Tenantcheck Insights · Case study
Tenancy Tribunal case 5447650 — Rent arrears at Unit/Flat Unit 4B, 257 Willis Street, Te Aro, Wellington 6011
Published 9 April 2026 · Application 5447650
Landlord favoured
- Rent arrears
- Property damage
At a glance
Key facts from the published tribunal order.
Outcome
Landlord favoured
From published order
Location
Wellington
Tribunal region
Adjudicator
J Tam
Dispute themes
Award balance
Gross awards, any bond applied per the order, and the remaining balance payable.
- Gross award
- $2,100.00
- Bond payment as ordered
- −$1,800.00
- Total balance for Tenant to pay Landlord
- $300.00
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 20 February 2026 | $1,800.00 | Rent arrears to 20 February 2026 | |
| Fridge replacement (less depreciation | $300.00 | Fridge replacement (less depreciation | |
| Net award | $300.00 | ||
| Total payable by Tenant to Landlord | $300.00 |
Claims and awards for application 5447650 — net $300.00 NZD. Verify on MoJ.
Rent arrears to 20 February 2026
- Amount
- $1,800.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Rent arrears to 20 February 2026
Fridge replacement (less depreciation
- Amount
- $300.00
- Awarded to
- Landlord
- Reason
- Fridge replacement (less depreciation
Net award
Landlord $300.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord
Landlord $300.00
Claim types — money lines allowed on this order
Order
- Anas Sanand must pay Leaders Property Management (2024) Limited As Agent For D & K Naik Family Trust $300.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
- The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,800.00 (BN-00055039) to Leaders Property Management (2024) Limited As Agent For D & K Naik Family Trust immediately.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing.
- The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, and refund of the bond following the end of the fixed term tenancy.
- The tenant sought a reduction of the fixed term which was due to expire on 8 March 2026. The tenant vacated the property on 1 February 2026.
- The tenant says that he is currently liable for rent on this tenancy while also paying rent elsewhere resulting in double rent of approximately $2,000 per fortnight, which is not sustainable relative to his income. The property is available to be re-let, and the landlord is holding a four-week bond, which mitigates any potential loss.
- Rent was paid up to 23 January 2026, and based on a weekly rent of $450, the outstanding rent to the vacate date on 1 February is approximately $579. The tenant seeks the release of the remaining bond balance of $1,221, with no further rent or costs payable beyond the vacate date. The tenant says that continuing the tenancy would cause significant hardship, and it is reasonable for the tenancy to be terminated.
- However, there are no unforeseen change of circumstances which supports the tenant’s application for reduction of fixed term permitted under section 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986. This fixed term tenancy was renewed from 8 September 2025 to 8 March 2026. It is expected that tenants would look for accommodation elsewhere nearing the expiry date of the fixed term should the tenancy not be renewed.
- Here, the tenant found suitable replacement accommodation which he had elected to move into, more than a month prior to the expiry of 8 March, on 1 February 2026. This decision by the tenant to accept a new tenancy which overlaps with the current fixed term tenancy was not caused by an unforeseen change of circumstances, notwithstanding the resulting hardship in the tenant paying double rent.
- For those reasons, I decline to reduce the fixed term tenancy to 1 February 2026 as requested by the tenant.
- The landlord was able to relet the premises on 20 February 2026, and accordingly will be entitled to rent to that date.
Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?
- A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
- The fridge was damaged during the tenancy.
- The tenant says that the damage was not intentional nor careless.
- The tenant had emailed the landlord to say that while defrosting the small fridge's freezer shelf during cleaning, it was accidentally punctured and it discharged refrigerant. The tenant unplugged it immediately, moved it aside, and left a note on the appliance.
- I find the damage to the fridge more than fair wear and tear, and the tenant has not disproved liability for the damage. The tenant failed to satisfy the Tribunal that his act of “accidental puncturing” of a refrigerant element in the fridge was not due to carelessness.
- The onus remained on the tenant to prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause the damage in question.
- The amounts ordered for fridge replacement costs are proved.
- I have taken into account betterment and depreciation. The landlord should be returned to the position they would have been in had the tenant not breached their obligations, and should not be better or worse off. In calculating depreciation, I have taken into account the age and condition of the items at the start of the tenancy and their likely useful lifespan.
Topics & place
Topics are dispute themes across the order (not the same as claim-type money lines).
Residential Tenancies Act sections
s40(2), s66
Key findings
- Dispute theme: rent arrears
- Dispute theme: property damage
Property management
Frequently asked questions
Common questions about this Tenancy Tribunal case.
What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5447650?
The tribunal order states: Anas Sanand must pay Leaders Property Management (2024) Limited As Agent
How much money was awarded in case 5447650?
Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,800.00 awarded to landlord
What type of tenancy dispute was case 5447650?
The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Property damage.
Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5447650?
The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13411984-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.