What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4547609 about?

The tribunal order states: Rent Easy Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $770.44 immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 4547609?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4547609?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4547609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9668566-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4547609 about?

The tribunal order states: Rent Easy Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $770.44 immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 4547609?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4547609?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4547609?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9668566-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Room 5, Unit/Flat 3, 52 Upper Queen Street, Eden Terrace, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4547609 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4547609 — net $770.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$750.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$770.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$770.44

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant was assisted by a Thai interpreter. The Property Manager attended by telephone, but her agent attended in person.

The tenant applied for a work order in relation to a bathroom fan and pests. She made a claim relating to the Healthy Homes standards, for compensation and exemplary damages.

The tenant has moved from the tenancy and therefore a work order is no longer sought.

While the tenant referred to the Healthy Homes standards, her claim does not relate to the standards in relation to heating, insulation etc. There is no evidence relating to a breach of the Healthy Homes standards so that part of the tenant’s claim is dismissed.

The main issues for the tenant were the lack of cleanliness of the premises and the pests, in particular rats and bed bugs.

[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Under section 45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.

Breaching any of these obligations 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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. I find they have committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The photographs produced by the tenant show that the premises were considerably dirty. The tenant suffered from the trauma of living with rats, both dead and live. The tenant suffered physically from bed bug bites for which she sought medical attention.

At the hearing there was a witness for the tenant who was a cleaner employed by the landlord after the tenant had complained of issues with cleanliness at the premises. The witness said that the kitchen was filthy, and he spent 8 and a half hours cleaning it. He said it was rat infested and the had to dispose of all the food and items in the fridge. He said the oven was shocking.

The witness said that he lifted a sack of rice, and a rat ran out from underneath. In the bedroom he found a used condom and the mattress was full of bed bugs.

The cleaner said that he had cleaned for a while and had not seen anything as disgusting as this.

From the evidence produced it is likely that the unclean state of the premises existed at the beginning of the tenancy. Underneath the bed there was a pile of rubbish including a used COVID test. Under the kitchen sink there was rubbish and debris that appear to have been there for some time.

The landlord’s evidence is that steps were taken when the tenant complained of issues. For example, when the tenant advised of the bed bugs the landlord replaced the bed mattress the following day. When the tenant complained of the rats the landlord purchased rat traps and suggested that the window should be closed overnight as this was suspected to be how the rats accessed the premises.

While the landlord did act it was reactive to the tenant’s complaints. Instead, the premises should have been cleaned before the tenant moved in so that she did not need to complain about the conditions. The landlord’s evidence was that the premises were deep cleaned annually. This is unlikely to be sufficient and instead there should be cleaning between tenancies to ensure that the landlord is complying with section 45(1)(a).

As mentioned above the state of the premises has had an impact on the tenant physically and emotionally. I consider that she is entitled to compensation for the conditions that she lived in due to the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness.

I have awarded the tenant $750.00 being 3 weeks rent which I consider is reasonable in the circumstances.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4547609 — net $770.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$750.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$770.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$770.44

Order

Rent Easy Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $770.44 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant was assisted by a Thai interpreter. The Property Manager attended by telephone, but her agent attended in person.
The tenant applied for a work order in relation to a bathroom fan and pests. She made a claim relating to the Healthy Homes standards, for compensation and exemplary damages.
The tenant has moved from the tenancy and therefore a work order is no longer sought.
While the tenant referred to the Healthy Homes standards, her claim does not relate to the standards in relation to heating, insulation etc. There is no evidence relating to a breach of the Healthy Homes standards so that part of the tenant’s claim is dismissed.
The main issues for the tenant were the lack of cleanliness of the premises and the pests, in particular rats and bed bugs.
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Under section 45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
Breaching any of these obligations 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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. I find they have committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The photographs produced by the tenant show that the premises were considerably dirty. The tenant suffered from the trauma of living with rats, both dead and live. The tenant suffered physically from bed bug bites for which she sought medical attention.
At the hearing there was a witness for the tenant who was a cleaner employed by the landlord after the tenant had complained of issues with cleanliness at the premises. The witness said that the kitchen was filthy, and he spent 8 and a half hours cleaning it. He said it was rat infested and the had to dispose of all the food and items in the fridge. He said the oven was shocking.
The witness said that he lifted a sack of rice, and a rat ran out from underneath. In the bedroom he found a used condom and the mattress was full of bed bugs.
The cleaner said that he had cleaned for a while and had not seen anything as disgusting as this.
From the evidence produced it is likely that the unclean state of the premises existed at the beginning of the tenancy. Underneath the bed there was a pile of rubbish including a used COVID test. Under the kitchen sink there was rubbish and debris that appear to have been there for some time.
The landlord’s evidence is that steps were taken when the tenant complained of issues. For example, when the tenant advised of the bed bugs the landlord replaced the bed mattress the following day. When the tenant complained of the rats the landlord purchased rat traps and suggested that the window should be closed overnight as this was suspected to be how the rats accessed the premises.
While the landlord did act it was reactive to the tenant’s complaints. Instead, the premises should have been cleaned before the tenant moved in so that she did not need to complain about the conditions. The landlord’s evidence was that the premises were deep cleaned annually. This is unlikely to be sufficient and instead there should be cleaning between tenancies to ensure that the landlord is complying with section 45(1)(a).
As mentioned above the state of the premises has had an impact on the tenant physically and emotionally. I consider that she is entitled to compensation for the conditions that she lived in due to the landlord’s failure to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness.
I have awarded the tenant $750.00 being 3 weeks rent which I consider is reasonable in the circumstances.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4547609 — Exemplary damages at Room 5, Unit/Flat 3, 52 Upper Queen Street, Eden Terrace,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4547609 — Exemplary damages at Room 5, Unit/Flat 3, 52 Upper Queen Street, Eden Terrace,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions