How much money was awarded in case 4597076?

Compensation: stress and inconvenien…: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: unlawful entry, breach…: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4597076?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4597076?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9510519-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4597076?

Compensation: stress and inconvenien…: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: unlawful entry, breach…: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4597076?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4597076?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9510519-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3H, 6 Burgoyne Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4597076 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4597076 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4597076 — net $420.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: unlawful entry, breach of privacy on 12 December 2022	$350.00	unlawful entry, breach of privacy on 12 December 2022
Compensation: stress and inconvenience in disregarding the tenant's rights to have an advocate speak on her behalf	$50.00	stress and inconvenience in disregarding the tenant's rights to have an advocate speak on her behalf
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$420.44
Bond	$1,600.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$420.44

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.

Just Prestige Properties Limited as agent for Sridhar Rao Chilakalapally must pay [The tenant/s] $420.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.

A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord’s property manager entered the premises on 12 December 2022 without the tenant’s consent or prior knowledge. While the initial notice of inspection stipulated 12 December 2022 as the inspection date, it was later changed to 13 December 2022 by mutual consent between the tenant and the landlord. Unbeknown to the tenant, the landlord came onto the premises on 12 December anyway and the tenant only found out about this in subsequent communication between the parties.

A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I consider an award of compensation of $350.00 appropriate having regard to the circumstances of the landlord’s breach of privacy in that instance. The tenant was not home at the time and her quiet enjoyment was technically not breached but her privacy was.

On the last date of the tenancy on 26 May 2023, the landlord’s agent ignored the tenant’s request to have an advocate speak to the landlord on her behalf. A tenant has a right to have a third party speak on her behalf and it was not for the landlord to refuse to do so without proper grounds. The agent concerned did not testify directly before the Tribunal on her version of events; I am only left with the tenant’s and her advocate’s recollection and evidence of the chaos that ensued during the 26 May 2023 exit inspection. I consider it appropriate that the tenant is compensated for the stress and inconvenience suffered by her on that day.

Only the amounts ordered are proved.

I decline the tenant’s claim for reimbursement of the costs to install kitchen cupboards at the start of the tenancy. The tenant’s request to install the cabinets were specifically made at her own costs. The landlord’s subsequent offer to bear the costs was on the basis that the tenant would continue renting the premises for at least 6 months after 26 May 2023; the tenant did not take up on the landlord’s offer.

Consequently, there was no enforceable agreement between the parties for the tenant to be reimbursed with the cabinetry costs. That said, the tenant is entitled to now remove the cabinetry, provided that the area is reinstated to its original condition. The prospective liability that the landlord may have towards the current tenants at the premises (after the removal of the kitchen cabinetry) is not a matter that is before the Tribunal presently, nor an issue that the Tribunal can address.

The tenant’s claim for reimbursement of half of the professional cleaning costs that the tenant has paid is also unsuccessful. The tenant is obliged to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy. The fact that her own professional cleaners have undertaken cleaning over and above the required standard does not mean that the landlord should now reimburse her half of the cleaning costs.

The landlord withdraws its claim for rent arrears. There being no other counterclaim by the landlord, the bond must be refunded to the tenant in full.

The tenant is entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee as she is partly successful on her claims as set out above.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4597076 — net $420.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: unlawful entry, breach of privacy on 12 December 2022	$350.00	unlawful entry, breach of privacy on 12 December 2022
Compensation: stress and inconvenience in disregarding the tenant's rights to have an advocate speak on her behalf	$50.00	stress and inconvenience in disregarding the tenant's rights to have an advocate speak on her behalf
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$420.44
Bond	$1,600.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$420.44

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Just Prestige Properties Limited as agent for Sridhar Rao Chilakalapally must pay [The tenant/s] $420.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,600.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord’s property manager entered the premises on 12 December 2022 without the tenant’s consent or prior knowledge. While the initial notice of inspection stipulated 12 December 2022 as the inspection date, it was later changed to 13 December 2022 by mutual consent between the tenant and the landlord. Unbeknown to the tenant, the landlord came onto the premises on 12 December anyway and the tenant only found out about this in subsequent communication between the parties.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I consider an award of compensation of $350.00 appropriate having regard to the circumstances of the landlord’s breach of privacy in that instance. The tenant was not home at the time and her quiet enjoyment was technically not breached but her privacy was.
On the last date of the tenancy on 26 May 2023, the landlord’s agent ignored the tenant’s request to have an advocate speak to the landlord on her behalf. A tenant has a right to have a third party speak on her behalf and it was not for the landlord to refuse to do so without proper grounds. The agent concerned did not testify directly before the Tribunal on her version of events; I am only left with the tenant’s and her advocate’s recollection and evidence of the chaos that ensued during the 26 May 2023 exit inspection. I consider it appropriate that the tenant is compensated for the stress and inconvenience suffered by her on that day.
Only the amounts ordered are proved.
I decline the tenant’s claim for reimbursement of the costs to install kitchen cupboards at the start of the tenancy. The tenant’s request to install the cabinets were specifically made at her own costs. The landlord’s subsequent offer to bear the costs was on the basis that the tenant would continue renting the premises for at least 6 months after 26 May 2023; the tenant did not take up on the landlord’s offer.
Consequently, there was no enforceable agreement between the parties for the tenant to be reimbursed with the cabinetry costs. That said, the tenant is entitled to now remove the cabinetry, provided that the area is reinstated to its original condition. The prospective liability that the landlord may have towards the current tenants at the premises (after the removal of the kitchen cabinetry) is not a matter that is before the Tribunal presently, nor an issue that the Tribunal can address.
The tenant’s claim for reimbursement of half of the professional cleaning costs that the tenant has paid is also unsuccessful. The tenant is obliged to leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy at the end of the tenancy. The fact that her own professional cleaners have undertaken cleaning over and above the required standard does not mean that the landlord should now reimburse her half of the cleaning costs.
The landlord withdraws its claim for rent arrears. There being no other counterclaim by the landlord, the bond must be refunded to the tenant in full.
The tenant is entitled to reimbursement of the filing fee as she is partly successful on her claims as set out above.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4597076 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 3H, 6 Burgoyne Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4597076 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat 3H, 6 Burgoyne Street, Grey Lynn, Auckland 1021,

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