Tribunal Grants Landlord Possession and Bond
📌 In brief
The Tenancy Tribunal granted the landlord possession of the rented premises and ordered the bond to be paid to the landlord. This decision was made due to the tenant's breach of the tenancy agreement and the landlord giving a lawful 90-day notice.
⚖️ Legal holding
A landlord is entitled to possession of the premises and the bond upon breach of tenancy and lawful notice.
📖 What the law says
This rule allows a tenant to ask the Tenancy Tribunal to cancel a notice ending their tenancy if they believe the landlord gave the notice because the tenant complained or used their rights under the tenancy agreement or law. The tenant must apply within 14 working days of receiving the notice.
This rule states that if a tenancy has ended, the Tenancy Tribunal must issue an order giving possession of the property to the person who is entitled to it. However, such an order cannot be made more than 3 months after the tenancy officially ended.
Plain-English explanation — does not replace advice from a lawyer.
📖 Technical summary
The Tenancy Tribunal granted possession of the premises to the landlord and ordered the bond to be paid to the landlord.
📜 Headnote Official document
The Tenancy Tribunal granted possession of the premises to the landlord and ordered the bond to be paid to the landlord. The tenant had breached the tenancy agreement and the landlord had given a lawful 90-day notice.
📚 Full judgment Official document
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5264840 1
[2025] NZTT 5264840
TENANCY TRIBUNAL AT WHANGAREI | TE TARAIPIUNARA RETIHANGA KI WHANGĀREI-TERENGA-PARĀOA
APPLICANT: [redacted]
Landlord
RESPONDENT: [redacted]
Tenant
TENANCY ADDRESS: [ADDRESS],Haruru 0204
ORDER
1. [NAME] and [NAME] are granted possession of the premises at [ADDRESS], [POSTCODE] immediately.
2. The [COMPANY] is to pay the bond of $540.00 to [NAME] immediately.
Reasons:
1. The application sought an order for termination and / or possession.
2. The hearing took place by phone on 11 June 2025.
3. [NAME] participated in the hearing. I was unable to contact [NAME] on the phone number provided. The hearing proceeded in [NAME]’s absence.1
4. [NAME]’s written and oral submissions detail some of the very disturbing incidents that have occurred at the premises in the last few months. Last week, [NAME] was taken away by the police. [NAME] do not know where [NAME] is now.
1 Section 93 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5264840 2
5. There are clear grounds for terminating this tenancy for breach, but in any event the landlord gave a lawful 90-day notice and the tenancy ended pursuant to that notice on 10 May 2025.
6. The landlord is entitled to an order for immediate possession of the premises.2
7. There is extensive damage the premises. The tenant left a tap running which flooded the house. The ranchslider is smashed. The police and armed offenders squad broke down doors when they entered the premises. The landlords will have to change the locks.
8. Mr [NAME] said that he was willing to bear the cost of repairs but he thought it was reasonable for him to receive the bond, and to retain a credit amount that the tenant had built up for power costs.
9. Although this application did not originally seek the bond, I agree that this is a very fair and expedient way of dealing with this. The landlord will certainly incur costs that are well beyond the amount of the bond and the power credit.
10. The bond will be released to the landlord.
[NAME]
11 June 2025
2 Section 64 RTA
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5264840 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/
__________________________________________________________________________________ 5264840 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 landlord was granted immediate possession of the premises.
- The landlord was entitled to a possession order because the tenancy ended after a lawful 90-day notice.
- The landlord was entitled to a possession order due to clear grounds for terminating the tenancy for breach.
- The landlord was entitled to receive the bond because there was extensive damage to the premises.
- The landlord was entitled to the bond because the costs of repairs would exceed the bond and power credit.
Patterns observed in similar cases in this collection — every case is unique.
❓ Frequently asked questions
What did this decision decide?
The Tenancy Tribunal granted the landlord possession of the rented premises and ordered the bond to be paid to the landlord.
What was the dispute about?
The dispute was about whether the landlord was entitled to possession of the premises and the bond due to the tenant's breach of the tenancy agreement.
How did the court decide, and why?
The court decided in favour of the landlord, granting possession of the premises and ordering the bond to be paid to the landlord, because the tenant had breached the tenancy agreement and the landlord had given a lawful 90-day notice.
Which laws or rules were applied?
The Residential Tenancies Act 1986, sections 54 and 64, were applied.
What was the argument that mattered most?
The argument that mattered most was that the tenant had breached the tenancy agreement and the landlord had given a lawful 90-day notice.
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, if a tenant breaches the tenancy agreement and the landlord gives a lawful notice, the landlord may be entitled to possession of the premises and the bond.
What evidence or documents mattered?
The evidence included the written and oral submissions detailing the breach of tenancy and the lawful notice given by the landlord.