calculations applying the correct statutory rate of 10% per annum.
Those revised calculations formed the basis of the previous decision.
No evidence was produced at the rehearing demonstrating that the revised interest calculations were incorrect, and the respondent did not dispute the methodology or arithmetic.
I am satisfied the interest claimed has been correctly calculated in accordance with section 128 and the Body Corporate’s resolution

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 produced invoices supporting the collection costs claimed.
The respondent did not dispute that those costs had been incurred or contend that they were unreasonable.
I am satisfied that the collection costs claimed were reasonably incurred in recovering the unpaid levies and are recoverable under section 124.
The applicant produced evidence of the legal costs claimed. Having reviewed the invoices and the work undertaken, I am satisfied that the legal costs claimed are reasonable and recoverable.
As the Body Corporate has succeeded with the claim, I must order the respondent 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 9077204 — net $30,865.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Unpaid levies	$23,482.77	Unpaid levies
Collection costs	$1,072.00	Collection costs
Legal costs	$2,857.50	Legal costs
Filing fee	$500.00	Filing fee
Interest to 11 May 2026	$2,366.52	Interest to 11 May 2026
Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026	$587.07	Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026
Net award	$30,865.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$30,865.86

Order

444 Trustees Limited Gary Strangman must pay Body Corporate 19392 $30,865.86 immediately, calculated as follows: DescriptionsApplicantRespondent Unpaid levies$23,482.77 Collection costs$1,072.00 Legal costs$2,857.50 Filing fee$500.00 Interest to 11 May 2026$2,366.52 Interest 11 May 2026 to 5 August 2026$587.07 Total award$30,865.86 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant $30,865.86

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by video conference on 8 August 2026. Mr Donaldson appeared for the applicant, Body Corporate 19392. Mr Strangman appeared for the respondent, 444 Trustees Limited
This matter comes before the Tribunal as a rehearing of the Body Corporate’s application for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, collection costs, legal costs and the filing fee under the Unit Titles Act 2010 (UTA).
On 27 May 2026, the Tribunal issued a decision ordering the respondent, Trust Ltd, to pay the applicant Body Corporate $30,278.79, comprising unpaid levies, penalty interest, collection costs, legal costs and the filing fee.
Following that decision, the respondent applied for a rehearing which was granted.
Accordingly, this matter has been reheard afresh. Although I have had regard to the evidence previously filed, I have determined the application on the basis of all evidence and submissions presented at the rehearing

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 application relates to levies struck for the financial years ending 2024, 2025 and 2026, together with the levy authorised for the period commencing 1 April 2026.
The applicant produced copies of the minutes of the Annual General Meetings held on 29 June 2023, 2 August 2024 and 12 June 2025. Those minutes demonstrate that the Body Corporate validly resolved to approve the operational fund and long-term maintenance fund budgets, determined the levies payable by unit owners, and apportioned those levies according to each owner’s utility interest.
The evidence further establishes that levy notices were issued in accordance with those resolutions and that the respondent’s share of those levies became payable on the dates specified in the notices.
The applicant also produced the relevant account statements, levy notices and financial records identifying the outstanding balance.
The minutes of the Annual General Meeting held on 12 June 2025 include a resolution approving operational fund levies of $102,030 and long-term maintenance fund levies of $65,000 and authorising levy notices to issue for the periods commencing 1 July 2025 and 1 January 2026. The applicant produced evidence of those levies.
The evidence also establishes that the Body Corporate resolved to raise a further levy from 1 April 2026 for the first half of the following financial year to ensure sufficient cash flow pending adoption of the next annual budget. I remain satisfied that this levy was authorised by the Body Corporate resolution and was validly issued.
Importantly, during the rehearing the respondent did not dispute that the levies remain unpaid. Nor did the respondent challenge the validity of the Annual General Meeting resolutions, the method by which the levies were calculated, or the accuracy of the amounts claimed.
Instead, the respondent explained that payment had deliberately been withheld because of longstanding concerns regarding the conduct of the Body Corporate, including complaints relating to management decisions, maintenance issues and the manner in which various matters had been dealt with over several years.
I accept that the respondent genuinely holds those concerns. However, they do not provide a legal defence to the present application.
The statutory obligation to pay body corporate levies arises under sections 80 and 121 of the Unit Titles Act 2010. Once levies have been properly authorised and struck by the Body Corporate, a Unit Owner must pay those levies when they fall due.
The Unit Titles Act does not permit a Unit Owner to withhold payment of properly authorised levies because they are dissatisfied with the performance of the Body Corporate, disagree with maintenance decisions, or have other grievances concerning Body Corporate management.
While a unit owner may have legitimate complaints regarding the administration of the Body Corporate or alleged failures to carry out maintenance obligations, those matters are separate legal issues from the statutory obligation to pay levies. Such complaints do not extinguish or suspend the obligation imposed by sections 80 and 121 of the Act.
In the present case, the respondent has not filed any counterclaim seeking relief arising from the alleged maintenance failures or other Body Corporate conduct. Accordingly, there is no cross-application before me requiring determination.
Nothing in this decision prevents the respondent from pursuing any remedies that may be available under the Unit Titles Act in separate proceedings should the respondent consider the Body Corporate has breached its statutory duties. However, those issues are not before the Tribunal in this application and cannot operate as a set-off or defence to the Body Corporate’s statutory entitlement to recover properly authorised levies.
Having considered all of the evidence presented at the rehearing, I am satisfied that the applicant has established the unpaid levies claimed.

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 evidence establishes that the Body Corporate resolved to charge interest at the rate of 10% per annum on overdue levies.
At the earlier hearing, an issue arose because some invoices had initially been generated using an incorrect interest rate of 14%. The applicant subsequently reviewed those calculations, corrected the error and filed amended calculations applying the correct statutory rate of 10% per annum.
Those revised calculations formed the basis of the previous decision.
No evidence was produced at the rehearing demonstrating that the revised interest calculations were incorrect, and the respondent did not dispute the methodology or arithmetic.
I am satisfied the interest claimed has been correctly calculated in accordance with section 128 and the Body Corporate’s resolution

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 produced invoices supporting the collection costs claimed.
The respondent did not dispute that those costs had been incurred or contend that they were unreasonable.
I am satisfied that the collection costs claimed were reasonably incurred in recovering the unpaid levies and are recoverable under section 124.
The applicant produced evidence of the legal costs claimed. Having reviewed the invoices and the work undertaken, I am satisfied that the legal costs claimed are reasonable and recoverable.
As the Body Corporate has succeeded with the claim, I must order the respondent to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Tenancy Tribunal case 9077204 — Tenancy dispute in Fernhill, Queenstown

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 9077204 — Tenancy dispute in Fernhill, Queenstown

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

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

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

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.