What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5157520?

The tribunal order states: Ying Yang owes Airpropty Limited As Agent For I. A. R. Shaikh $3,000.00,

How much money was awarded in case 5157520?

Mply With Order 4 Above, Then The Te…: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5157520?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Smoke alarms, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Mould & damp, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5157520?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11534208-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5157520?

The tribunal order states: Ying Yang owes Airpropty Limited As Agent For I. A. R. Shaikh $3,000.00,

How much money was awarded in case 5157520?

Mply With Order 4 Above, Then The Te…: $5,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5157520?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, Smoke alarms, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Mould & damp, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5157520?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11534208-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

45 Hobsonville Road, West Harbour, Auckland 0618 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5157520 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5157520. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
mply with Order 4 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to	$5,000.00		mply with Order 4 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5157520. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
mply with Order 4 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to	$5,000.00		mply with Order 4 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to

Order

Ying Yang owes Airpropty Limited As Agent For I. A. R. Shaikh $3,000.00, being rent arrears to 11 March 2025 (“the debt”).
From 12 March 2025 to 29 July 2025, Ying Yang must pay rent of $600.00 per week as it falls due and must also repay the debt as follows: a. By 10 weekly payments of $300.00 each Wednesday, commencing on Wednesday 12 March 2025 and ending on 14 May 2025; and b. Where the tenant’s financial circumstances improve, the tenant has agreed to contact the landlord to make arrangements to either increase the weekly amounts payable or pay the balance owing in one lump sum.
If Ying Yang fails to pay debt repayments within 2 working days of the due dates, the full amount of the remaining debt will fall due immediately.
The landlord must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 3 April 2025: a. Replace the metal strainer plug in the kitchen sink and ensure it creates a seal when pushed down that allows the sink to be filled and remain filled with water; b. Repair the kitchen faucet to a standard that it is fit for purpose and will not keep breaking; c. Repair the glass sliding door to the deck, so it opens and closes with ease; d. Clean the filters on and ensure the air-conditioner/heat pump in the lounge is fully operational, and that it heats and cools effectively; and e. Repair the broken curtain rail in the lounge so that it is fit for purpose and will not keep breaking.
The tenant must allow the landlord reasonable access during this 4-week period to investigate and remediate the items set out in Order 4 above.
If the landlord fails to comply with Order 4 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to $5,000.00. The cost of these repairs must be reasonable, receipts must be provided for the work undertaken and proven costs may be set off against rent payable.
The tenancy will end on 29 July 2025.
The reletting process will commence on 17 June 2025 (6 weeks prior to the end of the tenancy). The tenant must allow the landlord reasonable access for the reletting process, including access for the taking of photographs for advertising (if required) and for conducting viewings for prospective tenants. Viewing must be held no more than twice a week. These viewing will be held on one weekday and one weekend day, usually on a Wednesday and a Saturday unless otherwise notified at least 48 hours in advance. Each viewing will be for no more than 30 minutes.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing today. Both parties attended the hearing on 6 March 2025.
The tenant was assisted by a mandarin interpreter.
The tenant applied for a reduction in her fixed term tenancy, reimbursement of filing fee and compensation and exemplary damages for alleged breaches of s45(1)(b) and (bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
During the hearing, the landlord applied for rent arrears and provided rent records which prove the amount owing. The tenant consented to an order for payment of rent arrears being made.

TENANTS CLAIMS

Should the fixed term tenancy be ended early?

