Tenancy Tribunal Rejects Termination, Orders Rent Payment
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the landlord's request to terminate the tenancy was denied. Instead, the tenant was ordered to pay overdue rent and the landlord's filing fee. The decision was based on the fact that the tenant had made efforts to pay the rent arrears.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to have their rent arrears assessed without facing automatic termination of their tenancy.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows the Tenancy Tribunal to end a tenancy if one party has broken the tenancy agreement or the Act. However, if the problem can be fixed, the party who complained must first give the other party a notice to fix the problem within at least 10 working days.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application for termination of the tenancy and ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears and filing fees.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the landlord's application for termination of the tenancy and ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears and filing fees. The Tribunal found that the tenant had taken steps to remedy the breach and that termination was not justified given the partial payment of arrears.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480253 1
[2026] NZTT 5480253
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE], [NAME]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] As Agent For [NAME] And [NAME] As Trustees Of The [COMPANY] $248.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
Description Landlord Rent arrears (to 16 June 2026) $220.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $248.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $248.00
2. The Landlord’s other claims are dismissed.
Reasons:
1. A representative of the landlord attended the hearing.
2. The tenant did not attend the hearing. I made two calls to her mobile phone number during the hearing, both calls went straight to voicemail.
3. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears, water rates and reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480253 2
4. The landlord has provided a rent summary which proves that $220 is owing for rent as at the date of hearing.
5. The landlord also claimed water rates of $120.71. The invoice provided in support of that claim includes fixed charges as well as consumption charges. A tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to their occupation of the premises or to their use of the facilities (see s 39(3) RTA). Therefore, tenants are only liable for the electricity, gas, telephone and internet they use, and for water charges based on consumption (s 39(4) RTA). They are not liable for fixed water charges. More significantly, the landlord generated a report during the hearing which showed that the tenant has paid the amount claimed on this invoice. Other water rates invoices might be outstanding, but no claim has been made in respect of those, and no evidence provided. The claim for water rates is dismissed.
Should the tenancy be terminated?
6. The landlord also applied for termination of the tenancy.
7. 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. See section 56(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
8. 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.
9. The tenant has breached their obligations by failing to pay rent when it falls due.
10. The landlord served a 14-day notice on the tenant, and the tenant did not remedy the breach within the required period. However, she has taken steps to remedy the breach. The amount outstanding is now $220. That amount would not justify ending the tenancy. However, the tenant is on notice that her tenancy is at risk. Her payments have been sporadic. If she continues to fall in and out of arrears and the landlord makes another application for termination, that application may well be successful.
11. The landlord also noted that the Tenant regularly falls into modest arrears to support its application for termination. However, the landlord did not provide evidence that it has issued recidivist rent arrears notices under section 55(1)(aa) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
12. The application form states that the rent was 21 days in arrears at the date of the application. See section 55(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The evidence does not establish that. Rent summaries show that rent was 14 days in arrears at the date of the application. I also note that the rent was not 21
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480253 3
days in arrears at the date of hearing. See s56(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
13. The application for termination is dismissed. The landlord has not established any of the grounds for termination for rent arrears.
14. As the landlord was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee. The landlord was not substantially successful with its application, so I have declined its request for suppression of its details.
R Morgan
16 June 2026
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480253 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 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480253 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 has taken steps to remedy the rent arrears.
- The landlord did not prove that the tenant's arrears justified termination of the tenancy.
- The landlord did not provide evidence of issuing multiple rent arrears notices to the tenant.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord claimed water rates as an outgoing charge, but these included fixed charges which the tenant is not liable for.
- The landlord attempted to terminate the tenancy based on rent arrears without showing that the breach was incapable of remedy.
- The landlord requested termination of the tenancy despite the tenant having made partial payments towards the arrears.
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 ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears and filing fees.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over whether the landlord could terminate the tenancy due to unpaid rent and whether the tenant owed rent arrears and filing fees.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to dismiss the termination application because the tenant had taken steps to remedy the breach and the amount outstanding was not significant enough to warrant termination.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 56(1) and 39(3) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant had taken steps to remedy the breach and the amount outstanding was not significant enough to warrant termination.
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?
For someone in a similar situation, taking steps to remedy breaches and making partial payments can prevent termination of the tenancy.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The rent summary provided by the landlord and the tenant's partial payment of arrears mattered.