Tenant ordered to pay rent arrears and debt in installments
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the tenant must pay rent arrears and a debt in installments. The decision was based on the validity of notices addressed to the tenant using only their first and last name, even if the middle name was omitted.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant must comply with notices addressed to them using their first and last name, even if the middle name is omitted.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears and a debt in installments, with conditions for termination if unpaid.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tribunal ordered the tenant to pay rent arrears and a debt in installments, finding that notices addressed to the tenant using only their first and last name were valid despite the omission of the middle name.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 1
[2026] NZTT 5480929, 5419330
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT HAMILTON | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI KIRIKIRIROA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME_3] owes [COMPANY_1] $3,136.00 (“the debt”).
2. [NAME_3] must pay rent and the debt as follows:
a. By 44 weekly payments of $600.00, being $530.00 for rent and $70.00 for the debt.
b. A final payment of $586.00, being $530.00 for rent and $56.00 for the debt.
c. Payments will be every Tuesday, with the first payment on 16/06/2026 and continuing until 20/04/2027.
3. Payments will be allocated in the following order: rent, rent arrears, and the filing fee.
4. If the tenant fails to pay rent and rent arrears within 2 working days of the due dates:
a. The tenancy at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises.
b. The balance of the debt will be payable immediately.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 2
5. If the tenant fails to pay the filing fee within 2 working days of the due date, the filing fee will be payable immediately.
6. The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,020.00 (BN-15200469) to [COMPANY_1] immediately.
Description Landlord Tenant Rent arrears $2,300.00 Previous order application 5419330 dated 19/02/2026
$1,828.00
Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $4,156.00 Bond $1,020.00 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $3,136.00
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. This is a rehearing of application 5419330.
3. The landlord filed a further application 5480929 for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and refund of the bond, this matter was also heard.
4. The tenant wants to repay the debt to avoid immediate termination.
Was the correct name used for service of documents.
5. The tenant disputed that the notices issued by the landlord were addressed to her because they were addressed to [NAME_2], not [NAME_3]. She believed that this did not identify her as the correct recipient.
6. The tenant said that this was a breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986,RTA, and Postal Act but could not identify any section of either act that was breached.
7. The tenant said that the name [NAME_2] is a truncated version of her name and she does not recognise it. She only recognises her full name which includes her middle name of May. On this basis she has ignored and returned posted communications from the landlord. This has caused issues because the tenant has no email and no phone number and post is the only method of communication the landlord has available to them.
8. The tenant has also refused to recognise applications to the Tribunal under [NAME_2] as she said that it could be another person and her tenancy agreement records her as [NAME_3] ,the tenant.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 3
9. Tenancy application 5419330 recorded the tenants name as [NAME_3], and application 5480929 recorded the tenants name as [NAME_2].
10. The RTA requires a tenant to be formally identified for the purposes of the tenancy agreement and this includes the tenants full name as known to the landlord. See section 13A RTA. This is so the tenant is clearly identified.
11. Notices served under the RTA must be done so using the method stated in section 136. Under this section the use of the tenant’s middle name is not a legal requirement.
12. This is a long tenancy beginning in 2014. There were no other tenants at the premises with that name or similar as she was the only named tenant for the period of the tenancy. Notices had been received and acknowledged earlier in the tenancy by the tenant when addressed to [NAME_2].
13. The issue is whether any notice clearly identifies the tenant and the tenancy. The tenant is identifiable despite the omission of the middle name and there is no confusion about who the notice is for. The tenant also agreed that she received the notices.
14. I find that the failure to use the tenants middle name does not invalidate the notices issued by the landlord or notices from the Tenancy Tribunal. The tenant was able to be identified by the first and last name and the tenancy address. I find that there was no confusion or ambiguity and notices issued by the landlord to the tenancy address and both applications to the Tenancy Tribunal are valid.
15. The tenant has recently given the landlord her phone number and the landlord has recorded that for future communications the tenants full name, including her middle name, will be used.
16. The tenant was also concerned that there was different bond numbers recorded, however this was due to the updating of the bond lodgement system and the landlord has no responsibility for this.
17. As part of the file summary sent to the tenant for application 5480929, RTA section references were listed which included section 50A.The tenant believed that the application was erroneously made against a deceased tenant. This was incorrect. The section references were a guidance of what sections are used in the RTA to terminate tenancies.
Should a conditional termination order be made?
18. Where rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed, the Tribunal must make either a final or a conditional termination order. See section 55(1)(a) and (1A) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. The landlord established that the rent was owed and the tenant has already been paying extra rent to remedy the rent arrears.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 4
19. I am satisfied the tenant will pay the debt within the period specified in the order and is unlikely to commit any further relevant breach. I have granted a conditional termination order.
20. The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order may be enforced for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
21. Because [COMPANY_1] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
T Harris
12 June 2026
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 5
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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5480929 6
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 court found that the failure to use the tenant's middle name does not invalidate the notices issued by the landlord or notices from the Tenancy Tribunal.
- The court concluded that the tenant was able to be identified by the first and last name and the tenancy address, and there was no confusion or ambiguity.
- The court determined that notices issued by the landlord to the tenancy address and both applications to the Tenancy Tribunal are valid.
- The court was satisfied that the tenant will pay the debt within the period specified in the order and is unlikely to commit any further relevant breach.
- The court granted a conditional termination order, which will lapse if it is fully complied with.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant argued that the notices did not identify her as the correct recipient because they were addressed to a truncated version of her name, which she did not recognize.
- The tenant claimed that the use of a truncated version of her name was a breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and Postal Act, but could not identify any section of either act that was breached.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The tenant must pay rent arrears and a debt in installments, with conditions for termination if unpaid.
What was the dispute about?
The tenant disputed the validity of notices issued by the landlord because they used a truncated version of the tenant's name.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court found that the notices were valid because the tenant was clearly identifiable by the first and last name and there was no confusion.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 13A and 55(1)(a) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was whether the notices were valid when they used a truncated version of the tenant's name.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the tenant, who was ordered to pay rent arrears and a debt.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure that notices are clearly identifiable, even if the middle name is omitted.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any specific evidence or documents that mattered.