The tenant has applied for reduction of her fixed-term tenancy, due to end on 29 July 2025. The basis for her application for the Tribunal to end their tenancy early is: a. Her family has had issues that require her to return to China urgently and she cannot do so and pay rent to 29 July 2025; b. There was a home invasion on 30 January 2025 where the tenant’s flatmate was subject to a man threatening her with violence while he committed a burglary. The flatmate was so traumatised that she has moved out immediately and the tenant says she cannot afford to pay the $600.00 a week rent on her own. She says she also feels unsafe in the house after the home invasion; and c. The property has maintenance issues that have not been investigated or repaired in three months and she has no confidence these repairs will ever be made. The law
Parties enter into a fixed term tenancy for security. For tenants this is security of tenure; they can be sure they have a home for at least the agreed term. For landlords it is security of income; they can rely on a set amount of income from their investment.
If a tenant wishes to default on that contract, and the landlord accepts the repudiation, then the tenancy ends on the terms agreed. In such a situation of surrender the landlord does not have to agree and can stipulate terms provided they are reasonable. Such reasonable terms can be to ensure the aggrieved party (here the landlord) be placed in the same position as they would have been in, but for the breach of the tenancy agreement.
If the parties cannot agree to end the tenancy, it is open to the tenants to apply to the Tribunal to reduce the term pursuant to section 66(1) RTA.
The Tribunal reduce a fixed term tenancy where: a. there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and b. there would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and c. the applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced.
Section 66 sets a high threshold for reducing fixed term tenancies. The jurisdiction in this section is an extension to the doctrine of frustration found in the general law of contract. In most cases, s66 is used to seek a balance between the competing interests of applicant tenants, for whom significant obligations under fixed term agreements can create severe hardship when circumstances unexpectedly turn against them, and landlords, who have financial obligations and expectations of their own arising from the same bargain.
The term “unforeseen” is a legal term defined by reference to the reverse (“foreseeability”) in cases relating to negligence (in determining whether a duty of care is owed and what damages are reasonably foreseeable) and in cases assessing damages for breach of contract (also in assessing the remoteness of damage). In both contexts, there is a body of case law which has established that: a. Foreseeability must be assessed objectively through the eyes of a reasonable person who has taken all reasonable steps to inform himself of the circumstances; b. an outcome is foreseeable in legal terms if it is “liable to result”, “not unlikely”, “quite likely”, a “real danger”, a “serious possibility” or a “real risk”; c. The term “unforeseen” has few if any direct dictionary definitions, but by thesaurus is aligned with such concepts as “unexpected” and “without warning”. In a legal context, it must also be taken as the reverse of what is “foreseen”, thus being “not liable to result”, “unlikely”, “not a real danger”, “not a serious possibility” or “not a real risk”. Analysis & findings
The parties had not been able to reach an agreement to end the tenancy.
The tenant sought relief from the Tribunal in the form of an application pursuant to s66 for her tenancy to be ended earlier than 29 July 2025.
I turn to an application of s66 of the RTA to this situation. Having considered the facts, I find: a. There has not been an unforeseen change in the tenants’ circumstances that justifies the Tribunal ending the fixed term tenancy early. b. The tenant confirmed the family issue happened around two months ago (mid-January 2025) and it required her to return to China. She has been communicating with her family and they are trying to find a way to help her address the issue without her immediate return. However, she says the best way to resolve the issue is still for her to return home to China as soon as she can. When she was explaining this situation to me she did not convey any sense of urgency in return to China and confirmed she was not suffering financial distress in relation to this issue. c. The tenant submitted she has had to absorb the $300.00 per week rent her flatmate used to pay. The rent summary shows the tenant has been falling into rent arrears because she has not paid any rent since 29 January 2025. The tenant did however confirm that she had a friend that was willing to move in with her and help her pay the rent. She also confirmed she could repay the $3,000.00 rent arrears in instalments, over a 10-week period, while simultaneously paying her rent in full and on time. d. Any equitable offset the tenant may have had for the repair and maintenance issues she complains of are not a justifiable ground for the Tribunal to ending the fixed term tenancy early.
Section 66 of the RTA is clear that it must the applicants’ circumstances that have changed in an unforeseeable way, not external factors such as the rental market not being conducive to the tenants being able to sublet the premise for the remainer of the fixed term lease.
The tenant has not proven she will suffer severe hardship if the term of the tenancy is not reduced.
The landlord has confirmed it would suffer severe hardship if the term is reduced as the owner of the property is a full time student with a mortgage over this premise and has financial responsibility for a dependent child. The property managers have conveyed today that the owner is struggling to make ends meet because of the $3,000.00 rent arrears and not being able to inform creditors when the rent is likely to start being paid again and the rent arrears cleared.
Section 66 of the RTA is clear in requiring the Tribunal to establish an unforeseen change in circumstances before the respective hardships are weighed.
I empathise with both parties circumstances, but as an unforeseen change in the tenants’ circumstances has not been established, I have no jurisdiction to end the tenancy, and this claim must be dismissed.
The landlord is under no obligation to agree to end the fixed term early, but it offered to end it early on the condition the tenant continued to pay rent until a new tenant took over the lease and the tenant paid break lease fees of $862.60 for advertising, viewings, credit checks, reference checks and administration costs of setting up a new tenancy.
After due consideration, the tenant decided that she would prefer to remain in the tenancy until the end of the fixed term, on 29 July 2025. The landlord confirmed that it was agreeable to her continuing the fixed term lease to 29 July 2025, so long as she paid her rent in full and on time for the remainder of the tenancy and that she paid the rent arrears back in a reasonable timeframe. The tenant agreed to do so.
