What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4601349 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, suppression of the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4601349?

Compensation: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4601349?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4601349?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9438975-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4601349 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, suppression of the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4601349?

Compensation: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4601349?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4601349?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9438975-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4601349 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4601349 — net $2,520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$2,000.00	Compensation
Compensation	$500.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,520.44

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4601349 — net $2,520.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$2,000.00	Compensation
Compensation	$500.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,520.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,520.44

Order

By consent, suppression of the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $2,520.44 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants seek compensation of $12,482.14 (75% of rent paid) for maintenance issues at the premises and breach of quiet enjoyment.
The tenants are required to establish the claims to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
The parties should be aware that this decision does not necessarily recite every issue raised and the arguments for and against it but is intended to be a summary of the key issues requiring determination as set out at the start of the hearing.
This was a fixed term tenancy which commenced on 4 November 2022 and was due to run until 3 November 2023. However, the parties agreed to end the fixed term early so the tenancy ended on 12 June 2023. Did the landlord fail to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair?
[The tenant/s] claim that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Under section 45, a landlord must [of relevance here] provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair; comply with the healthy homes standards; and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.
The landlord does not dispute that there were maintenance issues from the start of the tenancy; although they say not to the extent as claimed by the tenants. The outside deck and stairs, external cladding and external security light were all repaired/replaced during the tenancy. The tenants accept that the landlord fixed the external steps and deck within a reasonable time of the start of the tenancy.
I find that the landlord has breached their maintenance obligations in regard to the following: -Deck was rotten in places and although repairs were made, both tenants went through the boards at different times during the tenancy. -Kitchen window was rotten, and the tenants were wary about opening it due to its dilapidated state. -Unfinished paintwork upstairs, and the tenant re-attached a door themselves. -The wood around the front door and windows is flaking, mouldy and rotten. I accept the evidence of the tenants that it was noticeably draughty, and they had to put towels down in bad weather to keep out rain. -Some minor mould and flaky paint in the bathroom. There is also a noticeable gap in the wall beside the shower panel where the wood is mouldy and rotten. -Flaking and bubbly paintwork on upstairs windowsill. -2 upstairs windows were taped closed and could not be opened. -Holes in cupboard ceiling which has allowed droppings to come through.
The landlord also breached their responsibilities in respect of the oven, gas hob and outside gas bottles. The tenants could not use the oven due to a faulty thermostat for around 4 weeks and the gas igniter was not working for a similar period. There is no evidence that any gas checks were made before this tenancy. The Gas (Safety & Measurement) Regulations 2010 have specific provisions for landlords. A landlord must ensure any gas appliance or installation used in connection with a rental premises is safe and must not allow any person to use an unsafe gas appliance or installation. In addition, all gas fitting work is restricted and can only be carried out by tradespeople who are registered and licensed to do so under the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act 2006. The landlord has been upfront that the owner displaced the gas connection when he fitted a new thermostat and replaced the washer at the connection. A certified gasfitter was only arranged when the tenant expressed their justified unease at using the oven without a certified gasfitter checking it over. While the checks and repair were done the following day, this does not negate the gravity of the breach.
However, the tenants have not provided sufficient evidence to prove there was any leak underneath the premises, mould in the corners of windowsills, or that the exposed wood at the back door is of any consequence. The droppings under the window in the back bedroom appears to be an insect problem rather than any inherent defect in the fabric of the building. There is no evidence that there is any inherent defect with the internal staircase. The tenants say they noticed a smell throughout the tenancy, but they have not provided any evidence to prove there is anything at the premises that might be causing their ill health as alleged. The tenants say that gas was leaking inside the premises for around 5 months, but I find this unlikely given the admission by the owner that he dislodged the connection when attempting repairs which was then replaced the following day. There is no evidence to suggest there is any methamphetamine contamination at the premises as inferred by the tenants during the hearing.
The issue of appropriate compensation for the breaches and loss of amenity is not straightforward. Appellate courts have also emphasised that the assessment of the proper amount of compensation is a question of fact in each case; that it is not an exact science and that a commonsense approach is required. There are no general or absolute rules for calculating the amount of compensation, but the primary purpose of awarding compensation is to reflect the extent of the loss actually and reasonably suffered by the injured party.
After considering all the evidence, I award $2,000.00 as fair, reasonable and proportionate compensation which equates to 4 weeks rent. Did the landlord breach the tenants’ quiet enjoyment of the premises?
The tenants say the landlord breached their quiet enjoyment by: -The owner coming around every few weeks and sometimes 3 days in a row to attend to repairs/renovations. The tenants do not dispute they consented to this, but they feel as though they had no choice but to agree. -Entering their son’s room during an inspection when they asked the landlord not to; and -By phoning them on a number of occasions when they were outside New Zealand and requesting a date to end the fixed term tenancy.
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 find that the owner overstepped and breached the tenants’ quiet enjoyment by being at the premises on an ad hoc basis throughout this tenancy. Although the repairs/renovations appear to have been necessary, they could have been done on a much reduced or condensed timeframe so that the tenants did not have to endure unreasonable interruptions. I award $500.00 for the breach which is equivalent to 1 weeks’ rent.
The tenants have not provided sufficient evidence to prove that the landlord entered their son’s room when they specifically asked him not to. The landlord says he knocked first, called out, and put his head through the door before the tenants asked him not to go in. Another property manager who was in attendance on that day has provided a statement to that effect. In a situation such as this where each of the parties gives subjective evidence that directly opposes the others, in order to reach the required standard of proof they will need to provide some kind of objective evidence that supports their position. This part of the claim is therefore not proven.
I do not find any breach by the landlord in phoning the tenants to ask for an end date for the fixed term. This was to the benefit of both parties so that the premises could be advertised, re-let, and the tenants could move on. Filing fee
Because the tenants have partly succeeded with their claims, the landlord must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4601349 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4601349 — Tenancy dispute

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