What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5153424?

The tribunal order states: Shahbaaz Shahed Khan, Anik Nath and Nidisha Nithyanand Shetty must pay

How much money was awarded in case 5153424?

Break Fee: $713.23 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,404.29 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $86.15 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5153424?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5153424?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11691476-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5153424?

The tribunal order states: Shahbaaz Shahed Khan, Anik Nath and Nidisha Nithyanand Shetty must pay

How much money was awarded in case 5153424?

Break Fee: $713.23 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $7,404.29 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $86.15 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5153424?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5153424?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11691476-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6, 60 Selo Street, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5153424 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5153424 — net $5,283.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 15 March 2025	$7,404.29	Rent arrears to 15 March 2025
Water rates	$86.15	Water rates
Break fee	$713.23	Break fee
Net award	$5,283.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,283.67

Order

Shahbaaz Shahed Khan, Anik Nath and Nidisha Nithyanand Shetty must pay Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For Alistair Mcgregor $5,283.67 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,920.00 (6516774-010) to Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For Alistair Mcgregor immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the face-to-face hearing on 8 April 2025.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy to end 4 January 2025 and refund of the bond.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears for the full-term of the fixed-term tenancy which ended 15 March 2025, compensation for water rates and fee for the tenant’s request to break the fixed-term tenancy. The landlord seeks refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. The tenancy
The parties entered into a fixed-term tenancy commencing 16 March 2024 and ending 15 March 2025.
On 28 November 2024, the tenants contacted the landlord to request they consent to an early end to the tenancy on the basis some of the tenant’s family members were moving to Auckland and they wished to rent a larger home.
The landlord says they agreed to the tenant being released early from the fixed- term tenancy but only on the condition they pay the break fee and that they remain liable for rent until a new tenancy commences.
The tenants say they agreed to pay the break fee but did not agree to remain liable for rent until a new tenancy commenced.
The landlord’s record of rent payments shows the tenant last paid rent on 31 December 2024, being rent up until 3 January 2025.
A new tenancy did not commence at the premises until 2 April 2025. Matters not in dispute
The tenant does not dispute that they owe $86.15 to the landlord for unpaid water rates during the tenancy.
The tenant does not dispute that they owe $713.23 to the landlord for marketing costs and other costs which the tenant agreed to pay in relation to the landlord taking steps to find new tenants before the end of the fixed-term tenancy.
By consent, I make orders on the above two matters. Burden and standard of proof
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Did the parties agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early?

THE LAW

No fixed-term tenancy shall be terminated unless the expiry of the term of the tenancy passes, or any of sections 55AA, 56A(1), 58(1)(d), (da), 58A, 59, 59A, or 59B apply, and notice is given in accordance with the applicable section. A fixed-term tenancy may also be ended by mutual agreement of the parties.
The Tribunal may make an order reducing the term of the tenancy by a period stated in the order, and making such variations in the terms of the tenancy as are necessary because of the reduction of the term, where it is satisfied that, because of an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances, the severe hardship which the applicant would suffer if the term of the tenancy were not reduced would be greater than the hardship which the other party to the tenancy would suffer if the term were reduced. See s 66 of the RTA. THE PARTIES’ POSITIONS
The landlord seeks an order for rent arrears to 15 March 2025, in the amount of $7,404.29 as per the terms of the fixed-term tenancy agreement.
The tenant says after they contacted the landlord on 28 November 2024 to ask that the fixed-term tenancy come to an early end, the landlord requested they complete an application form to seek the landlord’s consent and provided the tenants with an estimate of the break fee costs.
The tenants say that on 11 December 2024, the landlord emailed the tenants and stated: Thanks for your confirmation regarding the early termination of 6/60 Selo St, your vacation date is 03/01/25. I will come and complete final inspection on 06/01/25. Kindly sign the lease break documents I sent to you on 30/11/24 and return them to me as soon as possible. Once I receive the signed documents, I will proceed to relist the property on the rental market this week.
The tenants say they understood the landlord’s email of 11 December 2024 to be acceptance of their request to end the tenancy early and that in that email the landlord agreed the fixed-term tenancy would terminate on 3 January 2025.
As referred to in the landlord’s email of 11 December, all three tenants then signed the application form on 17 December 2024 and emailed it to the landlord.
The application form stated: I/We understand and agree that if this application shall be successful we will be required to continue to pay rent as required under the existing Tenancy Agreement and that the remaining name tenants will take over the responsibility of rental payments and other terms and conditions stipulated in the existing Tenancy Agreement.
The tenants say they understood the above clause to mean that if two of the tenants were remaining they would continue to pay rent, however, as all three tenants wished to move out, there would be no remaining tenants who would take over the responsibility of paying the rent.
The tenants say they did not believe they agreed to continue paying rent until new tenants were found for the premises (or their original fixed-term tenancy expired).
The application form also stated: I/We understand and agree that if this application shall be successful we will be required to sign a written agreement to record this variation which will be an extension of the existing Tenancy Agreement and all its terms and conditions. I/We agree the only release which is binding between the parties is in terms of the written agreement between the parties, not this present application (The document is called “Variation of a Tenancy Agreement”). Only once this application is successful and the aforementioned document is signed by all parties named on the existing Tenancy Agreement, will the exiting tenant be able to vacate the premises and be released from the fixed term tenancy.
Both parties confirmed no further written agreement was signed by the parties (referred to above as Variation of a Tenancy Agreement) as was anticipated by the application form.
The landlord says that, by signing the application form, the tenants acknowledged they would be liable to pay rent until a new tenancy commenced (or their original fixed-term tenancy expired).
The landlord says their email of 11 December 2024 acknowledging the tenants would move out on 3 January 2025 was an acknowledgement of their move-out date only and was not agreement that the tenants would cease to be liable for rent after that date.