The partes have agreed the following: a. The tenancy will end on 29 July 2025. The landlord made it clear it has no appetite to continue the fixed term tenancy beyond that date for any reason and the tenant acknowledged and agreed she will give the landlord vacant possession on 29 July 2025; b. The landlord will begin to advertise the property in the week ending 15 June 2025 and will conduct no more than two 30-minute viewings a week from 16 June 2025 to 27 June 2025, as with an oversupply of rental properties in Auckland, it could take eight to twelve weeks to re-rent the premise; c. Viewing will be held one weekday and one weekend day, usually on a Wednesday and a Saturday. The tenant will be notified of the exact days no less than 48 hours in advance; d. The tenant must not unreasonably withhold the landlord access for reletting related activities.
I dismiss the tenants claim to reduce her fixed term tenancy for all the reasons set out above. Has the landlord breached its section 45(1)(b) and (bb) obligations to the tenant?
The tenant says the landlord has breached its s45(1)(b) and (bb) of the RTA obligations to her.
Under section 45(1)(b) of the RTA, the landlord has an obligation to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention, within a timeframe that is reasonable in the circumstances. In Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd, the Wellington District Court held “what that time is depends not only on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be”. 1
There is an obligation to repair, even if the tenant has notice of the state of repair of the premises when entering a tenancy agreement.
A tenant may give a landlord 14 days’ notice to remedy a breach of the RTA and/or any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety, but should do so in good faith and to remedy a real and significant breach 2 . However, notice from the tenant is not required if the landlord knew of the need to repair 3 or the need for repair was apparent from observation 4 .
There is also failure to repair if the repair is ineffective, non-complaint or unsafe 5 .
Under section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA, a landlord must also comply with all the healthy homes standards. 1 Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington CIV-2009-085-1431, 24 February 2019 at [15]. 2 Brough v Housing NZ Ltd NZTT1848/1, 27 May 202 at [13]. 3 Berghan v Ponsonby Property Management Ltd trading as L J Hooker [2015] NZTT Manukau 2845 at [9]- [11]. 4 Barfoot & Thompson Ltd v Casey DC Auckland CIV-2005-004-1762, 7 November 2007 at [4]. 5 Staife v Aegis Trust [2016] NZTT Auckland 3314 at [31].
Breaching any of these s45(1) of the RTA obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a total maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
General damages may also be awarded in the form or rent reductions, water rates reductions or compensation for the stress, inconvenience and loss of amenity suffered by the tenants. Failure to maintain
The tenant says the landlord has failed to investigate and repair defects with the property brought to its attention, within a timeframe that is reasonable in all the circumstances.
The tenant submits that on 30 October 2024, she raised issues with the kitchen faucet, glass sliding door to the deck, the curtain rail in the living room and the air conditioner being broken and in need of repair. The tenant confirmed that none of these issues have been remedied and she is tired of waiting for the landlord to meet its obligations to her to undertake these repairs in a reasonable timeframe.
The landlord says he has tried approximately six times to arrange times and dates for a contractor to come and undertake the repairs, but both the landlord and the contractor continued to experience issues getting a date and time agreed to access to the premise to investigate, get quotes and undertake the required repairs. For this reason, the landlord says it created a WhatsApp group in November 2024 so the property manager could communicate with both the tenant and contractor for enhanced ease of arranging dates and times for repairs.
The landlord produced text messages, emails an WhatsApp messages that prove a communication issue developed early on in the tenancy and resulted in the landlord being confused about whether to focus on trying to negotiate a quick end to the tenancy or focus on the repair an maintenance issues being constantly raised by the tenant sporadically throughout communications about needing to end the tenancy early for inconsistent and varied reasons. There was also some evidence to suggest that at times the tenant had made it difficult for the landlord to gain access the property for repairs and/or to undertake routine property inspections.
The landlord noted that the tenant has also been reluctant to allow access for routine property inspections, and that she has tried to get the landlord to agree to 6 monthly rather than 3 monthly inspections. Further, the landlord confirms it has tried to convey to the tenant that 3 monthly inspections are required to validate the landlord’s insurance and that failure to undertake these inspections each 3 months would invalidate the property owner’s insurance.
The tenant confirmed her focus was to end the tenancy first and then to talk about the repairs later and she could see how that may have confused the landlord at times.
The landlord says when it undertook the only routine property inspection it has been able to do, on 20 January 2025, the tenant stayed in one room and did not interact with it. It confirms it looked at the faucet and considered that it just needed a screw to fix it. Therefore, the property manager was able to fix the faucet at that time and says he did so. It says that it also asked the tenant if there were any issues still needing to be addressed and the tenant did not convey any further issues at that time.
The tenant refutes the faucet was fixed and says it is still broken.
The landlord says it would have had these non-urgent repairs done in under a month if the communication had been clear and reasonable access granted. It says it has demonstrated that its acts promptly to undertake urgent repairs when the hot water cylinder stopped working 16 November 2024. The landlord says this urgent issue required immediate action and that it got an electrician to investigate the issue the same day. When the electrician stated the repair had to be undertaken by Vector, this was arranged for the following day. The landlord says this shows that if the tenant allows access the landlord will get things fixed quickly. Kitchen faucet
The tenant produced photographs that show the faucet handle is broken and the tenant cannot open the tap normally. In addition, the filter plug for the stainless-steel sink is broken and not able to be used as the centre pin is missing.
The tenant proved she sent the landlord these photographs on 30 October 2024 at 11:30am and says that despite ongoing communications these items are still broken, and she wants these issues fixed.
The landlord says he tried around six times to arrange times and dates for a contractor to come and undertake the repairs, but the landlord and contractor had issues getting a date and time agreed to access to the premise.
I dismiss the tenant’s claims for general damages and/or exemplary damages for the landlord’s alleged failure to repair these issues in a reasonable timeframe in all the circumstances. The landlord has proven it investigated these issues in late November 2024 and has had communication and access issues thereafter that have led to the repairs not having been completed. I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities. Glass sliding door to the deck
The tenant says this door does not slide and the track needs to be investigated.
The tenant proved she notified the landlord about this issue and has sent photographs and video to the landlord. She says that despite ongoing communications the door will not open and close, and she wants it fixed.
The landlord says he tried around six times to arrange times and dates for a contractor to come and undertake the repair, but the landlord and contractor have had issues getting a date and time agreed to access to the premise to investigate the cause of the issue with the door. The landlord is unsure if it needs the track repaired or if the door needs replacing.
I dismiss the tenant’s claim for general damages and/or exemplary damages for the landlord’s alleged failure to repair the sliding door in a reasonable timeframe in all the circumstances. The landlord has proven it has tried to get access to investigate this issues since mid-November 2024 and has had communication and access issues that have led to the issue with the door needing to be investigated and remediated. I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities.
I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities and dismiss her claims for general damages and/or exemplary damages accordingly. Curtain rail in living room
The tenant says the curtain rail is loose and needs to be screwed back into the wall.
The tenant proved she notified the landlord about this issue and has sent photographs and video to the landlord. She says that despite ongoing communications the rail is still loose, and she wants it fixed.
The landlord says he tried around six times to arrange times and dates for a contractor to come and undertake this repair, but the landlord and contractor have had issues getting a date and time agreed to access to the premise to screw the rail back into the wall.
I dismiss the tenant’s claim for general damages and/or exemplary damages for the landlord’s alleged failure to repair the curtain rail in a reasonable timeframe in all the circumstances. The landlord has proven it has tried to get access to carry out the repair since mid-November 2024 and has had communication and access issues that have led to the issue with the curtain rail still needing to be remediated. I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities.
I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities and dismiss her claims for general damages and/or exemplary damages accordingly. Air conditioner/heat pump in living room
The tenant says the air conditioner is not working at all and that she did not discover this until last month as it was not cold enough for her to use it.
The landlord says it was not aware of this issue until recently and that the tenant has had it focused on trying to reach agreement on ending the tenancy early. It confirmed that it is happy to investigate an remediate the issue promptly if it is granted reasonable access to do so.
I find the tenant has not proven her claims on the balance of probabilities and dismiss her claims for general damages and/or exemplary damages accordingly. Healthy Homes Standards Compliance
The tenants claim the landlord has breached its obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA, which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). The tenants consider that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS moisture ingress and drainage standard.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy; or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The tenancy agreement commenced on 30 October 2024. As such, the landlord was required to comply with all the healthy homes’ standards from the 120th day after the tenancy commenced, being Thursday, 27 February 2025.
The landlord provided the Tribunal with a healthy homes assessment report and compliance certificate dated 14 April 2021. These documents prove the premise complied all five of the healthy homes’ standards at the start of the tenancy. Heating standard
The tenants claim that the landlord failed to comply with the HHS heating standard because she has discovered in the last month that the heat pump/air conditioner is not working.
The heating standard require landlords to provide one or more fixed heaters that can directly heat the main living room. The heater(s) must be fixed (not portable) and must be at least 1.5 kW in heating capacity and meet the minimum heating capacity needed for the main living room.
The tenant’s healthy homes report records the premise has a heat pump that has sufficient heating capacity for the main living room and it is positioned where it is required to be.
I am satisfied the heat pump issue is a repair and maintenance issue and not a breach of the healthy homes’ standards.
I dismiss the tenant’s claim for general damages and/or exemplary damages for breach of the heating standard claim accordingly. Work Orders
The tenant claims that the landlord did not fix the kitchen faucet, metal strainer plug, curtain rail, heat pump/air conditioner and sliding door to the deck. The tenant wants the problems fixed.
Under section 45(1)(a) - (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the landlord has an obligation to provide and maintain certain standards and to comply with applicable requirements.
Where the Tribunal finds, the landlord has failed to comply with any of these obligations, it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. This provision does not apply to any work order, or part of a work order, in relation to smoke alarms, insulation, a failure to comply with a standard of fitness under section 120C Health Act 1956, or a failure to comply with any health or safety legislative requirement. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A work order may also authorise the tenant to undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of doing the work, if the landlord should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be set off by the tenant against rent payable. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The parties have consented to me making this work order and I order the landlord to carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 3 April 2025: a. Replace the metal strainer plug in the kitchen sink and ensure it creates a seal when pushed down that allows the sink to be filled and remain filled with water; b. Repair the kitchen faucet to a standard that it is fit for purpose and will not keep breaking; c. Repair the glass sliding door to the deck, so it opens and closes with ease; d. Clean the filters on and ensure the air-conditioner/heat pump in the lounge is fully operational, and that it heats and cools effectively; and e. Repair the broken curtain rail in the lounge so that it is fit for purpose and will not keep breaking.
The tenant must allow the landlord reasonable access during this 4-week period to investigate and remediate the items set out in Order 4 above.
If the landlord fails to complete all of these repairs, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to $5,000.00. The cost of these repairs must be reasonable, receipts must be provided for the work undertaken and proven costs may be set off against rent payable.

