VadeLab
DismissedTenancy Tribunal·

Tenancy Tribunal Rejects Tenant’s Compensation Claim

Case No. [2026] NZTT 5494509

📌 In brief

A tenant applied to the Tenancy Tribunal for compensation due to unexpected renovation works but was denied because their tenancy agreement was only for three months. The decision emphasised the importance of written agreements in establishing expectations and obligations between tenants and landlords.

⚖️ Legal holding

A tenant is not entitled to compensation if their fixed-term tenancy does not include a longer term as explicitly agreed in writing.

Topics

tenancy agreementscompensation claims

Provisions

📖 What the law says

Residential Tenancies Act 1986 s.54

This rule allows a tenant to ask the Tenancy Tribunal to cancel a notice from their landlord ending the tenancy. The tenant must apply within 14 working days and argue that the landlord gave the notice because the tenant complained or tried to use their rights under the tenancy agreement or law.

Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.

📖 Technical summary

The claimant's application for compensation was dismissed due to the fixed-term nature of the tenancy agreement.

📜 Headnote Official document

The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's application for compensation related to moving and carpet cleaning costs, ruling that the fixed-term nature of their agreement precluded such claims.

📚 Full judgment Official document

OUTCOME: Dismissed

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5494509 1

[2026] NZTT 5494509

TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT AUCKLAND | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI TĀMAKI MAKAURAU

APPLICANT: [redacted]

Tenant

RESPONDENT: [redacted] Agent For [RESPONDENT]

Landlord

TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]

ORDER

The application is dismissed.

Reasons:

1. Both parties attended the hearing.

2. The tenant seeks compensation in the form of moving costs ($560) and carpet cleaning costs ($150) that the tenant incurred (or will be incurring) in this 3- month fixed term tenancy.

3. The tenant contends that she was not aware that planned renovation works will be carried out on the apartment building in September or October 2026, which will necessitate the tenant having to vacate earlier than the 1 year that they expect to reside at the premises.

4. However, the parties’ tenancy agreement is only for a fixed term of 3 months until 30 June 2026 after which the agreement will automatically convert to periodic.

5. Any expectation that the tenant has or intends to rely upon must be based on the express and stated terms of the tenancy agreement.

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5494509 2

6. The landlord’s email to the tenant on 16 March 2026 makes it clear that the offer for the tenancy is “for a fixed term of 3 months which automatically converts to periodic afterwards”. The tenant’s response by return email on the same day is “yes I am happy to sign with that”.

7. If the landlord had represented to the tenant that this tenancy is meant to be for a longer term, of say 1 year, as alleged by the tenant, then I would expect the tenant to not reply with a “yes” to only entering into a 3-month fixed term tenancy. The tenant should have responded with “no”, I expect to stay for at least 1 year, so please redraft the agreement to reflect a fixed term of 1 year.

8. The landlord denies ever undertaking with the tenant to give them a term which is longer than 3 months. As it is, under the terms of a fixed term tenancy, either party can give 21 day’s notice prior to the expiry of the fixed term that they do not intend to renew the fixed term tenancy.

9. The landlord says that they have not given any notice to the tenant about not letting the fixed term tenancy roll over automatically to periodic on 30 June 2026. The landlord has also not given the tenant any formal notice about when the periodic tenancy might come to an end in which case the landlord would be obliged to give 90 days’ notice (without giving any reasons, under section 51 Residential Tenancies Act 1986).

10. The landlord also says that no notification has been given by the [NAME] about renovation works which is presently worrying the tenant. Any news of works being required to be done in September or October 2026 remains hearsay only.

11. Be that as it may, the material issue before the Tribunal is whether the landlord had represented or agreed to provide the tenant with a tenancy term that is long term or at least one year.

12. The clear written evidence before me is no, the tenancy agreement signed by the parties is only for a fixed term of 3 months after which it becomes periodic.

13. That being the case, there is no basis for the tenant to allege that the landlord is in breach of the tenancy agreement in place.

14. I must therefore dismiss the tenant’s claim for compensation for moving costs.

15. As for carpet cleaning costs, the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’) provides that tenants are only obliged to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy.

16. Here, section 17 of the tenancy agreement states:

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5494509 3

“…at the conclusion of the tenancy, the carpets will be inspected to see if they meet the standard of reasonably clean and tidy….”

17. I do not consider section 17 of the tenancy agreement, as it is presently drafted, to contradict the RTA standard of cleaning, ie., reasonably clean and tidy.

18. For those reasons, the tenant’s claim for compensation of $710.00 fails.

[APPELLANT]

02 June 2026

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5494509 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, or the failure to make an order, where the amount in dispute on appeal is

less than $1000 • a final order to undertake work, or the failure to make an order, where the value of the

work in dispute on appeal is 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 [NAME]/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 [NAME]/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.[NAME] https://www.[NAME] http://www.[NAME]

__________________________________________________________________________________ 5494509 5

A manaomia nisi faamatalaga poo se fesoasoani, e uiga i lau mataupu, asiasi ifo le matou aupega tafailagi: [NAME]/disputes/enforcing-decisions, pe fesootai mai le Tenancy Services i le numera [PHONE].

Reasons:

📊 How courts decide similar cases

Among 12 similar decisions in this collection:

A snapshot of this collection — not a prediction of your case's outcome.

⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this

✅ Tends to be accepted

  • The tenancy agreement clearly states the term is fixed for 3 months and then converts to periodic, which both parties agreed upon.
  • There was no written or clear representation from the landlord that the tenant would have a longer-term lease beyond the initial 3-month period.

❌ Tends to be rejected

  • The tenant's claim that they were unaware of planned renovation works necessitating early vacating does not entitle them to compensation under the terms of their fixed-term agreement.
  • The tenant argued for compensation based on an expectation of a one-year tenancy, which was not supported by the written tenancy agreement.

Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.

❓ Frequently asked questions

What did this decision decide?

The claimant's application for compensation related to moving and carpet cleaning costs was dismissed.

Who was involved?

A tenant and a landlord, with the landlord represented by an agent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The court decided based on the fixed-term nature of the tenancy agreement, which clearly stated it would end after three months.

Which laws or rules were applied?

Section 54 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was cited as relevant.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The written agreement stating a fixed term of three months was crucial in dismissing the claim.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

Against the tenant, who sought compensation but did not have grounds under their tenancy agreement.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

Tenants should ensure any verbal agreements are reflected in written contracts to avoid disputes.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The email exchange and the signed tenancy agreement were key pieces of evidence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Yes, but only if there is substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice, not just disagreement with the outcome.

Is it worth getting a lawyer for a case like this?

It's advisable to consult a qualified lawyer to understand your rights and options in such cases.

Official source: Tenancy Tribunal headnote and full judgment reproduced from the court's public records. View on the official source ↗Summary, holding, technical summary and questions: produced by Artificial Intelligence based on the official headnote and judgment. These are VadeLab’s own material and are not the work of the Court.This decision was issued by the Tenancy Tribunal and is reproduced from its published records. VadeLab is not affiliated with, and this page is not endorsed by, that court or tribunal.