What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5235091?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,760.00 (BN-00027992) to Moving

How much money was awarded in case 5235091?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5235091?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5235091?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12028197-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5235091?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,760.00 (BN-00027992) to Moving

How much money was awarded in case 5235091?

Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $4,840.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5235091?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5235091?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12028197-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Room Rm4, 37A West Tamaki Road, St Heliers, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5235091 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5235091 — net $3,107.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 25 June 2025 together with two days’ rent currently due in advance to 27 June 2025	$4,840.00	Rent arrears to 25 June 2025 together with two days’ rent currently due in advance to 27 June 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,107.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,107.00

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,760.00 (BN-00027992) to Moving Spaces Limited immediately.
Karishma Kumar must pay Moving Spaces Limited $3,107.00 immediately as set out in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by both Kevin Sharp and Sandra Sharp who attended in person. The tenant appeared by phone as she is now living in Melbourne, Australia.
This tenancy of a room with ensuite in a “room by room” tenancy began on 1 February 2025. The tenancy agreement was signed on 27 January 2025 and was for a fixed term from 1 February 2025 to 31 July 2025. Rent was $440 per week. The tenant paid a bond of $1760.00.
The tenant moved out of the property on 8 April 2025 and moved to Australia.
On 29 April 2025 the tenant filed an application seeking a reduction of the fixed term of the tenancy. The tenant listed other concerns in her application but confirmed at the hearing today that she did not intend these concerns to form part of an additional claim.
On 10 May 2025 the landlord filed a claim seeking rent arrears. The landlord has been unable to find a new tenant. Onus
As with all claims in the Tribunal the party bringing the claim carries the burden of proving their claim to the civil standard (on the balance of probabilities). Both parties have filed claims, and so each party carries the burden of proving their own claim. Tenant’s claim
The tenant said that her shortly after the tenancy began she was offered a job in Melbourne. She said that she had applied for jobs in the latter part of 2024 and so was surprised to receive an offer when she did. She said that her family had recently moved to Australia and that she felt that she did not have the support she needed in New Zealand. In her application the tenant said that the situation was stressful and was affecting her health.
The tenant said that the job offer ultimately fell through when she got to Melbourne and so she now has no income. She said that she is currently living with her parents and although they are assisting her, they cannot assist her with the rent for this tenancy. She says that the accumulating rent arrears are causing her severe financial hardship and significant stress. She said that she would have liked to have been able to agree to reasonable arrangement with the landlord.
The landlord said that they had understood from the tenant that she had simply decided to leave New Zealand and had hoped that a new tenant could be found. They said that they made it very clear to the tenant that she would be liable to pay rent until a new tenant was found and that she would have to pay the landlord’s expenses incurred in trying to find a new tenant. _52350913
The landlord produced email correspondence with the tenant. I summarise the relevant parts of the correspondence below: a. The tenant first contacted the landlord by email on 3 March 2025, only a month after the tenancy began, advising: b. The landlord responded the same day confirming that the tenant would be liable for the cost of reference checks, move-in and move-out costs incurred by the landlord, and that she would be liable for rent until a new person was to take over. c. The tenant then sent the landlord a further email on 5 March 2025 asking the landlord to find a new tenant as she did not have time while finishing up work and packing. d. The tenant confirmed that she would move out on 8 April 2025. The landlord responded, reiterating that the tenant would need to keep paying rent until a new tenant was found and that the landlord would continue trying to find a new tenant. e. On 19 March 2025 the tenant sent an email to the landlord offering to release the bond to cover rent for an additional four weeks. The tenant added: f. The parties continued to correspond by email but were unable to agree to a resolution.
The landlord said that they have spent significant time looking for a new tenant. The landlord also produced evidence of various listings and enquiries made in respect of the property. The landlord has now reduced the rent to $390.00 per week. _52350914
The landlord said that the rent is in arrears and that they have suffered hardship as would be expected as they have lost income but still have to pay expenses including utilities for the property.

Is the tenant entitled to a reduction of the fixed term?

