What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4575670 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 4575670?

Compensation: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4575670?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4575670?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9521866-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4575670 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 4575670?

Compensation: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4575670?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4575670?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9521866-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 11E, 30 Symonds Street, Grafton, Auckland 1010 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4575670 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4575670 — net $720.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation – requiring bond on other unit	$200.00	Compensation – requiring bond on other unit
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$720.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$720.44

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Auckland Rentals Limited T/A City Apartments Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $720.44 immediately. DescriptionTenant Exemplary damages$500.00 Compensation – requiring bond on other unit $200.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant$720.44
The tenant’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for compensation and exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond, failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition, and distress caused by the landlord seeking to have him pay the bond on another unit.
The premises is an apartment within a complex. The apartments generally have multiple bedrooms, but are rented on a per room basis. The landlord allocates the rooms to individual tenants, and the rent is for a bedroom and shared facilities.
The relationship between tenant and landlord began on 2 March 2023 when the tenant moved into unit 4C in the same building. On 5 May 2023 he moved into unit 19E.
Unit 4C was then tenanted so an associate of the tenant. That person did not pay a bond or rent as required and departed without notice. The landlord sought to have the tenant liable for the bond and/or finding a replacement tenant. The tenant resisted that, but suffered distress as a result. The landlord accepted that it was not the tenant’s responsibility a relatively short time later.
The bond paid by the tenant was lodged on 25 May 2023. Failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition
[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.
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.
When the tenant moved into the premises, the other bedroom in the apartment was already tenanted. The level of cleanliness expected must, in my view, reflect that situation.
Having seen the photographs provided, and heard the evidence, I am not satisfied that the tenant has proved the landlord did not provide the apartment in a reasonably clean and tidy state, and his application is dismissed. Failure to lodge bond.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord did not lodge the bond until 25 May 2023. I do not consider that the landlord’s explanation (that they were waiting for the tenant to move apartments) is a satisfactory reason for delaying the lodging of the bond. 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.
I consider that the failure to lodge the bond must have been an intentional act. The landlord accepted knowledge of the requirement to lodge the bond and an explanation for the failure.
The effect of that the breach is that the tenants’ have not had benefitted from the security of having the bond held in trust for them. A bond remains the tenant’s property for the duration of the tenancy, so the tenant is entitled to have that interest protected.
I further consider that there is a public interest in ensuring that tenant’s money is protected through use of the Bond Centre for the duration of tenancies. A failure to lodge the bond is a serious breach because it undermines the legislative arrangement for the management of residential tenancies.
Accordingly, I think an award of exemplary damages for the landlord’s failure on this occasion is appropriate, and I award $500.00 Requirement to pay further bond
The tenant alleges that the landlord’s requirement that he pay the bond for the replacement tenant in apartment 4C, or alternatively that he was responsible for finding a replacement tenant was a breach of the Act. The tenant claims this caused him significant stress.
The landlord accepts that this request was made of the tenant, and that it was not the tenant’s responsibility to either pay that bond or find a replacement tenant. The landlord’s position is that any stress was shortlived, as when the correct position was confirmed the tenant was advised of that. The landlord says that was around 3 days later.
The change in tenancy address from apartment 4C to apartment 19E was an agreed variation. The rent was adjusted at the same time. From the point that the tenant moved to apartment 19E, his responsibility for the rent and bond payments for apartment 4C ended. The landlord’s demand that he pay the additional bond or that he accept responsibility for finding a replacement tenant was inappropriate.
That said, I do accept the landlord’s evidence that the position was corrected in a relatively short time, and that from 18 May 2023 the tenant was not subject to this stress.
That said, I consider that some compensation for this demand and the associated anxiety is appropriate. There was never an obligation on the tenant to make this payment or to find a new tenant, and I accept he was distressed by the demand. I award $200.00 compensation pursuant to section 77(2)(n) of the Act. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4575670 — net $720.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation – requiring bond on other unit	$200.00	Compensation – requiring bond on other unit
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$720.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$720.44

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Auckland Rentals Limited T/A City Apartments Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $720.44 immediately. DescriptionTenant Exemplary damages$500.00 Compensation – requiring bond on other unit $200.00 Filing fee reimbursement$20.44 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant$720.44
The tenant’s other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for compensation and exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond, failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition, and distress caused by the landlord seeking to have him pay the bond on another unit.
The premises is an apartment within a complex. The apartments generally have multiple bedrooms, but are rented on a per room basis. The landlord allocates the rooms to individual tenants, and the rent is for a bedroom and shared facilities.
The relationship between tenant and landlord began on 2 March 2023 when the tenant moved into unit 4C in the same building. On 5 May 2023 he moved into unit 19E.
Unit 4C was then tenanted so an associate of the tenant. That person did not pay a bond or rent as required and departed without notice. The landlord sought to have the tenant liable for the bond and/or finding a replacement tenant. The tenant resisted that, but suffered distress as a result. The landlord accepted that it was not the tenant’s responsibility a relatively short time later.
The bond paid by the tenant was lodged on 25 May 2023. Failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition
[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.
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.
When the tenant moved into the premises, the other bedroom in the apartment was already tenanted. The level of cleanliness expected must, in my view, reflect that situation.
Having seen the photographs provided, and heard the evidence, I am not satisfied that the tenant has proved the landlord did not provide the apartment in a reasonably clean and tidy state, and his application is dismissed. Failure to lodge bond.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord did not lodge the bond until 25 May 2023. I do not consider that the landlord’s explanation (that they were waiting for the tenant to move apartments) is a satisfactory reason for delaying the lodging of the bond. 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.
I consider that the failure to lodge the bond must have been an intentional act. The landlord accepted knowledge of the requirement to lodge the bond and an explanation for the failure.
The effect of that the breach is that the tenants’ have not had benefitted from the security of having the bond held in trust for them. A bond remains the tenant’s property for the duration of the tenancy, so the tenant is entitled to have that interest protected.
I further consider that there is a public interest in ensuring that tenant’s money is protected through use of the Bond Centre for the duration of tenancies. A failure to lodge the bond is a serious breach because it undermines the legislative arrangement for the management of residential tenancies.
Accordingly, I think an award of exemplary damages for the landlord’s failure on this occasion is appropriate, and I award $500.00 Requirement to pay further bond
The tenant alleges that the landlord’s requirement that he pay the bond for the replacement tenant in apartment 4C, or alternatively that he was responsible for finding a replacement tenant was a breach of the Act. The tenant claims this caused him significant stress.
The landlord accepts that this request was made of the tenant, and that it was not the tenant’s responsibility to either pay that bond or find a replacement tenant. The landlord’s position is that any stress was shortlived, as when the correct position was confirmed the tenant was advised of that. The landlord says that was around 3 days later.
The change in tenancy address from apartment 4C to apartment 19E was an agreed variation. The rent was adjusted at the same time. From the point that the tenant moved to apartment 19E, his responsibility for the rent and bond payments for apartment 4C ended. The landlord’s demand that he pay the additional bond or that he accept responsibility for finding a replacement tenant was inappropriate.
That said, I do accept the landlord’s evidence that the position was corrected in a relatively short time, and that from 18 May 2023 the tenant was not subject to this stress.
That said, I consider that some compensation for this demand and the associated anxiety is appropriate. There was never an obligation on the tenant to make this payment or to find a new tenant, and I accept he was distressed by the demand. I award $200.00 compensation pursuant to section 77(2)(n) of the Act. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4575670 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 11E, 30 Symonds Street, Grafton, Auckland 1010

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4575670 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 11E, 30 Symonds Street, Grafton, Auckland 1010

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions