Tenant's Rent Reduction Claim Dismissed by Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed a tenant's request to lower their rent, stating that the current rent of $630 is fair and aligns with market rates in the area.
⚖️ Legal holding
Section 25 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 allows the Tribunal to reduce rent if it exceeds market rent by a substantial amount.
📖 What the law says
This section allows a tenant to ask the Tenancy Tribunal to reduce their rent. The Tribunal can do this if it believes the current rent is substantially higher than what similar properties would rent for in the market. If the Tribunal agrees, it can set a new rent that matches the market rate.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal dismissed the claimant's application to reduce the rent, finding the current rent reasonable.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal dismissed an application by a tenant to reduce the rent, finding the current rent of $630 to be fair and in line with market conditions in Halswell.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5174591 1
[2025] NZTT 5174591
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT [Event location suppressed]
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], Lansdowne, RD 2, Lansdowne 7672
ORDER
1. An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
2. The application is dismissed.
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
3. The applicant claimed that the rent increase on 1 January 2025 which increased the rent initially to $650, although subsequent to receiving the Tribunal application the landlord has agreed to reduce the rent to $630, should be set aside on the basis that the $630 rent is substantially in excess of market rent for the property.
4. The landlord claims that while she will abide with the Tribunal’s decision, she considers the $630 rent is fair market rent and should not be reduced.
5. Section 25 of the RTA is the relevant section. It says;
(1) On an application made to it at any time by the tenant, the Tribunal may, in accordance with the succeeding provisions of this section, on being satisfied that the rent payable or to become payable for the tenancy exceeds the market
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5174591 2
rent by a substantial amount, make an order reducing the rent to an amount, to be specified in the order, that is in line with the market rent.
(3) For the purposes of this Act, the market rent for any tenancy shall be the rent that, without regard to the personal circumstances of the landlord or the tenant, a willing landlord might reasonably expect to receive and a willing tenant might reasonably expect to pay for the tenancy, taking into consideration the general level of rents (other than income-related rents within the meaning of section 2(1) of the Public and Community Housing Management Act 1992) for comparable tenancies of comparable premises in the locality or in similar localities and such other matters as the Tribunal.
Background
6. The property is a semi-rural, three-bedroom home, with a sunporch (that can be used as a bedroom during the Summer months) and 2 bathrooms (one attached to the sunroom. It has a large deck. It is situated on the landlord’s 4-hectare property 9km from Halswall and has about one acre of ground. The tenants also have access to a playground and sandpit. The house does not have a covered garage but has ample parking and the landlord provides additional storage. The landlord confirmed it is healthy homes compliant.
7. The tenancy started in April 2018 and the rent was initially $475. The first rent increase was in January 2024 and increased the rent to $585. On 1 January 2025 the landlord increased the rent again to $650, but has, as noted, now reduced that to $630.
8. In support of the tenant’s claim, the following evidence was produced, a reference to a property in the same road that is rented for less than $500 and a phone number for the owner. [NAME] advertisements for properties listed, although the tenant noted the advertised prices may not be what the properties were actually rented for. One property rented at a lower rent is not indicative of market rent, as that term is defined. Evidence of the general rent in the area is required. The [NAME] ads are also of very limited value.
9. The landlord said she was confident the initial rent was fair but had reduced it as a good will gesture. She referred to information from the Tenancy Services website obtained when bonds are lodged.
10. The District Court has confirmed that the Tribunal must first make a finding about what the market rent is, before considering whether the rent proposed is substantially in excess of that. Substantially has been defined as around 10% higher than fair market rent.
11. [ADDRESS] has also confirmed that the [COMPANY] information, while only a guide, is a useful starting point, as it is updated monthly and contains information of rent, from the previous six months excluding the most recent month.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5174591 3
12. The market rental for a 3-bedroom home in the Halswell suburb of Christchurch is recorded as lower quartile $618, median $650 and upper $670.
13. It is likely based on the evidence provided that the property would fit the average quartile.
14. The landlord owns another 3-bedroom property in Halswell that she said she had recently advertised for rent. She said she had multiple people willing to rent it for $650. She reduced the rent to $630 for the particular tenants, as she wants to do some remedial work, and considers this reduction fair while that work occurs.
15. When asked, what she would advertise this property for if the tenants left, she said $650 without hesitation and that she would be very confident she could rent it for this, noting that she had in fact had enquiries from people wanting to rent it. She also said that she appreciated that the new rent might be harder for the tenants to pay, but that she needed to keep the rent more inflation adjusted to keep pace with rising costs.
16. The tenant said that Halswell was more urban, than this property is, and therefore the rents there may be higher. I asked what Christchurch suburbs that are more rural fringe might be and therefore arguably more relevant. Prebbleton and Lincoln were the two alternatives proposed. Prebbleton market rents are recorded as $680 lower quartile, $718 median and $750 upper. Lincoln as $538 lower, $655 median and $713 upper.
17. The applicant has not satisfied me that it is more likely than not that the $630 rent is substantially in excess of market rent.
18. The parties names are to be supressed, as there is negligible public interest in publishing either name.
[NAME] 13 March 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5174591 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 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.
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].
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 landlord's willingness to reduce the rent to $630 as a goodwill gesture was considered.
- The landlord's confidence in renting the property for $650 was acknowledged.
- The landlord's need to adjust rent to keep pace with rising costs was taken into account.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant's reference to a property in the same road rented for less than $500 was deemed insufficient to prove market rent.
- The tenant's suggestion that Halswell rents may be higher due to its more urban nature was not convincing.
- The tenant's comparison to Prebbleton and Lincoln suburbs was not deemed directly relevant to the property's location and characteristics.
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 application to reduce the rent, finding the current rent fair and in line with market conditions.
What was the dispute about?
The tenant argued that the rent increase to $630 was substantially higher than the market rent for the property.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the current rent was fair and in line with market conditions, based on evidence showing that $630 was within the range of market rents for similar properties in the area.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, specifically section 25, was applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was the evidence presented regarding the market rent for similar properties in the area.
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?
For someone in a similar situation, the decision suggests that the rent must be significantly higher than the market rate to warrant a reduction.
What evidence or documents mattered?
Evidence of market rents for similar properties in the area mattered, including information from the Tenancy Services website.