How much money was awarded in case 5438768?

M The Date Of This Order, Unless Soo…: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438768?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Healthy homes, Mould.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438768?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13353952-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5438768?

M The Date Of This Order, Unless Soo…: $200.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5438768?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: Healthy homes, Mould.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5438768?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13353952-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Unit 9, 2 Miller Street, Glenholme, Rotorua 3010, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5438768 — 14-day notice

Q: What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5438768?

The tribunal order states: Pursuant to s 25 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the rent for the tenancy

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5438768. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
m the date of this order, unless sooner reheard or varied according to law. 4. Under s 27, any amount paid by the tenant	$200.00		m the date of this order, unless sooner reheard or varied according to law. 4. Under s 27, any amount paid by the tenant

Pursuant to s 25 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the rent for the tenancy at 9/2 Miller Street, Rotorua is reduced to $200.00 per week.

The reduced rent takes effect from 1 March 2026. That date is after the date of the application and is the date from which the increase was to take effect.

This order remains in force for 1 year from the date of this order, unless sooner reheard or varied according to law.

Under s 27, any amount paid by the tenant above $200.00 per week for any period to which this order applies is not lawfully recoverable as rent. The Landlord is to refund that overpayment, or credit it to the tenant’s rent account, within 14 days of this order.

Reasons

The applicant tenant filed this application in response to a notified increase in rent for her tenancy at 9/2 Miller Street, Rotorua. I treat the application, according to its substance, as an application under s 25 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 for a determination of market rent.

The landlord did not attend the hearing. Notice of hearing having been given, the Tribunal may hear and determine the matter in the landlord’s absence.

The Tribunal had great difficulty in contacting the landlord on the day of hearing. The Tribunal first reached a person who could not assist. On a second attempt, the Tribunal was redirected to a phone line for Emerge Aotearoa who had, allegedly, taken over management of the property. The phone system for Emerge Aotearoa indicated the call was outside business hours despite it being about 10.00am on a working day, and the person eventually reached was rude and obstructive, spoke over the Adjudicator, and refused to provide contact details for a representative from Emerge to the Tribunal.

If this is how tenants are treated in the premises, they should be mindful to inform tenancy services of their concerns.

I am satisfied the landlord had proper notice of this proceeding and a fair opportunity to participate. The application was served on the landlord at its address for service on 10 March 2026. In addition, at the time of hearing the Tribunal made further attempts to contact the landlord using the available contact details, but those attempts did not result in any appearance, explanation, or request for an adjournment. In those circumstances, I was satisfied it was appropriate to proceed in the landlord’s absence. The landlord’s non- participation was not the result of any procedural unfairness, but of its own mismanagement.

The tenant produced a notice (letter) advising that her rent would increase to $360.00 per week, effective from the first pay date on or after 1 March 2026.

The notice formed part of a transition of Rotorua Lakes Council pensioner housing to management by Emerge Aotearoa.

The tenant said the proposed increases across the pensioner complexes were generally in the range of $350.00 to $390.00 per week. She said the complexes were originally pensioner housing and that many units and shared facilities are dated and in poor condition.

The tenant’s evidence was that some flats remain in disrepair. She referred to black mould, sinking floors, outside laundry facilities accessed by concrete steps, slippery surfaces in wet weather, lack of wall insulation in some older units, and asbestos in some older units. She also referred to limited communal amenities, inadequate seating, and rubbish collection difficulties for some residents. She said many residents are elderly and some rely on mobility equipment.

The tenant also said there are newer vacant units with better amenities, including internal laundry and insulation, but tenants have not been moved into them.

In support of her position, the tenant referred to online pricing for pensioner units in other centres. Her evidence was that one-bedroom pensioner units in Thames, Paeroa, Ngatea, and Waihi were around $215.00 per week, and in Te Aroha around $245.00 per week. She said those units were in better condition than the subject premises.

Under s 25(1), the Tribunal may reduce rent if satisfied that the rent payable or to become payable exceeds the market rent by a substantial amount. Market rent is the rent that a willing landlord might reasonably expect to receive and a willing tenant might reasonably expect to pay, disregarding the personal circumstances of either party, and taking into account comparable tenancies in the locality or similar localities and such other matters as the Tribunal considers relevant.

Under s 25(4), a market rent order may take effect from a date specified in the order, including an earlier date, provided it is no earlier than the date of the application.

Under s 26(1)(a), where the tenancy is periodic, the order remains in force for 1 year unless a shorter period is specified.

The Tribunal also has power under s 100 to require a valuer’s report in s 25 proceedings. I have considered that course, but in the circumstances of this case I am satisfied the matter can be determined on the material available.

I do not take into account the tenant’s personal ability to pay, except as context for why the application was made. Section 25 requires an objective assessment of market rent.

The landlord filed no evidence and did not appear. The tenant’s evidence is therefore uncontradicted.

The tenant’s comparator evidence is limited. It is not Rotorua evidence, and I accept it is not ideal. However, having considered MBIE – Tenancy Services bond data, pensioner accommodation does not have a category of its own and, as consequence of this, may require unique treatment in terms of any market value assessment.

Further, s 25(3) permits comparison with similar localities and also allows the Tribunal to take into account other relevant matters.

In this case, the condition and amenity evidence is significant. The tenant’s evidence was that the premises are dated pensioner housing with a number of deficiencies affecting comfort, safety, and amenity.

I accept that evidence. I also accept that the comparator units identified by the tenant were said to be in better condition than the subject premises.

Even allowing for the fact that Rotorua may command different rents from the comparison towns, I am satisfied on the evidence before me that a rent of $360.00 per week for this tenancy exceeds the market rent by a substantial amount.

Doing the best I can on the available evidence, I assess the market rent for this tenancy at $200.00 per week. I arrive at that figure because the only direct comparator material before me was in the range of $215.00 to $245.00 per week for pensioner accommodation said to be in better condition, while the subject tenancy is part of older pensioner housing with materially inferior condition and amenities.

I make no determination about the rents payable by other tenants in other units or complexes. This order is confined to the tenancy before the Tribunal.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5438768. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
m the date of this order, unless sooner reheard or varied according to law. 4. Under s 27, any amount paid by the tenant	$200.00		m the date of this order, unless sooner reheard or varied according to law. 4. Under s 27, any amount paid by the tenant