What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4499232 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4499232?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4499232?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4499232?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9397050-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4499232 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4499232?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4499232?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4499232?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9397050-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4499232 — Mould & damp

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names and identifying details of both parties.
The landlord must obtain a drainage specialist’s report that addresses the water pooling around the house and act on the specialist’s recommendation to address the issue.
The drainage specialist must be engaged within 2 weeks of this order for the report.
Order 2 is subject to the Body Corporate’s decision.
Tenant’s all other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 19 th July 2023.
The tenant sought compensation for: a. The premises being uninhabitable due to infestation of white tail spider; b. The landlord failing to maintain the blinds and ensuring privacy for the tenant; c. The premises having unreasonable window gaps; and d. Mould and moisture issues.
The tenant also raised issues with: a. Termination notice being retaliatory; and b. Drainage issues causing water pooling near the house.
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
I deal with each issue in turn. White tail spider infestation
The tenant claimed that the premises was uninhabitable due to infestation of white tail spider. The tenant said that there was an active infestation from 2 nd October 2022 to 6 th December 2022.
The tenant claimed that the premises had been vacant for more than 3 weeks prior to her moving in and that the premises was left in the dark during that time.
The tenant had taken photos of individual spiders and made a tally of the number of spiders sighted each day. There were 7 days where the tenant saw 1 spider, 3 days where there were 3, 1 day with 6 and 1 day with 12.
The tenant stressed that her child had been bitten by a spider and that pest control had to be called three times.
The tenant presented a letter from the first pest control professional to prove that there was a white tail spider infestation. The description noted in the invoice dated 13 th October 2022 was “treated premises for white tailed spiders, infestation was high.”
The pest control professional also had written a report saying that “the unit had a high infestation of white tailed spiders which caused a problem for the child who had a reaction to a bite, so the tenants didn’t feel safe living in the apartment. In my opinion, the unit was not habitable at that time.”
The landlord refuted the claims of there being a white tail spider infestation and provided letters from pest control professionals including the very pest control professional the tenant sought to rely on. The pest control professional’s subsequent report said that there was no infestation and he refused to come back to do another treatment despite the insistence from the tenant. That professional went as far as refunding the payment for the first pest control treatment.
The subsequent report stated: In regards to the above property, I carried out a spray treatment on the inside and outside of the unit for the control of white tailed spiders. In my opinion, the white tailed spider problem was not high and would clear after four weeks of treatment and stay active for four months. The tenant was not happy with the treatment and not willing to give it time to control the problem and wanted a second treatment. After speaking with the tenant over the telephone, I did not think she would be satisfied even if we did a second treatment. I then suggested to [the property manager] to contact another pest control company in the hope that would satisfy the tenant. The invoice originally charged for this treatment was reimbursed.
Furthermore, the landlord had evidence to prove that hte premises was not vacant and left in the dark for 3 weeks prior to the tenant moving in.
With the conflicting opinions by the professionals and the lack of photos showing any actual infestation, I am not satisfied that the tenant has proven that there was an infestation of white tail spiders.
The fact that there were three pest control professionals engaged before the tenant felt that the spiders were under control does not prove that there was an infestation. It proves that the landlord has attended to the tenant’s concerns diligently.
I do not find this claim proven. Failing to maintain the blinds and ensuring privacy for the tenant
The tenant claimed that the landlord has failed to provide or maintain the blinds in a reasonable state of repair.
The tenant claimed that the blinds in the smaller bedroom was broken from the beginning of the tenancy and that the blinds in the master bedroom was not working on one corner.
From the evidence presented, there was no dispute that the blinds in the smaller bedroom was not functioning from the beginning of the tenancy. The landlord had curtains provided in addition from the beginning.
From the photos provided, it seemed that the blinds were mostly functioning but the design of the blinds themselves meant that they were prone to malfunctioing.
In relation to the master bedroom blinds, the owner gave permission for the property managers to get the blinds replaced but for some reason it was not actioned by the property managers.
More importantly, the landlord offered the tenant curtains immediately to provide privacy for the master bedroom. However, the tenant insisted for the blinds to be repaired.
Under section 49 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), where a party breaches any of the provisions of the RTA, the other party must take all reasonable steps to limit the damage or loss arising from that breach.
This means that tenant cannot refuse to have curtains installed and seek a rent reduction of $100.00 per week on the basis that the blinds were not offering any privacy at night.
It was unreasonable for the tenant to refuse the curtains and then make a claim to the Tribunal.
I dismiss this claim. The premises having unreasonable gaps
[The tenant/s] claimed that there were large gaps in the lounge window. The tenant complained that the gaps were not up to Healthy Homes Standards (“HHS”), and was concerned about the spiders entering through the gaps as a result.
Under section 45, a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. Breaching any of this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A RTA.
The landlord denied that there were unreasonably large gaps in the lounge window and relied on the fact that no lounge window gaps were identified in the HHS report.
To address the tenant’s concerns in any case, the landlord sent three tradesmen to have the gaps sealed as directed by the tenant.
Having seen the photos, the HHS report, inspection reports and the email correspondences, I am not satisfied that there were unreasonably large gaps in the lounge window.
I find that the landlord had provided and maintained the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
This claim is not proven. Mould and moisture issues
The tenant claimed that there were issues with mould and moisture issue at the premises. She said that despite the building inspection report finding no issues, that the problem did exist and that it had not been addressed. The tenant said that her furniture had been affected by mould.
The landlord said that there was no evidence of any mould or moisture issues with the premises and relied on the building inspection reports.
Having seen the inspection photos and reports as well as photos provided by the tenant, I am not satisfied that the tenant has proven that the premises itself had mould and moisture issues.
I accept that with single glazed window panes and vent-less aluminium frames, condensation can form on the window panes. However, that does not mean that the premises had mould and moisture issues.
All the inspection reports stated that the premises did not have mould or moisture issues.
Mould is the joint responsibility of both the landlord and the tenant. The landlord needs to ensure that the premises itself is not suffering from dampness. The tenant needs to ensure that mould is controlled and cleaned off as part of the tenant’s ongoing duty to keep the premises reasonably clean.
This claim is not proven. Termination notice being retaliatory
On 29 th May 2023, the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 2 nd October 2023 as per the original fixed-term tenancy agreement. Although the tenant had seemingly accepted this termination notice and the reason for it, the tenant claimed that the notice was retaliatory at the hearing.
For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) RTA.
Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
The landlord had explained, with evidence, that the owner was going to return from London to live in New Zealand again.
Having seen the emails with supporting documents, I am satisfied that the termination notice given was not retaliatory.
Therefore, I dismiss this claim. Drainage issues causing water pooling near the house
The tenant claimed that there was an issue with drainage that was causing water to pool by the house when it rained. The tenant provided photos of the pooling from as recent as June 2023.
The HHS did not note any drainage issues with the premises itself.
Despite this, the landlord made enquiries with the Body Corporate to see if the issue could be investigated but the Body Corporate did not respond swiftly.
The landlord suggested that the unusually heavy rainfall from early 2023 had saturated the ground making the water to pool around the house.
Although that may be the case, the water pooling should be investigated to see whether that there may be other issues causing it.
The landlord had shown willingness to engage in professionals to address any issues with the premises.
At the hearing the landlord said that they were willing to get a drainage professional to investigate the issue. The landlord must do this within 2 weeks of this order if it has not been done already.
If the drainage professional’s report recommends some remedial action, the landlord must undertake the required work. This is to happen only if the Body Corporate allows the landlord to do the work. Name suppression
Although the tenant had not been successful with the application, both parties sought name suppression and I grant the suppression accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4499232 — Mould & damp

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4499232 — Mould & damp

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions