What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4597649 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 4597649?

Property Damage: $2,802.86 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4597649?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4597649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9346101-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4597649 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 4597649?

Property Damage: $2,802.86 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4597649?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4597649?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9346101-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

356 Razorback Road, Pokeno, RD 2, Pokeno 2472 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4597649 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4597649 — net $2,823.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Section 45(1A	$2,802.86	Section 45(1A
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,823.30
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,823.30

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4597649 — net $2,823.30 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Section 45(1A	$2,802.86	Section 45(1A
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,823.30
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,823.30

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Willa Zhao For Ihome Property Management Limited Acting Agent For Ruisong Jing must pay [The tenant/s] $2,823.30 immediately.
By consent, the landlord must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Wednesday 23 August 2023: a. Provide 20,000 litres of water for the water tank.
The tenant’s claim in respect of a breach of the Healthy Homes standards is dismissed.
The tenant’s claim in respect of retaliatory notice is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy began on 24 September 2022 and is for a fixed term due to end on 23 September 2023.
On 26 June 2023 the landlord issued the tenant with notice to terminate the tenancy on the basis that the owner is putting the property on the market within 90 days after the termination date. The last day of the tenancy will be 24 September 2023. Tenant’s application
The tenant has applied for a work order, for a claim relating to the Healthy Homes standards, for compensation and for exemplary damages. Work order
In relation to the work order the tenant advised at the hearing that he did not want any work carried out between the date of hearing and the last day of the tenancy if the tenancy is to terminate in accordance with the notice referred to above.
There was one issue that the parties agreed upon and that was that the landlord would provide a delivery of 20,000 litres of water for the water tank as soon as possible. That work order is made by consent. Healthy Homes standards
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (“HHS”).
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. All private rentals must comply within 90 days of any new or renewed tenancy between 1 July 2021 and 27 August 2022. For any new or renewed tenancy between 28 August 2023 and 2 March 2025 the rental must comply within 120 days.
As this tenancy commenced on 24 September 2023 the compliance date for this tenancy is 22 January 2023.
The Healthy Homes standards concern heating, insulation, ventilation, draught stopping, moisture ingress and drainage. The standards particularly relevant for this tenancy are heating and ventilation.
At the hearing the landlord produced a Healthy Homes Standards Report dated 6 March 2021. That report states that these premises comply with all the standards.
I am satisfied that this tenancy complies with the Healthy Homes standards. The tenant’s claim in relation to a breach of the Healthy Homes standards is dismissed. Failure to maintain
[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 and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair and provide an adequate means for the collection and storage of water if there is no reticulated supply.
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 has failed to maintain parts of the premises to a reasonable state and has not provided adequate means for the collection and storage of water. 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.
In relation to the failure to maintain the tenant has referred to issues including a mould problem, water penetration, an overflowing septic tank, overflowing gutters, faulty electrics and broken fencing.
The landlord acted on some of these issues but usually the tenant lived with the maintenance issues for some time before they were repaired. For example, the septic tank was cleaned on 15 May 2023, but the tenant says that it had not been cleaned for years. The air conditioning unit was apparently not working at the beginning of the tenancy and was not addressed until a new unit was installed in June 2023.
One issue which I consider the landlord should have acted sooner was when there had been a water leak. The leak caused the surrounding carpet to be mouldy and there were holes in the walls to carry out repairs. The carpet was never removed or replaced, and the walls were not repaired. The landlord said that the carpet was not replaced because her contractor said that the tenant did not want it replaced because no one uses that bedroom. The landlord says she only learnt the carpet had not been replaced when she was served with the application filed by the tenant.
It is not for the tenant to choose whether maintenance should be carried out or not. The carpet should have been replaced and the walls repaired. At the date of hearing this had not occurred.
Another significant issue is the water supply. There are two tanks on the property. The tenant thinks that the pipes taking the water from the roof to the tanks are too narrow. The water tank was cleaned in April 2023. The landlord says that the issue of the water quality was not raised by the tenant until April 2023. However, the landlord did not have any evidence in relation to when the water tank was cleaned prior to this tenancy. This is a significant maintenance issue.
The tenant has been affected by the landlord’s failure to maintain and in relation to the water supply. While the landlord has responded to maintenance issues the response has often involved delay and only responded to issues raised. There are some issues that should be addressed before they become a problem, such as cleaning the water tank and regularly emptying the septic tank. It is important for landlords to ensure that the properties that they rent out are maintained. I have calculated the award of exemplary damages at $60.00 per week for the 46 weeks and 5 days from the beginning of the tenancy until the date of hearing. The award amounts to $2,802.36. Asbestos
One of the issues that the tenant raised at the hearing was the presence of asbestos. The tenant said that he had asked the landlord about the possibility of asbestos being present at the beginning of the tenancy. He says that he was told there was no asbestos.
The tenant organised for testing to be carried out and the site visit took place on 28 July 2023. This was almost one year after the tenancy commenced. The tenant says that on 8 August 2023 he received the test results which were dated 2 August 2023. He submitted this evidence to the Tribunal on 10 August 2023. The tenant did not advise the landlord that testing was being carried out and did not provide a copy of the report or any information relating to the asbestos to the landlord. The landlord only learnt of this issue during the hearing.
The asbestos report records that of the two samples tested one has shown to contain asbestos contaminated materials. This sample was taken from the upstairs ceiling.
The report recommended that the residents/tenants evacuate the house immediately and that a full assessment be completed. After receipt of this report the tenant did not evacuate the home or advise the landlord of the test results.
The landlord was entitled to be advised of the test results and take necessary action. The tenant had expected the Tribunal to order the landlord to provide alternate onsite accommodation for the tenant. Such an order was premature as the landlord needed an opportunity to consider what options were necessary presumably after consulting their insurer. For these reasons this issue was not part of this order. Notice to terminate
The landlord gave the tenant notice to end the tenancy as she wished to put the premises on the market for sale. The tenant considers that the notice may be retaliatory.
The landlord produced an agreement with a Real Estate agency to list the premises for sale. I am satisfied that the landlord is genuine in relation to selling the premises as she is entitled to do. The notice complies with the Act.
I find that the notice to end the tenancy is not retaliatory. The tenant’s claim in relation to the notice being retaliatory is dismissed.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason an order is made suppressing the tenant’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4597649 — Exemplary damages at 356 Razorback Road, Pokeno, RD 2, Pokeno 2472

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4597649 — Exemplary damages at 356 Razorback Road, Pokeno, RD 2, Pokeno 2472

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