Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5256603 — Tenancy dispute at 18 Crown Crescent, Otara, Auckland 2023
Decided 8 Jul 2025 · Published 8 Jul 2025 · Application 5256603
Landlord favoured
- Filing Fee
- Rent arrears
- 14-day notice
Order
- The tenants/respondents, Mose Sipaia and Makerita Neli are jointly and severally liable to pay the landlord/applicant, Oaks Property Management Limited As Agent For SRI Property Investment Ltd, the sum of $2,667.00 (“the debt”), calculated as follows:
- The tenants are jointly and individually responsible to pay: a. Ongoing weekly rent of $660.00, as required under the tenancy agreement; and b. The debt of $2,667.00, in full on or before 15 September 2025.
- All payments made by the tenants shall be allocated in the following order: a. Current rent; b. Rent arrears; then the c. Filing fee.
- If the tenants fail to make payment of either the weekly rent or the debt within two working days of the respective due dates: a. The tenancy at 18 Crown Crescent, Ōtara, Auckland 2023 shall be terminated immediately, and the landlord shall be granted immediate possession of the premises; and b. The full remaining balance of the debt will become immediately payable in full.
Reasons
- The landlord (applicant) and tenant, Ms. Sipaia, attended the hearing. Ms. Neli did not appear. Ms. Sipaia stated that she had no email contact for Ms. Neli and that Ms. Neli did not have a phone, though she currently resided at the property. Given Ms. Sipaia’s presence at the hearing, her co-residence with Ms. Neli, and that service appeared to be correctly effected as per the tenancy agreement, the hearing proceeded in Ms Neli’s attendance in accordance with section 91 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
- The landlord withdrew the application for immediate termination and return of the bond. Although the landlord raised a water bill of $228.03 (as of 9 June 2025), this was not included in the original application or the notice of hearing, and therefore could not be considered at this hearing.
- The landlord sought a conditional termination order based on rent arrears. Ms. Sipaia expressed a willingness to repay the arrears to avoid immediate termination. Rent arrears
- Ms. Sipaia did not dispute the rent arrears. Ms. Neli’s position is unknown. The landlord provided rent records supporting the amount owed.
Should a conditional termination order be made?
- Where rent is at least 21 days in arrears at the time of the application, the Tribunal is required to make either a final or conditional termination order, in accordance with section 55 of the Act.
- The landlord explained that the tenants, as recent immigrants, had encountered systemic barriers that contributed to their financial difficulties. WINZ had agreed to contribute to the arrears by mid-September and was also supporting the ongoing rent payments.
- Considering this, the landlord withdrew the request for immediate termination and instead sought a conditional termination order. Of the total $3,660.00 in arrears, the landlord stated that WINZ would pay $1,020.00 around 10 September 2025. The landlord also confirmed that WINZ had begun contributing regularly to rent payments and that the tenants had agreed to pay $2,000.00 towards the arrears. Ms. Sipaia advised this amount had been paid the night before the hearing but may not yet appear in the landlord’s records. Accordingly, the full amount was included in the calculation, with the expectation that it will either be confirmed shortly or resolved by the conditional order’s compliance date (no later than two working days after 15 September 2025).
- Based on the information provided at the hearing, I am satisfied that the tenants will pay the arrears within the timeframe specified in the order and are unlikely to commit further breaches. A conditional termination order is therefore granted.
- The conditional termination order will lapse if fully complied with. If the tenants breach its terms, the possession order may be enforced at any time within 90 days from the first breach, under section 64(4)(b) of the Act. Filing fee
- As Oaks Property Management Limited As Agent For Sri Property Investment Ltd has wholly succeeded with the claim, the filing fee is reimbursed.