A fixed-term contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances; b. the change was unforeseen; c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced; and d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
“Unforeseen” means unexpected or without warning. An unforeseen change in circumstances has in previous cases included 1 : a. An unexpected transfer of the tenant’s employment to another city just before the tenancy commenced; b. One of four tenants developing a sudden and serious illness and leaving the property; c. Suicide of a co-tenant; d. Visits from unknown persons enquiring about drugs and three burglaries at the premises; e. A former partner moving nearby in breach of a protection order; f. A partner leaving the relationship and the tenancy property; g. Detection of a former methamphetamine laboratory; h. Relocation to another city for cancer treatment; 1 Usher & Usher v Bravo Property Management [2024] NZTT 4892686 at [13] _52350915 i. In earthquake cases, services cut to the tenancy property; and j. Substantial damage to the property.
The tenant provided no written evidence in respect of her claimed change in circumstances (to confirm the job offer and relocation of her family) but I accept that the tenant accepted a job overseas and that her family had also moved there, even though she did not state these as reasons for her move to the landlord in correspondence.
However while I find that there has been a change in circumstances I do not consider that the change was unforeseen because: a. The job offer may have been unexpected but having received the offer the tenant did not have to accept it. The tenant made a conscious decision to accept the job and move to Australia. b. The tenant’s family moved very shortly before or after the tenant moved in (the tenant could not recall the exact date at the hearing) and the move was not unexpected or unforeseen.
I accept that the tenant is in a very difficult financial situation and that the ongoing rent payment will cause her hardship. However as the tenant has entered into a fixed-term tenancy, and has not proved that there has been an unforeseen change in her circumstances, the Tribunal is unable to reduce the fixed term.
The tenant’s claim to reduce the fixed term is dismissed. The landlord’s claim
The landlord produced a rent summary showing that rent is in arrears and that rent is owing in the amount of $4,840.00 (being rent to today’s date together with two days rent owing in advance to 27 June 2025).
The landlord said that rent due to the end of the fixed term will be $6,977.14.
At the hearing I advised the landlord that the Tribunal is only able to award rent that is in arrears or is currently due in advance. The rent going forward will become due and owing each week. It is also entirely possible in the meantime that the landlord will find a new tenant.
The landlord is able to file a new claim if there are additional rent arrears owing at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord also raised the fact that they have unpaid invoices for advertising expenses and time spent trying to find a new tenant. The landlord has not included a claim for expenses in their application and so I am only able to hear and determine the claim for rent arrears today. _52350916 Filing fee and name suppression
As the landlord has been the substantially successful party I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord did not seek an order for name suppression. The tenant is not entitled to an order for name suppression as she has not been the substantially successful party. See section 95A RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5235091 — net $3,107.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 25 June 2025 together with two days’ rent currently due in advance to 27 June 2025	$4,840.00	Rent arrears to 25 June 2025 together with two days’ rent currently due in advance to 27 June 2025
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,107.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$3,107.00

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,760.00 (BN-00027992) to Moving Spaces Limited immediately.
Karishma Kumar must pay Moving Spaces Limited $3,107.00 immediately as set out in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by both Kevin Sharp and Sandra Sharp who attended in person. The tenant appeared by phone as she is now living in Melbourne, Australia.
This tenancy of a room with ensuite in a “room by room” tenancy began on 1 February 2025. The tenancy agreement was signed on 27 January 2025 and was for a fixed term from 1 February 2025 to 31 July 2025. Rent was $440 per week. The tenant paid a bond of $1760.00.
The tenant moved out of the property on 8 April 2025 and moved to Australia.
On 29 April 2025 the tenant filed an application seeking a reduction of the fixed term of the tenancy. The tenant listed other concerns in her application but confirmed at the hearing today that she did not intend these concerns to form part of an additional claim.
On 10 May 2025 the landlord filed a claim seeking rent arrears. The landlord has been unable to find a new tenant. Onus
As with all claims in the Tribunal the party bringing the claim carries the burden of proving their claim to the civil standard (on the balance of probabilities). Both parties have filed claims, and so each party carries the burden of proving their own claim. Tenant’s claim
The tenant said that her shortly after the tenancy began she was offered a job in Melbourne. She said that she had applied for jobs in the latter part of 2024 and so was surprised to receive an offer when she did. She said that her family had recently moved to Australia and that she felt that she did not have the support she needed in New Zealand. In her application the tenant said that the situation was stressful and was affecting her health.
The tenant said that the job offer ultimately fell through when she got to Melbourne and so she now has no income. She said that she is currently living with her parents and although they are assisting her, they cannot assist her with the rent for this tenancy. She says that the accumulating rent arrears are causing her severe financial hardship and significant stress. She said that she would have liked to have been able to agree to reasonable arrangement with the landlord.
The landlord said that they had understood from the tenant that she had simply decided to leave New Zealand and had hoped that a new tenant could be found. They said that they made it very clear to the tenant that she would be liable to pay rent until a new tenant was found and that she would have to pay the landlord’s expenses incurred in trying to find a new tenant. _52350913
The landlord produced email correspondence with the tenant. I summarise the relevant parts of the correspondence below: a. The tenant first contacted the landlord by email on 3 March 2025, only a month after the tenancy began, advising: b. The landlord responded the same day confirming that the tenant would be liable for the cost of reference checks, move-in and move-out costs incurred by the landlord, and that she would be liable for rent until a new person was to take over. c. The tenant then sent the landlord a further email on 5 March 2025 asking the landlord to find a new tenant as she did not have time while finishing up work and packing. d. The tenant confirmed that she would move out on 8 April 2025. The landlord responded, reiterating that the tenant would need to keep paying rent until a new tenant was found and that the landlord would continue trying to find a new tenant. e. On 19 March 2025 the tenant sent an email to the landlord offering to release the bond to cover rent for an additional four weeks. The tenant added: f. The parties continued to correspond by email but were unable to agree to a resolution.
The landlord said that they have spent significant time looking for a new tenant. The landlord also produced evidence of various listings and enquiries made in respect of the property. The landlord has now reduced the rent to $390.00 per week. _52350914
The landlord said that the rent is in arrears and that they have suffered hardship as would be expected as they have lost income but still have to pay expenses including utilities for the property.

