Tenant Wins Rent Credit Dispute at Tenancy Tribunal
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal resolved a dispute over rent arrears and credits between a landlord and tenant. The tenant argued that the landlord's rent summary contained errors and that she was owed additional credits. After reviewing the evidence, the Tribunal found in favour of the tenant, adjusting the rent summary and reducing the amount owed.
⚖️ Legal holding
A tenant is entitled to rent credits as agreed upon, minus any undisputed arrears.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled on rent arrears and credits between a landlord and tenant.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled on a dispute over rent arrears and credits between a landlord and tenant. The tenant disputed the landlord's rent summary, arguing for additional credits. The Tribunal acknowledged the confusion in the records and awarded the tenant the appropriate credits, reducing the net amount owed.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167931 1
[2025] NZTT 5167931
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [NAME] must pay [COMPANY] $397.24 immediately, being rent arrears to 21 May 2025.
Description Landlord Tenant Rent arrears $2,627.24 Rent credits as per Landlord (3 weeks @ $540) $1,620.00 Rent credits as per Tribunal $610.00 Total award $2,627.24 $2,230.00 Net award $397.24 Total payable by Tenant to Landlord $397.24
Reasons:
1. Both parties attended the hearing via teleconference.
2. The landlord has applied for rent arrears of $1,018.21. The landlord says he has credited 3 weeks rent to the tenant for a time when there was a problem with sewerage and flooding.
3. The tenant disputes the claim and says that the various rent summaries provided by the landlord are confusing and contain errors. In particular, the tenant provided evidence of an agreement via text message that she would be credited $60.00 and a further $50.00. The tenant also provided her bank statements and highlighted a
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167931 2
payment that she made on 5 January 2024 which does not appear on the rent summary.
4. I acknowledge that the rent records are confusing, and the tenant has successfully identified an error of one missed payment. However, there is also a general lack of understanding by the tenant which has led to mistrust. The date a payment leaves her account is not necessarily the date the payment is received by the landlord.
5. However, I acknowledge that the landlord has frequently added payments together under one date which has added to the confusion, and the rent day has changed from Sunday to Thursday which is not reflected in the summary.
6. In an attempt to clarify, I will set out the rent liability.
Start date End date Weeks Weekly amount Total
24/05/2020 25/03/2023 148 $540.00 $79,920.00
26/03/2023 10/09/2024 76 weeks 3 days $560.00 $42,800.00
11/09/2024 21/05/2025 36 weeks 1 day $590.00 $21,324.29
Total Rent due $144,044.29
Less Rent paid $141,417.05
Total Arrears $2,627.24
7. The starting point for rent arrears is therefore $2,627.24 less 3 weeks rent credited of $1620.00 = $1,007.24.
8. I find that the tenant should be credited for the payment of $500.00 made on 5 January 2024.
9. I do not accept the landlord’s evidence that the $60.00 and $50.00 should be included in the 3 week credit. He made no mention of this in the rent summary nor in his initial evidence. I therefore find that the tenant should be credited a total of $2,230.00 as per the table above.
10. I decline to make any award of the filing fee.
[NAME]
22 May 2025
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5167931 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. 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 tenant successfully showed that a payment she made on 5 January 2024 was missing from the landlord's rent summary.
- The tenant was entitled to a credit for a $500 payment made on 5 January 2024.
- The tenant was entitled to additional credits of $60 and $50, as agreed via text message.
- The landlord's rent summaries were confusing, with payments grouped under single dates and an unreflected change in rent day.
❌ Tends to be rejected
- The landlord's claim that the $60 and $50 credits were included in the three-week credit was not accepted.
- The landlord failed to mention the $60 and $50 credits in his rent summary or initial evidence.
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 owed additional rent credits, reducing the amount of rent arrears owed to the landlord.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about the accuracy of the rent summary provided by the landlord, specifically whether the tenant was owed additional credits for previous agreements.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the tenant, acknowledging the confusion in the rent records and crediting the tenant for payments and agreements not reflected in the landlord's summary.
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 tenant's evidence of text messages and bank statements showing additional credits and a missed payment in the landlord's summary.
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 ensure they have clear records and evidence of any agreements regarding rent credits to support their case.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence that mattered included text messages showing agreements for rent credits and bank statements showing a missed payment in the landlord's summary.