MY ANALYSIS

By signing the application form, the tenants agreed to continue to pay rent as required under the existing Tenancy Agreement. No further written agreement was signed by the parties which could be considered a variation to the Tenancy Agreement. The second portion of the same sentence in the application form which refers to “remaining name tenants” was irrelevant in the tenant’s situation in which all three tenants were moving out. The first portion of that sentence stands alone as a commitment that while their application was being considered the tenants agreed to continue paying rent under the existing fixed-term tenancy agreement.
It remains unclear why the landlord did not, after accepting the tenant’s application, then request the tenant sign a variation to the tenancy agreement as was anticipated in the application form. Certainly, if the parties had done so, it would have provided the tenants with a clear understanding of the terms of the agreement they had entered into.
Having not done so, and in light of the tenant’s acknowledgment in the application form that they would continue to pay rent under the existing tenancy agreement, I find there was no variation to the fixed-term tenancy agreement and both parties are bound by the terms of that agreement.
It follows that, as a new tenancy did not commence at the premises until after the end of the fixed-term tenancy, the tenant is liable to pay rent until 15 March 2025.
I make an order accordingly.
The bond is to be released to the landlord in partial payment of the amounts ordered. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5153424 — net $5,283.67 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 15 March 2025	$7,404.29	Rent arrears to 15 March 2025
Water rates	$86.15	Water rates
Break fee	$713.23	Break fee
Net award	$5,283.67
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$5,283.67

Order

Shahbaaz Shahed Khan, Anik Nath and Nidisha Nithyanand Shetty must pay Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For Alistair Mcgregor $5,283.67 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,920.00 (6516774-010) to Auckland Property Management Limited As Agent For Alistair Mcgregor immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the face-to-face hearing on 8 April 2025.
The tenant has applied for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy to end 4 January 2025 and refund of the bond.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears for the full-term of the fixed-term tenancy which ended 15 March 2025, compensation for water rates and fee for the tenant’s request to break the fixed-term tenancy. The landlord seeks refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee. The tenancy
The parties entered into a fixed-term tenancy commencing 16 March 2024 and ending 15 March 2025.
On 28 November 2024, the tenants contacted the landlord to request they consent to an early end to the tenancy on the basis some of the tenant’s family members were moving to Auckland and they wished to rent a larger home.
The landlord says they agreed to the tenant being released early from the fixed- term tenancy but only on the condition they pay the break fee and that they remain liable for rent until a new tenancy commences.
The tenants say they agreed to pay the break fee but did not agree to remain liable for rent until a new tenancy commenced.
The landlord’s record of rent payments shows the tenant last paid rent on 31 December 2024, being rent up until 3 January 2025.
A new tenancy did not commence at the premises until 2 April 2025. Matters not in dispute
The tenant does not dispute that they owe $86.15 to the landlord for unpaid water rates during the tenancy.
The tenant does not dispute that they owe $713.23 to the landlord for marketing costs and other costs which the tenant agreed to pay in relation to the landlord taking steps to find new tenants before the end of the fixed-term tenancy.
By consent, I make orders on the above two matters. Burden and standard of proof
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, or in mathematical terms, has a fraction more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.

Did the parties agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early?

