Tenant Entitled to Bond Refund and Compensation Due to Landlord's Failure to Disclose
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the claimant was a tenant and not a flatmate, entitling her to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs due to the landlord's failure to disclose that she would be sharing facilities with strangers.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to protections under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 if the premises are principally used by renters.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows a tenant to ask the Tenancy Tribunal to cancel a notice from their landlord to end the tenancy. The tenant must do this within 14 working days of getting the notice. They can argue that the landlord gave the notice because the tenant used a right they had under their tenancy agreement or the law, or because they complained about the landlord.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The claimant was found to be a tenant, not a flatmate, entitling her to protections under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the claimant was a tenant, not a flatmate, and was entitled to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs due to the landlord's failure to disclose that the claimant would be sharing facilities with strangers.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5464681 1
[2026] NZTT 5464681
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
[NAME] (aka [NAME]) must pay [NAME] $708.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
Description Tenant Bond refund $530.00 Compensation: Moving out costs $150.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $708.00
Reasons:
1. Only the applicant attended the video hearing. The landlord gave notice that she would not be attending.
2. The tenant has applied for her bond, compensation and the filing fee.
Background
3. The landlord advertised for a person to rent a room and facilities at [ADDRESS], Alicetown, Lower Hutt. The applicant was shown the premises and
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5464681 2
agreed to tenant the property. The landlord also used one bedroom at the property. The applicant was told that apart from her there were other renters. There was one who had his own bathroom and used the kitchen. There was another person occupying a bedroom who would use a shared bathroom.
4. The applicant was not told that the landlord rented a room for [NAME]. This meant that the tenant was having to share facilities, including the bathroom with strangers.
5. The landlord received a bond of $530.00 from the applicant. The landlord did not lodge the bond with the [COMPANY].
6. The landlord provided the tenant with a flatmate agreement.
Was the applicant a flatmate or tenant?
7. Section 5(1)(n) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the RTA is excluded in cases where:
The premises, not being a boarding house, continue to be used, during the tenancy, principally as a place of residence by the landlord or the owner of the premises or by any member of the landlord’s or owner’s family.
8. When determining whether the RTA is excluded from a tenancy, the Tribunal considers the substance of the agreement between the parties rather than the labels they have applied.
9. ‘Principally as a place of residence by the landlord’ refers to area of the premises used by the landlord, not the amount of time the landlord spends at the premises or whether the landlord has another home elsewhere. If the landlord used 60% of the premises and the renters used 40% of the premises, then the premises would be principally use by the landlord.
10. In the present case the premises was principally used by renters and [NAME]. The area of the premises used by the landlord was small in comparison and therefore the exclusion under s.5(n) does not apply. The applicant was a tenant, not the landlord’s flatmate or boarder. The landlord was required to comply with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 regarding what is included in a tenancy agreement, lodging the bond, complying with [COMPANY]. The landlord should have disclosed to the applicant that other bedrooms and shared facilities would be used by [NAME].
11. From the evidence I am satisfied that the landlord failed to inform the tenant that she could encounter strangers using her shared bathroom at any time.
12. I accept that the arrangement for the tenant was unsatisfactory and that she had to leave the tenancy because the landlord did not fully inform her of the nature of the premises.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5464681 3
13. I have therefore ordered that the landlord refund the bond, pay moving costs of $150.00 and the filing fee.
14. The respondent is warned that she must meet the requirements of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 by providing a tenancy agreement that complies with the provisions of the Act. She must provide information about [COMPANY]. She is not a flatmate. She is a landlord. She must lodge a bond. She may be fined if she does not comply with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 in any case in future.
[NAME]
17 June 2026
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5464681 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/
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The tenant was considered a tenant under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
- The landlord used only a small part of the premises compared to the renters.
- The landlord failed to inform the tenant about sharing facilities with strangers.
- The tenant had to move due to unsatisfactory living conditions.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord claimed the tenant was a flatmate, not a tenant.
- The landlord argued the bond did not need to be lodged with the specified company.
- The landlord provided a flatmate agreement instead of a proper tenancy agreement.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The claimant was entitled to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs due to the landlord's failure to disclose that she would be sharing facilities with strangers.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the claimant was a tenant or a flatmate, and whether she was entitled to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the claimant was a tenant and not a flatmate, and was entitled to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs because the landlord failed to disclose that the claimant would be sharing facilities with strangers.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the claimant was a tenant and not a flatmate, and was entitled to protections under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation may be entitled to a bond refund and compensation for moving costs if their landlord fails to disclose important information about the premises.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.