LANDLORD CLAIM

Rent arrears

The landlord provided rent records which prove the tenant owes $3,000.00 rent arrears to 11 March 2024 as the last rent payment she made was on 29 January2025.
The landlord had not made a cross application, but by the consent of the parties an order has been made for: a. The repayment of the rent arrears in instalments of $300.00 per week for 10 weeks, commencing on 12 March 2025. These repayments being in addition to the tenant paying her rent in full and on time each week, from 12 March 2025 to the end of the tenancy on 29 July 2025. Termination of the tenancy and reletting
The parties have also agreed: a. The tenant is committed to remaining in the tenancy until 29 July 2025; b. The tenant will give the landlord vacant possession of the premise on 29 July 2025, when the fixed term ends; c. The relet process will start 6 weeks before end of fixed term period; d. Viewing for prospective tenants is to be twice a week. One will be conducted during the week (usually Wednesday) and one on the weekend (usually Saturday); e. Each viewing will be no more than 30 minutes; and f. The tenant will be given 48 hours’ notice of the date and time of each viewing.

OTHER ORDERS

Reimbursement of filing fee

Section 102(4) of the RTA confirms that where an applicant is wholly or substantially successful in his/her/its claims, the Tribunal must reimburse the filing fee.
Because the tenant has not been wholly or substantially successful with her claims, I dismiss her application for reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression
The tenant applies for non-publication of her name and identifying details.
The Tribunal can order name suppression when a party has been wholly or substantially successful in the proceeding. In this case the tenant has applied for name suppression, but she has not been wholly or substantially successful in the proceeding, her application for suppression is declined.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5157520 — Rent arrears at 45 Hobsonville Road, West Harbour, Auckland 0618

Tenancy Tribunal case 5157520 — Rent arrears at 45 Hobsonville Road, West Harbour, Auckland 0618

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

TENANTS CLAIMS

Should the fixed term tenancy be ended early?

LANDLORD CLAIM

OTHER ORDERS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

TENANTS CLAIMS

Should the fixed term tenancy be ended early?

LANDLORD CLAIM

OTHER ORDERS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions