What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5421314?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White at 11A

How much money was awarded in case 5421314?

Rent Arrears: $13,147.66 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421314?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421314?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13142400-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5421314?

The tribunal order states: The tenancy of Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White at 11A

How much money was awarded in case 5421314?

Rent Arrears: $13,147.66 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421314?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421314?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13142400-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

11A Fairview Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5421314 — Rent arrears

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421314 — net $13,147.66 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss	$13,147.66	Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss
Net award	$13,147.66
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$13,147.66

The tenancy of Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White at 11A Fairview Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.

Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White must pay Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities $ 13,147.66 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss) $ 13,147.66 Total award$13,147.66 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$13,147.66

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.

There was late contact by the tenant, firstly to the landlord and then the Registry. An adjournment was requested but there is insufficient evidence to support such a request. Given the significant and growing rent arrears, even with further proof, an adjournment would have been unlikely.

The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy and rent arrears.

The landlord provided a rent summary that established rent arrears today of $16,434.57. The last rent payment was in November 2025.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy is terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Did the landlord fail to mitigate its loss

In Huang v Ashworth [2024] NZDC 15726 the District Court confirmed there is a duty to mitigate for rent arrears (see section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The Court confirmed the test of what the landlord ought to do to mitigate its loss is a factual one and depends on: a. Whether the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate its loss; and b. More particularly, whether it acted reasonably having regard to all the circumstances of the case.

In Huang v Ashworth the Court reduced the rent arrears by a third to take into account a failure to mitigate loss.

As a provider of a provider of social housing, the landlord has to deal with challenging tenancies where rent arrears can become a continuing problem. The preference is to work with the tenant and to try and found a way to accommodate the respective needs, often with a generous rent payment schedule.

As considered in Huang, Judge Sainsbury noted: [18] I consider...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 when it is being naive 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 balance of probabilities that here was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.

I consider the landlord was actively working with the tenant and trying to find ways for the tenancy to continue over a long period of time. I heard from the landlord that the tenants have a history of tardy engagement, and little follow through of any promise.

The rent summary does show the dramatic fluctuations in rent where income assessments changed the rent requirements. This typically reflects an improved financial situation for the tenants but challenges in budgeting as well as seasonality changes in the income verses the lag in reassessment.

I balance the consideration of mitigation with the attempts of the landlord over a long period of time but also the harsh reality of what is now a sizable debt for the tenant. Earlier steps to use the appropriate tools available to the landlord under the RTA may have seen an earlier end to the tenancy, or a resolution method agreed and put in place, effectively stopping the bleeding. The landlord’s desire or direction to support tenants long-term in these rent arrears situations, and then later seek full rent later may be seen in some ways as letting both sides down, rather than being “cruel to be kind”.

I reduce tenant liability for rent arrears by 20%, this reflects an approximate time when I consider any prior generous accommodation should have been discarded and an appropriate application made to the Tribunal.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421314 — net $13,147.66 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss	$13,147.66	Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss
Net award	$13,147.66
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$13,147.66

Order

The tenancy of Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White at 11A Fairview Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015 is terminated, and possession is granted to Kāinga Ora–Homes And Communities immediately.
Sirena Anamaria Takerei and Phillip Anthony White must pay Kāinga Ora– Homes And Communities $ 13,147.66 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below: DescriptionLandlord Rent arrears to 18 February 2026 (less 20% for failure to mitigate the loss) $ 13,147.66 Total award$13,147.66 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord$13,147.66

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.
There was late contact by the tenant, firstly to the landlord and then the Registry. An adjournment was requested but there is insufficient evidence to support such a request. Given the significant and growing rent arrears, even with further proof, an adjournment would have been unlikely.
The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy and rent arrears.
The landlord provided a rent summary that established rent arrears today of $16,434.57. The last rent payment was in November 2025.

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Rent was at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed. The tenancy is terminated. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Did the landlord fail to mitigate its loss
In Huang v Ashworth [2024] NZDC 15726 the District Court confirmed there is a duty to mitigate for rent arrears (see section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The Court confirmed the test of what the landlord ought to do to mitigate its loss is a factual one and depends on: a. Whether the landlord took all reasonable steps to mitigate its loss; and b. More particularly, whether it acted reasonably having regard to all the circumstances of the case.
In Huang v Ashworth the Court reduced the rent arrears by a third to take into account a failure to mitigate loss.
As a provider of a provider of social housing, the landlord has to deal with challenging tenancies where rent arrears can become a continuing problem. The preference is to work with the tenant and to try and found a way to accommodate the respective needs, often with a generous rent payment schedule.
As considered in Huang, Judge Sainsbury noted: [18] I consider...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 when it is being naive 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 balance of probabilities that here was some failure to mitigate loss but less than that assessed by the Tribunal.
I consider the landlord was actively working with the tenant and trying to find ways for the tenancy to continue over a long period of time. I heard from the landlord that the tenants have a history of tardy engagement, and little follow through of any promise.
The rent summary does show the dramatic fluctuations in rent where income assessments changed the rent requirements. This typically reflects an improved financial situation for the tenants but challenges in budgeting as well as seasonality changes in the income verses the lag in reassessment.
I balance the consideration of mitigation with the attempts of the landlord over a long period of time but also the harsh reality of what is now a sizable debt for the tenant. Earlier steps to use the appropriate tools available to the landlord under the RTA may have seen an earlier end to the tenancy, or a resolution method agreed and put in place, effectively stopping the bleeding. The landlord’s desire or direction to support tenants long-term in these rent arrears situations, and then later seek full rent later may be seen in some ways as letting both sides down, rather than being “cruel to be kind”.
I reduce tenant liability for rent arrears by 20%, this reflects an approximate time when I consider any prior generous accommodation should have been discarded and an appropriate application made to the Tribunal.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421314 — Rent arrears at 11A Fairview Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421314 — Rent arrears at 11A Fairview Road, Western Heights, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenancy be terminated?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions