What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5177031?

The tribunal order states: Gary Wilton must pay Michael Edward O'Brien $6,177.00 immediately, as

How much money was awarded in case 5177031?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5177031?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5177031?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12062069-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5177031?

The tribunal order states: Gary Wilton must pay Michael Edward O'Brien $6,177.00 immediately, as

How much money was awarded in case 5177031?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,150.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5177031?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5177031?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12062069-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

76 Chelsea Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5177031 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5177031 — net $6,177.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 August 2023	$6,150.00	Rent arrears to 29 August 2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,177.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,177.00

Order

Gary Wilton must pay Michael Edward O'Brien $6,177.00 immediately, as calculated below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
I previously adjourned the hearing to allow the landlord the chance to provide a suitable rent summary. He has done that together with supporting evidence of payments of rent from his bank, Westpac. Background
The tenancy started on 3 January 2018 and ended on 29 August 2023.
The landlord first made an application in the Disputes Tribunal in March 2024, which the registry declined to process. It correctly advised him to file an application in the Tenancy Tribunal. He made his Tenancy Tribunal application on 25 February 2025.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $22,950.00. The claim dates back to July 2018. Issue
The sole issue before the Tribunal is whether the landlord has proved a claim for rent arrears and if so, how much the Tribunal should make an order for. Relevant law
Section 40 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) sets out a tenant’s responsibilities. Included among them is the responsibility to pay rent when due. Discussion
The tenant first disputed that he owed any rent at all. When I pressed him, he agreed that there were rent arrears of $900.00 as of 2 July 2019. He also accepted the amount of arrears in the landlord’s rent record after 26 May 2020.
The tenant gave evidence that he paid cash payments of $11,000.00, $10,000.00 of which was paid during the period between July 2019 and May 2020. In the landlord’s rent record, no payments of rent are recorded for that period.
The landlord said the only cash payments of rent he received were 3 payments of $200.00 each in September and November 2023.
I queried the tenant about the cash payments he says he made. He said he received no receipts from the landlord. He obtained the funds (cash) from the sale of chattels.
I had the registrar administer the promise to both parties and I explained that the giving of false evidence could result in a referral to the police.
Despite that caution, one of the parties continued to lie. Both cannot be correct – either cash payments were made, or they were not.
I do not need to make a credibility finding in this case because there is a reason why the landlord’s claim for rent cannot succeed in full.
The Limitation Act 2010 applies as a defence, though it was not pleaded by the tenant and would only have applied to the amount of $900.00 as of 26 March 2019, 6 years before the date of the application.
Rather, the application cannot succeed in full because a landlord has a duty to mitigate their loss. The landlord in this case could have applied to terminate the tenancy any time between July and October 2019 when the rent arrears were between $1,200.00 and $6,000.00 (leaving side the cash payments the tenant says he paid some time (he did not know when) during the period July 2019 and May 2020.
In Huang v Ashworth 1 Judge Sainsbury said this: I consider that Mr Huang’s attempts to resolve the issue of rent arrears without resorting to eviction were reasonable, especially for a tenancy that had lasted close to 4 years. But I qualify that; it is reasonable only up to a point. Where a tenant repeatedly breaches promises to make up arrears and instead additional arrears are incurred there comes a point where it is being naïve or careless to your own interests to persist giving the tenant more time to pay. For that reason, I do not consider that the full arrears can be claimed. In other words I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that there was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.
Here, the landlord took no action during the period July 2019 and May 2020 when the bulk of the arrears accrued (leaving aside the tenant’s evidence that he made cash payments totalling $10,000.00 during that time).
He also took no action despite the arrears continuing to accrue during the period May 2020 to August 2023.
Even then, once the tenancy ended, the landlord waited 7 months before making his first application to the Disputes Tribunal, and then another 11 months until he made his application to the Tenancy Tribunal.
The landlord said he felt sorry for the tenant who at one time had lost his job. He said the tenant assured him he would pay the arrears.
The period of rent default is very long in this case, dating back to July 2018, with no action by the landlord to mitigate his loss. He could have, and should have, acted sooner. 1 [2024] NZDC 15726
I consider that the landlord’s claim must be limited to a 3-year period from 26 August 2020 until the end of the tenancy on 29 August 2023.
The rent arrears for that period amount to $6,150.00 and it is that amount only I award to the landlord together with the filing fee. Result
The landlord’s application for rent arrears is allowed in the amount of $6,150.00 from 26 August 2020 until the end of the tenancy. With the filing fee added, the tenant must pay the landlord $6,177.00.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5177031 — net $6,177.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 August 2023	$6,150.00	Rent arrears to 29 August 2023
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$6,177.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$6,177.00

