Tenancy Tribunal Dismisses Claim for Rent Arrears and Termination
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application for termination of the tenancy and recovery of rent arrears because the landlord failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the amount owed.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord must provide clear evidence of rent arrears and outgoings to succeed in a claim before the Tenancy Tribunal.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant's application for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, outgoings, and refund of the bond was dismissed due to insufficient evidence.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the claimant's application for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, outgoings, and refund of the bond due to insufficient evidence provided by the landlord.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5076208 1
[2025] NZTT 5076208
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted] For [NAME]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. [NAME], representing the landlord, and Mr [NAME], the tenant, both attended the teleconference hearing.
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, outgoings, refund of the bond and refund of the filing fee.
3. The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
Rent arrears
4. The landlord said the rent arrears to the hearing date of 15 April 2025 was $6,761.29. The tenant thought this was around the correct amount owing. Whilst the landlord had provided a rent summary, with only rent transactions,
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5076208 2
along with their application, that went to 10 January 2025, the landlord did not provide an updated rent summary for the hearing. Immediately prior to the hearing, I asked the landlord to provide an updated rent summary before the hearing. However, the landlord sent in a ledger that contained both rent and water invoice transactions, which did not set out only the summary of rent transactions, nor did it include any running arrears column for just rent owing. I asked for only the rent summary from the landlord after receiving this but did not receive any updated rent summary before the hearing. During the hearing, the landlord said they could not provide an updated rent summary until after the hearing, as they were at the tenant’s house for the hearing, given the tenant’s phone had broken. As such, there was no evidence provided by the landlord which clearly showed the exact amount of rent arrears claimed, which was $6,761.29, despite several opportunities being provided to the landlord to do so.
5. As the landlord has not proved their claim for rent arrears they claimed, which was $6,761.29, I dismiss this claim.
Termination of the tenancy
6. As I have dismissed the landlord’s rent arrears claim, and there was no updated rent summary provided, the landlord, who sought a conditional termination order at the hearing, is unable to prove any claim for termination of the tenancy, either a full or conditional termination order, as they claimed the tenant was more than 21 days in arrears. Thus, the landlord’s claim for termination of the tenancy is also dismissed.
Outgoings
7. The landlord claimed for outgoings, namely water bills. In their application, the landlord was seeking $361.47 for water bills. At the hearing, the landlord said they were claiming $34.00 for water bills. Both the landlord and tenant said the water bill balance owing had been reduced to $34.00 due to a leak found at the property. There was only one [NAME] invoice provided by the landlord for the period 12 August 2024 to 9 September 2024, which showed a net balance owing of $354.68, after taking off any fixed charges. There was no evidence provided by the landlord in the way of a clear water ledger setting out the water invoices and receipts for the tenant and the balance owing by the tenant for only water, nor was there any evidence provided of how the parties reached the figure of $34.00 for water owing by the tenant at the time of the hearing. Further, the property manager did not know the date to which the landlord claimed the $34.00 was owing for water bills. I find the landlord has provided insufficient evidence to prove their claim for water bills and so dismiss this claim.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5076208 3
Refund of the bond
8. As I have dismissed the landlord’s claims for rent arrears, for termination of the tenancy and for outgoings, and as the landlord did not claim any compensation which could impact the bond, and given the tenancy is now ongoing, the landlord’s claim for refund of the bond is also dismissed.
Filing fee
9. As the landlord has not been successful with the claims, I do not reimburse the filing fee.
10. I note during the hearing that the property manager and tenant appeared to have discussed potential arrangements between themselves before the hearing, for the tenant to address the rent arrears and water bills. As I am dismissing the landlord’s claims, the parties can reach their own agreements as to tenancy matters as between themselves of course.
C Price
15 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5076208 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5076208 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 tenant acknowledged the approximate amount of rent arrears.
- The landlord and tenant agreed that the water bill balance had been reduced due to a leak.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord did not provide an updated rent summary showing the exact amount of rent arrears.
- The landlord lacked a clear water ledger setting out the water invoices and receipts for the tenant.
- The landlord failed to provide evidence of how the parties reached the figure of $34.00 for water owing.
- The landlord did not claim any compensation which could impact the bond and did not provide sufficient evidence for termination of the tenancy.
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 landlord's application for termination of the tenancy and recovery of rent arrears.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the landlord's claim for rent arrears and the termination of the tenancy agreement.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the landlord's claims because the landlord did not provide enough evidence to prove the amount of rent arrears claimed.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were cited in the judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the lack of clear evidence provided by the landlord to prove the amount of rent arrears claimed.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have clear and comprehensive evidence to support their claims before bringing them to the Tenancy Tribunal.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment mentions that the landlord did not provide an updated rent summary or a clear water ledger setting out the water invoices and receipts for the tenant.