Bond Refund Claim Dismissed Due to Lack of Jurisdiction
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a claim for a bond refund because the landlord was living at the premises during the tenancy, which falls outside the scope of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
The RTA does not apply if the landlord was living at the premises principally as a place of residence during the tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This section lists specific situations where the Residential Tenancies Act does not apply. For example, it does not apply to commercial premises, or if the tenant's income largely comes from using the property for farming or similar activities.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the application due to lack of jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed an application for a bond refund due to lack of jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, as the landlord was residing at the premises during the tenancy period.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181178 1
[2025] NZTT 5181178
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Applicant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Respondent
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. This application is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the teleconference hearing.
2. The applicant made an application for refund of the bond.
3. The landlord claimed that the tenant was only a boarder and not a tenant under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)
4. The parties confirmed that the landlord lived at the premises along with 2 other boarders during the time the applicant lived at the premises.
5. In total there were 4 individuals living at the premises at time all sharing facilities together.
6. Section 5(1)(n) RTA states that the RTA does not apply if the landlord was living at the premises principally as a place of residence during the tenancy.
7. Accordingly, I find that the section 5(1)(n) RTA applies and that the Tenancy Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to hear this dispute.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181178 2
8. The applicant will need to apply to the Disputes Tribunal for the matter to be heard.
9. This application is dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction.
[NAME]
08 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181178 3
Please read carefully: Visit justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals for more information on rehearings and appeals.
Rehearings You can apply for a rehearing if you believe that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has happened. For example: • you did not get the letter telling you the date of the hearing, or • the adjudicator improperly admitted or rejected evidence, or • new evidence, relating to the original application, has become available.
You must give reasons and evidence to support your application for a rehearing. A rehearing will not be granted just because you disagree with the decision. You must apply within five working days of the decision using the Application for Rehearing form: justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf
Right of Appeal Both the landlord and the tenant can file an appeal. You should file your appeal at the District Court where the original hearing took place. The cost for an appeal is $260. You must apply within 10 working days after the decision is issued using this Appeal to the District Court form: justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals
Grounds for an appeal You can appeal if you think the decision was wrong, but not because you don’t like the decision. For some cases, there’ll be no right to appeal. For example, you can’t appeal: • against an interim order • a final order for the payment of less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work worth less than $1000.
Enforcement Where the Tribunal made an order about money or property this is called a civil debt. The Ministry of Justice Collections Team can assist with enforcing civil debt. You can contact the collections team on [PHONE] or go to justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt for forms and information.
Notice to a party ordered to pay money or vacate premises, etc. Failure to comply with any order may result in substantial additional costs for enforcement. It may also involve being ordered to appear in the District Court for an examination of your means or seizure of your property.
If you require further help or information regarding this matter, visit tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing- decisions or phone Tenancy Services on [PHONE].
Mēna ka hiahia koe ki ētahi atu awhina, kōrero ranei mo tēnei take, haere ki tenei ipurangi tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, waea atu ki Ratonga Takirua ma runga [PHONE] ranei.
https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Forms/TT-Application-for-rehearing.pdf https://www.justice.govt.nz/tribunals/tenancy/rehearings-appeals/ https://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/about-civil-debt/ https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions http://www.tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5181178 4
A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: tenancy.govt.nz/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord lived at the premises during the tenancy.
- There were four individuals living together at the premises.
- The landlord was living at the premises principally as a place of residence.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The applicant requested a refund of the bond under the RTA.
- The applicant considered themselves a tenant under the RTA.
- The RTA applies if the landlord was not living at the premises primarily as a place of residence.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the claim for a bond refund due to lack of jurisdiction.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 applies when the landlord lives at the premises during the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 does not apply because the landlord was living at the premises during the tenancy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Section 5(1)(n) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the landlord was living at the premises during the tenancy, thus falling outside the scope of the RTA.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should consider applying to the Disputes Tribunal if they believe their case falls outside the Tenancy Tribunal's jurisdiction.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.