Claimant wins levy recovery case at Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled in favour of the claimant, ordering the respondent to pay all unpaid levies, interest, costs, and the filing fee. This decision was based on the Unit Titles Act 2010 and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ 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 purposes like checking compliance, maintaining shared infrastructure, or repairing common property.
This section generally states that the Tenancy Tribunal cannot award costs to or against parties in proceedings, unless certain exceptions apply. These exceptions include cases where the proceedings are considered frivolous, a party was represented by a lawyer, or the dispute should have been settled earlier but a party refused without good reason.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant successfully recovered unpaid levies, interest, costs, and the filing fee from the respondent.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that a unit owner must pay all levies and outgoings payable for the unit as determined by the body corporate. The decision was based on the Unit Titles Act 2010 and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9063404 1
[2025] NZTT 9063404
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [NAME] $21,458.19 immediately, calculated as follows:
Descriptions Applicant
Ordinary Levies (due 30/12/2020 to 30/04/2025)
$15,534.74
Costs: [NAME] Manager
$667.00
Costs: Legal Fees $1,863.19 Costs: Attendance at Hearing $212.75 Interest $2,680.51 Filing Fee $500.00 Total award $21,458.19 Total payable by Respondent to Applicant
$21,458.19
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9063404 2
Reasons:
1. [NAME] attended the hearing as Counsel for the [NAME]. A representative of the [NAME] Manager also attended.
2. The unit owners did not attend the hearing. I tried to call them on both landline and mobile numbers during the hearing, but the calls were not answered.
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.
7. The outstanding levies cover the period from December 2020 to April 2025. [NAME] provided a clear and detailed breakdown of the outstanding levies and referred me to all relevant [NAME] resolutions to prove the claim.
Is the Unit owner liable for interest?
8. 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.
9. 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?
10.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 recovering the levies, objectively assessed, be paid by a defaulting unit owner.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9063404 3
Again, [NAME] provided a clear and detailed breakdown of the amounts sought. I am satisfied that the costs ordered above are reasonable.
11.Because the [NAME] has succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. Section 176(1) Unit Titles Act 2010 and section 102(4) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
[NAME] 07 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 9063404 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 as determined by the body corporate.
- Interest can be charged up to 10% per annum on unpaid levies.
- Reasonable costs incurred by the body corporate in collecting unpaid levies can be recovered from the unit owner.
- The filing fee is reimbursed if the body corporate succeeds with the claim.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The unit owner's non-attendance at the hearing did not affect the decision.
- There are no specific arguments from the unit owner that were explicitly rejected in the text provided.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the respondent must pay the claimant all unpaid levies, interest, costs, and the filing fee.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the respondent's failure to pay levies and outgoings for the unit as determined by the body corporate.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the claimant because the respondent failed to pay the levies by the due date, and the body corporate had provided clear records of the amounts owed.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Unit Titles Act 2010 and the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the respondent had not paid the levies by the due date, and the body corporate had provided clear records of the amounts owed.
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 by the due date to avoid facing similar consequences.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included the records provided by the body corporate showing the amounts owed and the due dates for payment.