Tenant Wins Refund for Water Rates Paid During Tenancy
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal decided that the tenant was not responsible for paying water charges during the tenancy period because the tenancy agreement did not include water meter readings. The landlord was ordered to refund the tenant $787.00 for water rates paid.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to a refund of water rates paid if the tenancy agreement does not provide for water meter readings.
📖 What the law says
This section means that if a tenancy agreement says something different from what the Act requires, or tries to limit the Act's rules, that part of the agreement won't count. This applies unless the Act specifically allows for such a difference, or the Tenancy Tribunal decides it's okay after looking at all the details of the tenancy.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal ruled that the tenant was not liable for water charges during the tenancy period.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the tenant was not liable for water charges during the tenancy period as the tenancy agreement did not include water meter readings. The Tribunal ordered the landlord to return the $787.00 paid by the tenant for water rates.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5216231 1
[2025] NZTT 5216231, 5193995
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT MANUKAU | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI MANUKAU
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Tenant
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Landlord
TENANCY ADDRESS: Unit/[ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
[NAME] must pay [NAME] and [NAME] $814.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
Description Landlord Tenant Return of water rates paid $787.00 Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Total award $814.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $814.00
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing.
2. The landlord sought payment of water rates purportedly owing at the end of the tenancy.
3. I prefer the tenant’s evidence that the parties had agreed that the rent includes water. The parties’ tenancy agreement supports the tenant’s position as there is no meter reading set out on the agreement. The relevant section requires the landlord to set out the water meter reading at the start of the tenancy “if charging for water”.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5216231 2
4. As no water meter reading had been provided, I find that the landlord is not entitled to charge for water at all. The landlord’s claim for water rates is therefore dismissed.
5. The tenant started paying water rates midway during the tenancy when the landlord demanded payment. The tenant has paid $787.00 in total towards water rates.
6. Section 11(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’) provides any agreement or arrangement, or any provision of any agreement or arrangement, entered into in respect of a tenancy to which this Act applies, that is inconsistent with any of the provisions of this Act, or that purports to exclude, modify, or restrict the operation of any such provision, shall be of no effect.
7. Section 11(3) RTA further provides that any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon tenants by this Act shall be of no effect.
8. Given that the tenant was not liable to pay for water during the entire tenancy, I order the landlord to return the $787.00 paid by the tenant.
9. The tenant’s claim for full refund of the rent on account of having to respond to the landlord’s claims filed herein is unsuccessful.
10. The tenant’s claim for refund of rent is really a claim for costs and inconvenience in responding to the landlord’s claim.
11. Section 102 RTA states that the Tribunal shall have no power to award costs to or against any party to proceedings before it.
12. For those reasons, only the tenant’s claim for refund of water rates paid is successful.
13. Because the tenant is partly successful on their claim, I also order the landlord to reimburse the filing fee.
J Tam
09 April 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5216231 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5216231 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 did not include a meter reading for water charges.
- The tenant paid $787.00 in water rates during the tenancy.
- The landlord claimed water rates without providing meter readings.
- The tenant's rent included water according to their agreement.
- The Tribunal ordered the landlord to return the water rates paid by the tenant.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The tenant claimed a full refund of rent due to responding to the landlord’s claims.
- The tenant requested a refund of rent based on costs and inconvenience.
- The Tribunal cannot award costs to or against any party under the Residential Tenancies Act.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal decided that the tenant was not responsible for paying water charges during the tenancy period.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the tenant owed water charges to the landlord during the tenancy period.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided that the tenant was not liable for water charges because the tenancy agreement did not include water meter readings, indicating that water charges were included in the rent.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 11(1) and 11(3) were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenancy agreement did not include water meter readings, implying that water charges were included in the rent.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the tenant who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
Someone in a similar situation should check their tenancy agreement for water meter readings to determine if they are responsible for paying water charges.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The tenancy agreement and the testimony of both parties mattered in this decision.