Is the tenant entitled to a reduction of the fixed term?

A fixed-term contract will be applied strictly, and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in s 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. In particular the applicant will need to establish that: a. there has been a change in their circumstances; b. the change was unforeseen; c. the unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced; and d. the severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
“Unforeseen” means unexpected or without warning. An unforeseen change in circumstances has in previous cases included 1 : a. An unexpected transfer of the tenant’s employment to another city just before the tenancy commenced; b. One of four tenants developing a sudden and serious illness and leaving the property; c. Suicide of a co-tenant; d. Visits from unknown persons enquiring about drugs and three burglaries at the premises; e. A former partner moving nearby in breach of a protection order; f. A partner leaving the relationship and the tenancy property; g. Detection of a former methamphetamine laboratory; h. Relocation to another city for cancer treatment; 1 Usher & Usher v Bravo Property Management [2024] NZTT 4892686 at [13] _52350915 i. In earthquake cases, services cut to the tenancy property; and j. Substantial damage to the property.
The tenant provided no written evidence in respect of her claimed change in circumstances (to confirm the job offer and relocation of her family) but I accept that the tenant accepted a job overseas and that her family had also moved there, even though she did not state these as reasons for her move to the landlord in correspondence.
However while I find that there has been a change in circumstances I do not consider that the change was unforeseen because: a. The job offer may have been unexpected but having received the offer the tenant did not have to accept it. The tenant made a conscious decision to accept the job and move to Australia. b. The tenant’s family moved very shortly before or after the tenant moved in (the tenant could not recall the exact date at the hearing) and the move was not unexpected or unforeseen.
I accept that the tenant is in a very difficult financial situation and that the ongoing rent payment will cause her hardship. However as the tenant has entered into a fixed-term tenancy, and has not proved that there has been an unforeseen change in her circumstances, the Tribunal is unable to reduce the fixed term.
The tenant’s claim to reduce the fixed term is dismissed. The landlord’s claim
The landlord produced a rent summary showing that rent is in arrears and that rent is owing in the amount of $4,840.00 (being rent to today’s date together with two days rent owing in advance to 27 June 2025).
The landlord said that rent due to the end of the fixed term will be $6,977.14.
At the hearing I advised the landlord that the Tribunal is only able to award rent that is in arrears or is currently due in advance. The rent going forward will become due and owing each week. It is also entirely possible in the meantime that the landlord will find a new tenant.
The landlord is able to file a new claim if there are additional rent arrears owing at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord also raised the fact that they have unpaid invoices for advertising expenses and time spent trying to find a new tenant. The landlord has not included a claim for expenses in their application and so I am only able to hear and determine the claim for rent arrears today. _52350916 Filing fee and name suppression
As the landlord has been the substantially successful party I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The landlord did not seek an order for name suppression. The tenant is not entitled to an order for name suppression as she has not been the substantially successful party. See section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5235091 — Rent arrears at Room Rm4, 37A West Tamaki Road, St Heliers, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5235091 — Rent arrears at Room Rm4, 37A West Tamaki Road, St Heliers, Auckland

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant entitled to a reduction of the fixed term?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant entitled to a reduction of the fixed term?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions