While he has since turned to real estate and works as an agent for Ray White, he has continued working as a freelance broadcaster.<\/p>\n
In June 2026, Barfoot & Thompson, acting for landlord Kevin Putt, filed a claim with the Tenancy Tribunal seeking termination of the tenancy for rent arrears, water and wastewater charges, and a refund of the bond.<\/p>\n
Just over a week later, the landlord separately issued a 90-day no-cause termination notice ending the tenancy on September 20, 2026.<\/p>\n
The notice allowed a landlord to end a periodic residential tenancy without providing a specific reason.<\/p>\n
According to the tribunal\u2019s recent decision, the arrears came amid significant financial pressure for the family due to illness and redundancy.<\/p>\n
However, the arrears were subsequently cleared.<\/p>\n
Speaking with Open Justice, McKay acknowledged the landlord had a right to use the 90-day termination notice.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s just the way it is,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
The decision stated that in early July, the tribunal held a hearing to consider the landlord\u2019s claim.<\/p>\n
It stated that \u201cthe tenant\u201d appeared but the landlord did not.<\/p>\n
The tribunal adjourned the matter.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, the McKays filed a claim with the tribunal seeking a deferment of the no-cause termination date.<\/p>\n
Both claims were heard on September 17, when the landlord told the tribunal the rent arrears had been paid.<\/p>\n
Despite this, the landlord still advanced the application for termination to coincide with the expiry of the 90-day no-cause notice.<\/p>\n
Under the Residential Tenancies Act, where rent is at least 21 days in arrears on the date the application was filed, the tribunal must make a termination order. <\/p>\n
Hamish McKay is now a real estate agent for Ray White in Auckland. Photo \/ Herald Now<\/p>\n
However, the tribunal may refuse to make an order if satisfied the breach has been remedied, the landlord has been compensated for any resulting loss, and the tenant is unlikely to commit another breach of that kind.<\/p>\n
Tribunal adjudicator Glenn Barnett said in the decision that, apart from the now-paid rent arrears, there was no other evidence of loss arising from the breach.<\/p>\n
He said it was also unlikely, if not impossible, that the McKays would find themselves in this position again.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe 90-day no-cause termination notice is valid, and the tenancy will end on 20 September 2026.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe tenant will therefore run out of time to find themselves in a position where they are again at least 21 days in arrears.\u201d<\/p>\n
Barnett declined to terminate the tenancy for rent arrears, with the valid no-cause termination notice due to end the tenancy days later.<\/p>\n
Turning to the McKays\u2019 application for a deferment of the no-cause termination date, Barnett noted they had hoped to have an \u201copen discussion\u201d with the landlord about the arrears and the termination notice at the earlier hearing and were frustrated the landlord failed to appear.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe tenant believed that this was unfair,\u201d the decision stated.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe tenant also stated that the rental market was extremely difficult and provided two recent examples of being turned down. They expressed concern that a reference from the landlord would not be favourable.\u201d<\/p>\n
The landlord said that during the tenancy, they had successfully applied for termination due to rent arrears, but had then been persuaded not to enforce the order, only for the rent to fall into arrears again.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe landlord was reluctant to travel this path again.\u201d<\/p>\n
The landlord disagreed that the rental market was as bad as the McKays stated, submitting there were several similar properties for rent in the area.<\/p>\n
They also said they had not been approached for a reference, but if asked, would provide an \u201chonest one\u201d.<\/p>\n
The tribunal found the McKays were unable to point to any provision of the act that allowed it to extend the termination date of a valid 90-day no-cause notice, dismissing the claim for a deferment.<\/p>\n
However, the landlord offered to extend the tenancy by one week, until September 27, 2026, which the family accepted.<\/p>\n
The tribunal did not deal with the landlord\u2019s application for water and wastewater charges.<\/p>\n
According to the decision, if the issue could not be resolved, the landlord could make another application to the tribunal.<\/p>\n
Brianna McIlraith is a Queenstown-based reporter for Open Justice covering courts in the lower South Island. She has been a journalist since 2018 and has had a strong interest in business and financial journalism.<\/p>\n