Conditional Termination Order for Unpaid Water Rates
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal granted a conditional termination order to a landlord for unpaid water rates, allowing the tenant to avoid immediate eviction if they pay the debt within a specified period. The order was made under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must pay outstanding water rates within a specified period to avoid termination of the tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This section allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if one party breaks the tenancy agreement or the Act. For breaches that can be fixed, the party complaining must first give the other party a notice explaining the problem and giving them at least 10 working days to fix it.
This section outlines the types of orders the Tenancy Tribunal can make. These include declaring the rights or obligations of parties, ordering a party to give possession of premises to another, or ordering a party to pay money.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal granted a conditional termination order to a landlord for unpaid water rates, allowing the tenant to avoid immediate eviction if they pay the debt within a specified period.
📜 Headnote Official document
In a case before the Tenancy Tribunal, a landlord sought termination of a tenancy due to unpaid water rates. The Tribunal granted a conditional termination order, allowing the tenant to avoid immediate eviction if they paid the debt within a specified period.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5180172 1
[2025] NZTT 5180172
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted] Salt / [COMPANY]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] owes [COMPANY] As Agent For David & Toniette Salt / [COMPANY] $720.73 (“the debt”).
2. [NAME] must pay the debt in full by no later than 4pm on Friday 16 May 2025.
3. If the tenant fails to pay the debt within 2 working days of the due date:
a. The tenancy at Unit/[ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises.
b. The balance of the debt will be payable immediately.
4. This order incorporates the Tribunal order made on 1 July 2024 under application TT 4884481.
Description Landlord Tenant Previous order application 4884481 dated 01/07/2024 $220.29 Water rates $500.44 Total award $720.73 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $720.73
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5180172 2
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the remote hearing.
2. The tenant did not attend the hearing by Teams video link. Telephone calls were made to the tenant on the number provided in the application to the Tribunal and to a second number provided by the landlord during the hearing. There was no response to any of the telephone calls. 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 has been given.
3. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, water rates arrears and refund of the bond. The tenant wants to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.
Should a conditional termination order be made?
4. The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where, due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate. Where the breach is capable of remedy the landlord must first serve a notice on the tenant requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days, and establish that the tenant has failed to do so. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
5. The tenant breached their obligations by failing to pay water rates. On 6 September 2024, the landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant, but the breach was not remedied within the required period. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy. The landlord has previously applied to the Tribunal for an order for water rates. On 1 July 2024 an order was made that the tenant pay the water rates arrears within a specified. The order was made by consent of the parties. The tenant did not comply with that order. No water rates have been paid by the tenant in the subsequent months. The total amount of water rates now owing by the tenant is $700.29.
6. Despite my finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence I am satisfied the tenant will pay the debt within the period specified in the order and is unlikely to commit any further breach. I have granted a conditional termination. See section 78(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
7. The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5180172 3
8. On 1 July 2024 the Tribunal made an order relating to this tenancy, for water rates arrears. The previous order is incorporated into this order for enforcement purposes.
S Young
28 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5180172 4
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5180172 5
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's request for termination was accepted because the tenant failed to pay water rates.
- The landlord served a 14-day notice to remedy the breach, which the tenant did not comply with.
- The Tribunal found it would be unfair to refuse to end the tenancy due to the tenant's continued non-payment.
- A previous Tribunal order for water rates arrears, made by consent, was not complied with by the tenant.
- The Tribunal was satisfied that the tenant would pay the debt within the specified period, leading to a conditional termination.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's argument to avoid immediate termination was not fully accepted, as a conditional termination order was still made.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal granted a conditional termination order to a landlord for unpaid water rates, allowing the tenant to avoid immediate eviction if they pay the debt within a specified period.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about unpaid water rates by the tenant, leading the landlord to seek termination of the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to grant a conditional termination order, allowing the tenant to avoid immediate eviction if they pay the debt within a specified period. This was deemed equitable given the tenant's willingness to repay the debt.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 56(1) and 78(3), were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant had breached their obligation to pay water rates, but was willing to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord, who initially brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they pay any outstanding debts within the specified period to avoid termination of their tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the exact evidence or documents that mattered.