Tenancy Tribunal Terminates Tenancy Due to Rent Arrears and Breach
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ended a tenancy because the tenant had not lived in the premises and had significant rent arrears. The Tribunal ruled that termination was fair considering the landlord's need to use the property effectively.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant's failure to live in the premises and significant rent arrears justify termination of the tenancy.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated a tenancy due to breach of obligation and rent arrears.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of a tenant who had not lived in the premises and had significant rent arrears. The Tribunal found that the tenant had breached the tenancy agreement and that termination was equitable given the landlord's need to maximise property use.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5223892 1
[2025] NZTT 5223892
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The tenancy of [NAME] at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] is terminated, and possession is granted to [COMPANY], at 10am on Monday 19 May 2025.
2. This order may be enforced immediately.
3. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] $1,006.00 immediately, being rent arrears to 19 May 2025.
Reasons:
1. The hearing was conducted by telephone. [NAME] attended for the landlord. The tenant did not attend. The landlord believes that the tenant is in prison but does not know which prison. The tenant has contacted the landlord’s Contact Centre regarding the application and so he must be aware of the hearing. It appears that he has not made any arrangements to attend the hearing from prison. A call to his mobile telephone at the time of the hearing went straight to voicemail. I am satisfied that he has been served with the application and so I proceeded with the hearing.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5223892 2
2. The landlord has applied for termination of the tenancy for breach of the tenant’s obligations.
3. 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 it.
4. 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.
5. The tenant has breached his obligations by not living in the premises. The tenancy agreement requires the tenant to live in the premises at all times.
6. The landlord served a 14-day breach notice on the tenant on 25 February 2025, and the tenant has not remedied the breach.
7. It would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy because the landlord, as a social housing provider, must maximise the use of their rental properties. Having properties sitting vacant is contrary to that purpose.
8. As well, the property has, since it has been vacant, been used by squatters and has suffered significant damage.
9. WINZ has stopped paying the rent because the tenant is in prison and rent is now over 11 weeks in arrears. That is another ground for terminating the tenancy and requires the Tribunal to make a termination order.
10. For obvious reasons, I have directed that the landlord may enforce this order immediately. Although, because the premises are unoccupied, the landlord may take immediate possession of the premises in any case.
R Armstrong 19 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5223892 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.
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5223892 4
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 did not live in the premises as required by the tenancy agreement.
- The tenant failed to remedy the breach of not living in the premises after receiving a 14-day notice.
- Rent is now over 11 weeks in arrears, and WINZ has stopped paying the rent because the tenant is in prison.
- The property has been used by squatters and has suffered significant damage while vacant.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's absence from the premises due to imprisonment was not considered a valid reason to avoid termination.
- The inequity of having rental properties sit vacant, especially for a social housing provider, justified termination.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal terminated the tenancy of a tenant who had not lived in the premises and had significant rent arrears.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord could terminate the tenancy due to the tenant's failure to live in the premises and significant rent arrears.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided to terminate the tenancy because the tenant had breached the tenancy agreement and the rent was significantly overdue, making it inequitable to continue the tenancy.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant had breached the tenancy agreement by not living in the premises and had significant rent arrears.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, if they fail to live in the premises and have significant rent arrears, the tenancy may be terminated.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included the breach notice served by the landlord and the fact that the rent was significantly overdue.