THE LAW

No fixed-term tenancy shall be terminated unless the expiry of the term of the tenancy passes, or any of sections 55AA, 56A(1), 58(1)(d), (da), 58A, 59, 59A, or 59B apply, and notice is given in accordance with the applicable section. A fixed-term tenancy may also be ended by mutual agreement of the parties.
The Tribunal may make an order reducing the term of the tenancy by a period stated in the order, and making such variations in the terms of the tenancy as are necessary because of the reduction of the term, where it is satisfied that, because of an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances, the severe hardship which the applicant would suffer if the term of the tenancy were not reduced would be greater than the hardship which the other party to the tenancy would suffer if the term were reduced. See s 66 of the RTA. THE PARTIES’ POSITIONS
The landlord seeks an order for rent arrears to 15 March 2025, in the amount of $7,404.29 as per the terms of the fixed-term tenancy agreement.
The tenant says after they contacted the landlord on 28 November 2024 to ask that the fixed-term tenancy come to an early end, the landlord requested they complete an application form to seek the landlord’s consent and provided the tenants with an estimate of the break fee costs.
The tenants say that on 11 December 2024, the landlord emailed the tenants and stated: Thanks for your confirmation regarding the early termination of 6/60 Selo St, your vacation date is 03/01/25. I will come and complete final inspection on 06/01/25. Kindly sign the lease break documents I sent to you on 30/11/24 and return them to me as soon as possible. Once I receive the signed documents, I will proceed to relist the property on the rental market this week.
The tenants say they understood the landlord’s email of 11 December 2024 to be acceptance of their request to end the tenancy early and that in that email the landlord agreed the fixed-term tenancy would terminate on 3 January 2025.
As referred to in the landlord’s email of 11 December, all three tenants then signed the application form on 17 December 2024 and emailed it to the landlord.
The application form stated: I/We understand and agree that if this application shall be successful we will be required to continue to pay rent as required under the existing Tenancy Agreement and that the remaining name tenants will take over the responsibility of rental payments and other terms and conditions stipulated in the existing Tenancy Agreement.
The tenants say they understood the above clause to mean that if two of the tenants were remaining they would continue to pay rent, however, as all three tenants wished to move out, there would be no remaining tenants who would take over the responsibility of paying the rent.
The tenants say they did not believe they agreed to continue paying rent until new tenants were found for the premises (or their original fixed-term tenancy expired).
The application form also stated: I/We understand and agree that if this application shall be successful we will be required to sign a written agreement to record this variation which will be an extension of the existing Tenancy Agreement and all its terms and conditions. I/We agree the only release which is binding between the parties is in terms of the written agreement between the parties, not this present application (The document is called “Variation of a Tenancy Agreement”). Only once this application is successful and the aforementioned document is signed by all parties named on the existing Tenancy Agreement, will the exiting tenant be able to vacate the premises and be released from the fixed term tenancy.
Both parties confirmed no further written agreement was signed by the parties (referred to above as Variation of a Tenancy Agreement) as was anticipated by the application form.
The landlord says that, by signing the application form, the tenants acknowledged they would be liable to pay rent until a new tenancy commenced (or their original fixed-term tenancy expired).
The landlord says their email of 11 December 2024 acknowledging the tenants would move out on 3 January 2025 was an acknowledgement of their move-out date only and was not agreement that the tenants would cease to be liable for rent after that date.

MY ANALYSIS

By signing the application form, the tenants agreed to continue to pay rent as required under the existing Tenancy Agreement. No further written agreement was signed by the parties which could be considered a variation to the Tenancy Agreement. The second portion of the same sentence in the application form which refers to “remaining name tenants” was irrelevant in the tenant’s situation in which all three tenants were moving out. The first portion of that sentence stands alone as a commitment that while their application was being considered the tenants agreed to continue paying rent under the existing fixed-term tenancy agreement.
It remains unclear why the landlord did not, after accepting the tenant’s application, then request the tenant sign a variation to the tenancy agreement as was anticipated in the application form. Certainly, if the parties had done so, it would have provided the tenants with a clear understanding of the terms of the agreement they had entered into.
Having not done so, and in light of the tenant’s acknowledgment in the application form that they would continue to pay rent under the existing tenancy agreement, I find there was no variation to the fixed-term tenancy agreement and both parties are bound by the terms of that agreement.
It follows that, as a new tenancy did not commence at the premises until after the end of the fixed-term tenancy, the tenant is liable to pay rent until 15 March 2025.
I make an order accordingly.
The bond is to be released to the landlord in partial payment of the amounts ordered. Should the tenant reimburse the landlord’s application fee?
As the landlord has succeeded with the claim the tenant must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5153424 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 60 Selo Street, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5153424 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat 6, 60 Selo Street, Glen Eden, Auckland 0602

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the parties agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early?

THE LAW

MY ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the parties agree to end the fixed-term tenancy early?

THE LAW

MY ANALYSIS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions