Tenant's Bond Refund Claim Dismissed by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's claim for a bond refund because there was no clear evidence that the landlord agreed to a shorter notice period than the standard 28 days.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to the full 28-day notice period unless there is clear evidence of an agreement for a shorter notice period.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the tenant's claim for a bond refund due to insufficient evidence of an agreement for shorter notice.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's claim for a bond refund, ruling that there was insufficient evidence to show an agreement for a shorter notice period than the standard 28 days.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5072449 1
[2025] NZTT 5072449
TENANCY TRIBUNAL - Video Location
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: Room 3, Unit/Flat [ADDRESS], [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. The application is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing held yesterday.
2. The tenant is claiming a refund of her bond on the basis that the tenant should not have had to give 28 days’ notice to end her tenancy.
3. The tenant moved into premises that comprised of a studio room, a kitchenette and a bathroom on the 10 October 2024. The premises is part of larger premises that the tenant had access to including a full-sized kitchen.
4. The tenant and the landlord completed a tenancy agreement for the premises on the same day.
5. The tenant was waiting to move into her own apartment that was being constructed. Before taking the tenancy she was in motel accommodation but that was expensive. She saw an advertisement advertising the tenancy premises and made enquiries as a result of that. The tenant told the landlord in writing that she would need the tenancy for a ‘month, maybe longer.’ The
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5072449 2
tenant and the landlord agreed that the tenancy would be periodic and the tenant and landlord both signed a tenancy agreement that reflected that.
6. Unfortunately, the very next day after the tenant entered into the agreement, she was advised that her new constructed apartment was available for her to live in. She therefore gave notice on the 11 October to end the tenancy.
7. The landlord has retained the tenant’s full bond of $1600.00 the landlord says that this covers rent for the 28 days’ notice period.
8. The tenant claims that the landlord should not be entitled to the full 28 days rent because she had advised the landlord that her apartment may not be ready for 2-4 weeks, and the landlord had agreed to her giving 2 weeks’ notice not 28 days notice as required in the RTA.
9. The landlord denies that it ever agreed to a lesser period of notice.
10. Having considered all of the evidence I am not satisfied that the tenant and the landlord ever agreed that the tenant was only required to only give 2 weeks notice to terminate the tenancy. There is no written record of that agreement, and the tenancy agreement records the tenancy as periodic. This means that the usual rules (28 days notice) applied.
11. The landlord confirmed that it was unable to enter into a new lease agreement with a new tenant until after the notice period.
12. The tenant’s claim is dismissed.
[NAME]
13 February 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5072449 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5072449 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 tenancy agreement states the tenancy is periodic, meaning the standard 28-day notice period applies.
- There is no written record of an agreement for a shorter notice period.
- The landlord confirmed they could not enter into a new lease agreement until after the 28-day notice period.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed she had verbally agreed with the landlord for a 2-week notice period.
- The tenant advised the landlord that her new apartment might not be ready for 2-4 weeks.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed the tenant's claim for a bond refund.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant should receive a bond refund because she claimed the landlord agreed to a shorter notice period.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant's claim was dismissed because there was no clear evidence that the landlord agreed to a shorter notice period.
Which laws or rules were applied?
No specific laws or rules were mentioned in the judgment.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the lack of evidence showing an agreement for a shorter notice period.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was against the person who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should ensure they have clear evidence of any agreements regarding notice periods.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify any particular evidence or documents that mattered.