Tenant Ordered to Pay Rent Arrears After Failing to Provide Evidence
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered a tenant to pay rent arrears to the landlord after determining that the landlord's claim was supported by a rent ledger. The tenant argued that an initial payment had not been accounted for, but could not provide bank records to back up this claim.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is required to prove their claim if they dispute the landlord's rent ledger.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal found the landlord's claim for unpaid rent to be proven based on the rent ledger.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears to the landlord after finding the landlord's claim proven based on the rent ledger. The tenant claimed an additional payment at the start of the tenancy but failed to provide bank records to support this claim.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5116348 1
[2025] NZTT 5116348
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] as agent for [NAME] $428.57 immediately, being rent arrears to 6 November 2024.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. This tenancy commenced on 13 November 2020 and ended on 7 November 2024.
3. The landlord claims that the tenant owes it $428.57 in rent.1 It has produced a ledger in the usual form provided by landlords to the Tribunal, which sets out each rent period and the dates of the various payments made. It records that from the commencement of the tenancy, the tenant was initially $480 in credit. Although that amount fluctuated, the tenant largely always remained in credit, until the final days of the tenancy, when the tenant fell into “arrears” for a short period of a few days.
1 I note that in my last order I incorrectly recorded “ according to the landlord $101,590 should have been paid. The amount paid was in fact $101,018.57.”. That was a typographical error, in fact the amount paid was $100,590 as against the amount charged for rent of $101,018.57, meaning the amount allegedly due was $428.57.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5116348 2
4. The dispute between the parties arises because the tenant claims an additional payment she made at the commencement of the tenancy of $480 has not been taken into account and does not appear on the rent summary. She claims she owes no further rent.
5. The hearing was adjourned previously for the tenant to supply bank records to confirm this payment. The tenant did not provide those bank records, but continues to maintain she has paid this additional payment.
6. The landlord has explained today that the $480 paid by the tenant is clearly taken into account; it is reflected in the fact the ledger demonstrates the tenant was in arrears in that amount from the very beginning of the tenancy.
7. I explained to the parties at the hearing that the applicant has the obligation of proving its claim. Documents such as a rent ledger are, in the absence of any contradicting written material, usually good evidence corroborating a claim as to the amount of rent due. The tenant has put forward no written material contradicting the landlord’s claim, such as bank statements, despite being given the opportunity to do so.
8. I find the landlord’s claim to be proven, as ordered above. I add that I agree with the landlord that the rent summary indeed reflects her additional $480 payment at the beginning, due to the fact it records she was in credit by that amount at the outset of the tenancy.
9. The landlord does not want return of the filing fee.
D Watson
23 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5116348 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5116348 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 landlord provided a detailed rent ledger showing the tenant was in arrears.
- The ledger reflected the initial $480 credit the tenant claimed to have paid.
- The tenant did not provide any written proof, such as bank records, to contradict the ledger.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed an additional payment was made but did not provide bank records to confirm it.
- The tenant maintained they owed no further rent without providing any supporting documentation.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant was ordered to pay rent arrears to the landlord.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was over whether the tenant owed rent arrears and whether an initial payment was correctly accounted for.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord because the tenant failed to provide evidence to support their claim of an additional payment.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The most important argument was the tenant's failure to provide bank records to support their claim of an additional payment.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have proper documentation to support any claims they make regarding rent payments.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The rent ledger and the tenant's lack of bank records to support their claim mattered in this decision.