Order

Gary Wilton must pay Michael Edward O'Brien $6,177.00 immediately, as calculated below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
I previously adjourned the hearing to allow the landlord the chance to provide a suitable rent summary. He has done that together with supporting evidence of payments of rent from his bank, Westpac. Background
The tenancy started on 3 January 2018 and ended on 29 August 2023.
The landlord first made an application in the Disputes Tribunal in March 2024, which the registry declined to process. It correctly advised him to file an application in the Tenancy Tribunal. He made his Tenancy Tribunal application on 25 February 2025.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $22,950.00. The claim dates back to July 2018. Issue
The sole issue before the Tribunal is whether the landlord has proved a claim for rent arrears and if so, how much the Tribunal should make an order for. Relevant law
Section 40 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) sets out a tenant’s responsibilities. Included among them is the responsibility to pay rent when due. Discussion
The tenant first disputed that he owed any rent at all. When I pressed him, he agreed that there were rent arrears of $900.00 as of 2 July 2019. He also accepted the amount of arrears in the landlord’s rent record after 26 May 2020.
The tenant gave evidence that he paid cash payments of $11,000.00, $10,000.00 of which was paid during the period between July 2019 and May 2020. In the landlord’s rent record, no payments of rent are recorded for that period.
The landlord said the only cash payments of rent he received were 3 payments of $200.00 each in September and November 2023.
I queried the tenant about the cash payments he says he made. He said he received no receipts from the landlord. He obtained the funds (cash) from the sale of chattels.
I had the registrar administer the promise to both parties and I explained that the giving of false evidence could result in a referral to the police.
Despite that caution, one of the parties continued to lie. Both cannot be correct – either cash payments were made, or they were not.
I do not need to make a credibility finding in this case because there is a reason why the landlord’s claim for rent cannot succeed in full.
The Limitation Act 2010 applies as a defence, though it was not pleaded by the tenant and would only have applied to the amount of $900.00 as of 26 March 2019, 6 years before the date of the application.
Rather, the application cannot succeed in full because a landlord has a duty to mitigate their loss. The landlord in this case could have applied to terminate the tenancy any time between July and October 2019 when the rent arrears were between $1,200.00 and $6,000.00 (leaving side the cash payments the tenant says he paid some time (he did not know when) during the period July 2019 and May 2020.
In Huang v Ashworth 1 Judge Sainsbury said this: I consider that Mr Huang’s attempts to resolve the issue of rent arrears without resorting to eviction were reasonable, especially for a tenancy that had lasted close to 4 years. But I qualify that; it is reasonable only up to a point. Where a tenant repeatedly breaches promises to make up arrears and instead additional arrears are incurred there comes a point where it is being naïve or careless to your own interests to persist giving the tenant more time to pay. For that reason, I do not consider that the full arrears can be claimed. In other words I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that there was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.
Here, the landlord took no action during the period July 2019 and May 2020 when the bulk of the arrears accrued (leaving aside the tenant’s evidence that he made cash payments totalling $10,000.00 during that time).
He also took no action despite the arrears continuing to accrue during the period May 2020 to August 2023.
Even then, once the tenancy ended, the landlord waited 7 months before making his first application to the Disputes Tribunal, and then another 11 months until he made his application to the Tenancy Tribunal.
The landlord said he felt sorry for the tenant who at one time had lost his job. He said the tenant assured him he would pay the arrears.
The period of rent default is very long in this case, dating back to July 2018, with no action by the landlord to mitigate his loss. He could have, and should have, acted sooner. 1 [2024] NZDC 15726
I consider that the landlord’s claim must be limited to a 3-year period from 26 August 2020 until the end of the tenancy on 29 August 2023.
The rent arrears for that period amount to $6,150.00 and it is that amount only I award to the landlord together with the filing fee. Result
The landlord’s application for rent arrears is allowed in the amount of $6,150.00 from 26 August 2020 until the end of the tenancy. With the filing fee added, the tenant must pay the landlord $6,177.00.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5177031 — Rent arrears at 76 Chelsea Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5177031 — Rent arrears at 76 Chelsea Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions