Tenant Ordered to Pay $5,072.85 in Rent Arrears Despite Absence
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered a tenant to pay $5,072.85 in rent arrears to the end of tenancy on 28 January 2025. The tenant did not attend the hearing, having been properly notified according to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must pay rent arrears as ordered by the Tenancy Tribunal.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears in the absence of the tenant.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay $5,072.85 in rent arrears to the end of tenancy on 28 January 2025. The tenant did not attend the hearing, having been properly notified according to the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5109329 1
[2025] NZTT 5109329
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] $5,072.85 immediately, being rent arrears to the end of tenancy on 28 January 2025.
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. The tenant did not answer either of the calls made to him at the scheduled time on the number provided to the Tribunal.
2. Because I am satisfied the tenant has been served notice of the hearing in accordance with the Residential Tenancies Act, 1986 and the tenant has not requested an adjournment, the hearing was conducted in the tenant’s absence.
3. The landlord has applied for rent arrears and has provided rent records which prove the amount owing.
C Lamdin
26 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5109329 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5109329 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].
Reasons:
⚖️ What tends to weigh in cases like this
✅ Tends to be accepted
- The landlord proved the amount of rent owing by providing rent records.
- The tenant was properly informed about the hearing.
- The tenant did not ask for the hearing to be postponed.
- The hearing proceeded without the tenant because he did not answer the calls.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay $5,072.85 in rent arrears to the end of tenancy on 28 January 2025.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about unpaid rent arrears up to the end of the tenancy.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord because the tenant was properly notified of the hearing and did not request an adjournment.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 54 was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was that the tenant had been properly notified of the hearing and did not request an adjournment.
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?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they receive proper notification of hearings and respond appropriately to avoid default judgments.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The rent records provided by the landlord proved the amount of rent arrears owed.