Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5364841 — Rent arrears at 12 Chartwell Drive, Crofton Downs, Wellington 6035
Published 27 January 2026 · Application 5364841
- Rent arrears
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Wellington
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
K Koller
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $1,111.43
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $1,111.43
Claims & awards
What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.
| Claim | Landlord | Tenant | Reason |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rent arrears to 2 July 2025 | $1,083.43 | Rent arrears to 2 July 2025 | |
| Filing fee reimbursement | $28.00 | Filing fee reimbursement | |
| Net award | $1,111.43 | ||
| Bond | $1,500.00 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $1,111.43 |
Claims and awards for application 5364841 — net $1,111.43 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears to 2 July 2025
- Amount
- $1,083.43
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears to 2 July 2025
Filing fee reimbursement
- Amount
- $28.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Filing fee reimbursement
Net award
Landlord $1,111.43
Bond
Landlord $1,500.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $1,111.43
Dismissed claims
- The Cost Of Arranging The Variation… — because this amounts to a request for key money. Section 17(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states that a landlord cannot, without the Tribunal’…
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Stirling Gooch, Ethan Stewart, Jos Williams and Zadie Hurrell must pay Wolfbrook Property Management Limited $1,111.43 from the bond as set out in the table:
- The claim for key money is dismissed.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,500.00 (3086560-011) immediately apportioned as follows: Wolfbrook Property Management Limited: $1,111.43 Stirling Gooch, Ethan Stewart, Jos Williams and Zadie Hurrell: $388.57
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears and has provided rent records which prove the amount owing.
- I note that the tenants are jointly and severally liable, which means all the tenants are responsible for the money owed. Any dispute between the tenants about who should pay the arrears is not something I can decide. The tenants can file an application in another jurisdiction.
- The tenants who joined the tenancy are responsible for any arrears arising before they signed the variation of tenancy because this was a continuing tenancy. The bond is there to protect the landlord and should be refunded to cover the money owed.
- The claim for the cost of arranging the variation of tenancy is dismissed because this amounts to a request for key money. Section 17(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) states that a landlord cannot, without the Tribunal’s consent, require a tenant to pay any money other than rent or bond for the variation of a tenancy agreement.
- Key money means any sum of money demanded by way of fine, premium, foregift, reimbursement of expenses, administration charges, or otherwise as consideration for the grant, continuance, extension, variation, or renewal of a tenancy agreement, or for consent to the surrender or disposition of the tenant’s interest under a tenancy agreement or to a subletting by the tenant; but does not include any sum payable or paid by way of rent or bond. Landlord’s can still claim reasonable expenses under section 44A RTA if there has been an assignment, subletting, or end of the tenancy by mutual agreement.
- I note that breaching section 17(1) RTA is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500. See section 17(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
- Because the landlord has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s17(1), s17(3), s44A
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
Property management
- WOLFBROOK PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LIMITED (applicant)
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5364841?
The tribunal order states: Stirling Gooch, Ethan Stewart, Jos Williams and Zadie Hurrell must pay
How much money was awarded in case 5364841?
Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,083.43 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5364841?
The primary dispute was Rent arrears.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5364841?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13030418-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.