Tenant and Landlord Agree to Structured Debt Repayment Plan
📌 In brief
The Tenant and Landlord agreed to a structured debt repayment plan to resolve their dispute over the tenancy. The Tenant will pay $4,264.48 in installments of $50.00 every two weeks.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must repay a debt according to a structured plan agreed upon by both parties.
📖 Technical summary
The parties agreed to a debt repayment plan.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenant and Landlord agreed to a structured debt repayment plan, resolving their dispute over the tenancy. The order requires the Tenant to pay $4,264.48 in installments of $50.00 every two weeks.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4967413 1
[2025] NZTT 4967413
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [Tenancy address suppressed]
ORDER BY CONSENT
1. This is an order made by the consent of both parties.
2. [The tenant/s] must pay [The landlord/s] $4,264.48.
3. The tenant will pay the debt in order 2. at the rate of $50.00 per fortnight. These fortnightly payments will commence after the debt in mediated order 4895602, currently under a similar repayment structure, is paid in full.
4. If any payment of the debt specified in order 2. above is not made on the due dates as indicated in order 2. above, the remaining amount will be due and payable in full immediately and is enforceable as a monetary order of the Tenancy Tribunal.
5. The parties agree that payment of the debt in 2. resolves all and any disputes relating to this tenancy. No further applications to the Tribunal will be made.
6. Given the parties reached this order by consent, it will be treated as the prior mediated order and the parties’ details are to be suppressed (see Section 95A Residential Tenancies Act 1986).
[NAME] 27 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4967413 2
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 4967413 3
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].
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tenant agreed to a structured payment plan of $50.00 every two weeks.
- Both parties consented to the order, showing mutual agreement on the repayment terms.
- The debt would be fully resolved once all payments were made according to the plan.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- There are no arguments presented that the court rejected in this particular decision.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenant and Landlord agreed to a structured debt repayment plan.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the Tenant's outstanding debt to the Landlord.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided by consent, allowing the parties to reach an agreement on how the debt would be repaid.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The structured repayment plan was agreed upon by both parties.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case, as both parties agreed to the repayment plan.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation could negotiate a structured repayment plan with the other party to resolve the dispute.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents.