Tenancy Tribunal Lacks Jurisdiction Over Flatmates and Head Tenant Dispute
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a case involving flatmates seeking a bond refund from a head tenant, stating it lacked jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine disputes between flatmates and a head tenant.
📖 What the law says
This section states that the Tenancy Tribunal has the power to resolve disagreements between landlords and tenants about tenancies covered by this Act. It also allows the Tribunal to decide if a property is a residential premises under the Act or if a tenancy agreement exists.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal lacks jurisdiction over disputes between flatmates and a head tenant.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed an application for a bond refund from flatmates to a head tenant, ruling that it lacked jurisdiction under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5078968 1
[2025] NZTT 5078968
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [Tenancy address suppressed]
ORDER
1. An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details.
2. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the application and the matter is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. The applicants all attended the hearing. The respondent did not attend and did not respond when telephoned on the number ending in 123.
2. The applicants have applied for a bond refund following the end of the tenancy. The total amount they collectively paid towards bond was $3,400.00.
3. The matter I must first determine is whether the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear and determine the tenant’s claims.
4. The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine any dispute between a landlord and a tenant, and/or a guarantor of a tenant, that relates to a residential tenancy to which the Residential tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) applied. See section 77 of the RTA. The Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine disputes between parties other than those in a landlord and tenant relationship.
5. A tenant is someone who rents a property from the landlord/owner, and usually has a tenancy agreement that records that they are the tenant and have obligations to the owner/landlord. Flatmates are not responsible to the landlord
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5078968 2
for rent and the state of the property. Instead, they are often responsible to a head tenant(s) for their share of rent and outgoings. This position remains even if the head tenant is not physically residing at the property.
6. Here, the respondent is the head tenant. She alone had a tenancy agreement with the owner (who is not a party to this dispute). The applicants had a sub- letting arrangement with the head tenant. As part of that arrangement, the applicants paid bond of $3,400.00 directly to the respondent.
7. In other words, they were the head tenant’s flatmates, and the dispute therefore exists between flatmates. The applicants advised that the respondent did not live at the property while they were there, however, they continued to pay her rent and the arrangement detailed above continued to exist between the applicants and respondent.
8. Accordingly, the relationship between the parties is not a landlord/tenant relationship and therefore the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to determine the application.
9. The application is dismissed.
10. Alternative options for resolving the dispute were discussed at the hearing.
Suppression
11. Section 95A of the RTA permits that the Tribunal may, on application of any party to the proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or part not be published.
12. Given the applicant’s genuine uncertainty regarding jurisdiction, and the decision that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction, I order suppression of all parties’ details.
[NAME] 11 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5078968 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.
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].
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/
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The Tribunal has jurisdiction to resolve disputes between landlords and tenants under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The head tenant has a direct tenancy agreement with the property owner.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The Tribunal lacks jurisdiction to resolve disputes between flatmates and a head tenant.
- Flatmates are not considered tenants in relation to the property owner but rather in relation to the head tenant.
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 application for a bond refund from flatmates to a head tenant.
What was the dispute about?
Flatmates sought a bond refund from a head tenant who was the primary tenant of the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the dispute between flatmates and a head tenant.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 77, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the dispute was between flatmates and a head tenant, not a landlord and tenant.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the flatmates who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should seek alternative methods to resolve disputes with a head tenant.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents presented.