Claimant Wins Levy Recovery Case at Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
In a recent Tenancy Tribunal case, the claimant successfully recovered unpaid levies, interest, costs, and filing fees from the respondent. The decision was based on the Unit Titles Act 2010, which requires unit owners to pay all levies and outgoings as determined by the Body Corporate.
⚖️ Legal holding
A unit owner must pay all levies and outgoings payable for the unit as determined by the Body Corporate.
📖 What the law says
This section outlines some responsibilities of owners of principal units, including allowing the body corporate or its agents to enter their unit for specific reasons like emergencies or maintenance.
This section generally states that the Tenancy Tribunal cannot award costs to or against parties in proceedings, unless certain situations apply, such as when the proceedings are considered frivolous or vexatious.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant successfully recovered unpaid levies, interest, costs, and filing fees from the respondent.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled in favour of the claimant, ordering the respondent to pay unpaid levies, interest, costs, and filing fees. The decision was based on the Unit Titles Act 2010, which mandates that unit owners must pay all levies and outgoings as determined by the Body Corporate.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9057464 1
[2025] NZTT 9057464
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
RESPONDENT: [redacted] Owner
UNIT ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE], Unilodge
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [NAME] $27,365.64 immediately, calculated as follows:
Descriptions Applicant Respondent
Levy $19,492.16 [NAME] charges $632.50 Interest $1,001.14 Costs: Solicitor's fees $5,739.84 Filing Fee $500.00 Total award $27,365.64
Total payable by Respondent to Applicant
$27,365.64
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9057464 2
Reasons:
1. The [NAME] attended the remote hearing on 19 May 2025. The [NAME] was represented by [NAME].
2. The owner did not attend the hearing by Teams video link. This matter was first heard before the Tribunal on 10 March 2025. On that date there was some uncertainty as to the service of the notice of hearing on the owner. The matter was adjourned to ensure that the owner was aware that today's hearing would be by Teams video link only. The Tribunal may hear matters in the absence of a party where satisfied that notice of the hearing has been given. I am satisfied that notice of the hearing was given.
3. The [NAME] has applied for recovery of unpaid levies, interest, costs and the filing fee from the unit owner.
Does the Unit Owner owe the levies claimed?
4. A unit owner must pay all [NAME] levies and outgoings payable for the unit. See sections 80(1)(f) and 121(1) Unit Titles Act 2010.
5. The [NAME] has determined the levies payable and unit owner's share has been calculated according to their utility interest.
6. The [NAME] has fixed the due date for the levies to be paid, and the unit owner has not paid the levies by that date. See section 124(1) Unit Titles Act 2010. The [NAME] has provided records to prove the amount claimed.
Is the Unit owner liable for interest?
7. If a unit owner fails to pay levies by the due date, interest accrues on the unpaid balance. A [NAME] may charge interest up to 10% per annum. See section 128 Unit Titles Act 2010.
8. The [NAME] has resolved to charge interest at 10% per annum on unpaid levies. The [NAME] has proved the amount of interest owing from the due date to the hearing date.
Is the Unit owner liable for costs?
9. Pursuant to section 124 UTA, and as resolved at meetings of the [NAME], the [NAME] is entitled to recover any reasonable costs incurred by it in collecting unpaid levies as a debt due by the owner to the [NAME]. In accordance with the judgments (of the District Court and Court of Appeal respectively) in [NAME] 162791 v [NAME] DC Auckland, CIV2014-004- 0120, 24 June 2014 and [NAME] 162791 v Gilbert [2015] NZCA 185, the Tribunal must order that the reasonable costs incurred by the [NAME] in
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9057464 3
recovering the levies, objectively assessed, be paid by a defaulting unit owner. I am satisfied that the costs ordered above are reasonable.
10.As the [NAME] has succeeded with the claim, I have ordered the owner to reimburse the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
[NAME] 19 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9057464 4
Please read carefully:
SHOULD YOU REQUIRE ANY HELP OR INFORMATION REGARDING THIS [COMPANY] [PHONE].
MEHEMA HE PĀTAI TĀU E PĀ ANA KI TENEI TAKE, PĀTAI ATU KI TE [COMPANY] [PHONE].
AFAI E TE MANA’OMIA SE FESOASOANI E UIGA I LENEI MATAUPU FA’AMOLEMOLE IA FA’AFESO’OTAI’I LOA LE OFISA O LE [COMPANY] [PHONE].
Rehearings:
You may make an application to the Tenancy Tribunal for a rehearing. Such an application must be made within five working days of the order and must be lodged at the Court where the dispute was heard.
The only ground for a rehearing of an application is that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur. Being unhappy or dissatisfied with the decision is not a ground for a rehearing. (See ‘Right of Appeal’ below).
Right of Appeal:
If you are dissatisfied with the decision of the Tenancy Tribunal, you may appeal to the District Court. You only have 10 working days after the date of the decision to lodge a notice of appeal.
However, you may not appeal to the District Court:
1. Against an interim order made by the Tribunal. 2. Against an order, or the failure to make an order, for the payment of money where the
amount that would be in dispute on appeal is less than $1,000. 3. Against a work order, or the failure to make a work order, where the value of the work
that would be in dispute on appeal is less than $1,000.
There is a $200.00 filing fee payable at the time of filing the appeal.
Enforcement:
Where the Tribunal made an order that needs to be enforced then the party seeking enforcement should contact the Collections Office of the District Court on [PHONE] or go to www.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.
http://www.justice.govt.nz/fines/civil-debt
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The unit owner must pay all levies and outgoings for the unit as required by law.
- The Body Corporate calculated the levies based on the unit owner's utility interest.
- The unit owner did not pay the levies by the due date set by the Body Corporate.
- The Body Corporate provided records to prove the amount of unpaid levies claimed.
- The Body Corporate is entitled to recover reasonable costs incurred in collecting unpaid levies.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the respondent to pay the claimant $27,365.64, including unpaid levies, interest, costs, and filing fees.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the respondent's refusal to pay the levies, interest, costs, and filing fees as determined by the Body Corporate.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the claimant because the respondent was required to pay all levies and outgoings as determined by the Body Corporate under the Unit Titles Act 2010.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Unit Titles Act 2010, sections 80(1)(f), 121(1), 124(1), and 128 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the respondent was legally obligated to pay all levies and outgoings as determined by the Body Corporate.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they pay all levies and outgoings as determined by the Body Corporate to avoid legal action.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included records proving the amount of levies, interest, costs, and filing fees owed by the respondent.