Tribunal Allows Landlord to Dispose of Tenant's Abandoned Goods
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal decided that the landlord could dispose of the tenant's abandoned goods after the tenancy ended. This decision was based on the impracticality of returning the goods and their low value compared to the costs of storage and transportation.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord may dispose of a tenant's abandoned goods if the value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them.
📖 Technical summary
The Tribunal allowed the landlord to dispose of the tenant's abandoned goods.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal ruled that the landlord could dispose of the tenant's abandoned goods at the end of the tenancy, given the impracticability of returning the items and their low value compared to the costs involved.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472710 1
[2026] NZTT 5472710
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT REMOTE LOCATION | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE]
ORDER
1. [COMPANY_1] must take any of the tenant’s personal documents that have been left at the premises to the nearest Police station and obtain a receipt for them.
2. The landlord may dispose of the other goods left at the premises by the tenant as the landlord sees fit.
Reasons:
1. The landlord attended the hearing held remotely on 3 June 2026. The tenant did not attend the hearing.
2. The landlord has applied for the disposal of goods the tenant left at the premises at the end of the tenancy.
3. The landlord agreed on a period for the tenant was to collect the goods, but the tenant failed to collect the goods within that time.
4. It is not practicable for the landlord to the return the goods to the tenant. The value of the goods is below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them. Therefore the landlord may dispose of the goods. See sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472710 2
N Walker
03 June 2026
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472710 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, 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5472710 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:
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The decision allowed the landlord to dispose of the tenant's abandoned goods.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord could dispose of the tenant's abandoned goods after the tenancy ended.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord, reasoning that it was impractical to return the goods and their value was too low to justify the costs of storage and transportation.
Which laws or rules were applied?
Sections 62(3)(b), 62B(2) and (3) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the value of the goods was below the cost of storing, transporting and selling them.
Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?
The decision was for the landlord, who brought the case.
What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?
For someone in a similar situation, the landlord may be able to dispose of abandoned goods if the value of the goods is lower than the costs associated with storing and transporting them.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The judgment does not specify the evidence or documents that mattered.