How much money was awarded in case 4638276?

Compensation: Power: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4638276?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4638276?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9303919-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4638276?

Compensation: Power: $100.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4638276?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4638276?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9303919-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4638276 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4638276 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4638276 — net $120.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Power	$100.00	Power
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$120.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$120.44

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant and landlord’s name and identifying details.

The tenant’s claims for a work order for a roof leak, kitchen switch, carpet cleaning, windows and back door are dismissed.

The tenant’s claim in relation to vents is withdrawn.

By consent the landlord must fix the leak in the laundry by 8pm on Friday 18 August 2023.

The landlord must engage a heat pump specialist to investigate the operation of the heat pump and provide a written report to both the tenant and the landlord by 1 September 2023. The report is to set out what steps must be taken to ensure that the thermostat is fully operational and to ensure that the entire living room can be heated to 18 degrees to ensure compliance with HHS.

As an alternative to compliance with Order 5, the landlord must pay the tenant $500.00 immediately.

If the landlord fails to comply with either Order 5 or 6 above, then the tenant may obtain the heat pump specialists report and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to $500.00. These costs may be set off against rent payable.

The tenant may make a further application to the Tribunal if the landlord does not remedy any issue identified in the report relating to the operation of the heat pump so that it complies with HHS.

The landlord must repair or replace the glass panelled doors so there are no unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the door, which allow draughts to arise. This must be completed by 1 September 2023.

As an alternative to compliance with Order 9, the landlord must pay the tenant $200 immediately.

If the landlord fails to comply with either Order 9 or 10 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to $200. These costs may be set off against rent payable.

[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $120.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

The landlords’ property manager attended the hearing with a support person and the tenant also attended. The Tribunal must consider an application brought by the tenant against the landlord for work orders and compensation.

With any claim before the Tribunal, it is the applicant (the tenant in this case) who must establish their claim. The tenant must show to the Tribunal that what she is claiming is more likely than not, or in a mathematical context just over 50% likely to have occurred. If the applicant does not establish the claim, it will be dismissed. I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

For the sake of brevity, I have not referred to all the evidence presented by the parties; however, they can be assured that it has all been carefully considered.

WORK ORDER

The tenant claims that the landlord has not maintained the property in a number of respects. The tenant wants the problems fixed.

Under section 45(1)(a) - (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), the landlord has an obligation to provide and maintain certain standards and to comply with applicable requirements. Section 45 RTA requires a landlord to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair and also to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards.

Where the Tribunal finds the landlord has failed to comply with any of these obligations, it may make an order for the landlord to carry out the work. See section 78(1)(e) RTA.

If the work order is not being made by consent of both parties, the Tribunal must also make a monetary order as an alternative to compliance with the work order. This provision does not apply to any work order, or part of a work order, in relation to smoke alarms, insulation, a failure to comply with a standard of fitness under section 120C Health Act 1956, or a failure to comply with any health or safety legislative requirement. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) RTA.

A work order may also authorise the tenant to undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of doing the work, if the landlord should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be set off by the tenant against rent payable. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(b) RTA. Heat pump Facts

[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) RTA, which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019. In this decision I will refer to this legislation as “HHS”.

The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS heating standard. The tenant seeks a work order to remedy this. The tenant wants the landlord to replace the heat pump.

The tenant says that the heat pump is not working as it should. The tenancy began on 6 March 2023. She says that in June 2023 she set the heat pump to 16 degrees (air conditioning) but, using a heat monitoring device, she could see that it pumped out hot air at 32 degrees.

The tenant says that at the start of the tenancy she had the heat pump on all the time set at 26 degrees to keep the temperature constant, but in about mid- June she wanted to turn it down because she received a high electricity bill. She says she could not adjust the heat. The temperature was not showing on the remote.

She says that the location of the heat pump means that it does not heat the whole living room because it is an “L” shaped area. The tenant initially said the area that the heat pump was in the living room, but later in the hearing stated she regarded it was in more of a hallway area, saying it was not in an area where you could place furniture, like a table.

She says she is now using fan heaters. She says that she has measured the temperature in the room and the heat pump does not bring the living room up to 18 degrees. She also says that the heat pump is old and the fan outside goes 24/7.

The tenant provided evidence showing discussions between her and the property manager relating to her power bills in June 2023. At this point parties explored whether her increase in power might be due to a water leak or the need to clean the heat pump. On 14 June 2023 the tenant’s message refers to servicing the outside unit. On 1 July 2023 the tenant makes it clear to the landlord she considers there to be an issue with the heat pump, and on 5 July 2023 the landlord replies that they would definitely get someone to look at the heat pump.

The tenant says that at the start of July 2023 an electrician did come to the property. The tenant says he did not do very much – he opened the heat pump, looked at the filters and told her that the heat pump was in a bad position and that the heat pump kw capacity was too high for the room. She says the electrician said that the room required a 6kw heat pump but that the heat pump is a 8kw heat pump.

After the electrician had been, the tenant had no more discussions with the landlord about the heat pump.

The landlord does not accept that the heat pump is not compliant to HHS and says it is working. The landlord provided a copy of a healthy homes report. The healthy homes report sets out that the room requires a heat capacity of

81kw and the heat pump has a heat capacity of 6.3kw.

The landlord provided evidence in the form of a written statement from their electrician who investigated the heat pump after the tenant raised her concern. He attended the property on 6 July 2023. His report sets out his view that the location of the heat pump meant that the heat pump was heating a small area and sensing heat and shutting down. The report also says that guidelines say that running a heat pump over 24 degrees increases power consumption and lessens efficiency.

The landlord says that the electrician reported to them that he saw the heat pump going on 6 July 2023 and reported there were no issues with it working but that it was not in a great place.

The landlord had no evidence that the heat pump could heat the room to 18 degrees other than the general statement that the heat pump was working and in line with the heat capacity requirements in the HHS. The law

Compliance dates for HHS vary depending on the tenancy. All private rentals, that are new or renewed after 28 August 2022 must comply with HHS within 120 days, with all private rentals complying by 1 July 2025.

HHS provide that a main living room must have a qualifying heater(s) to meet minimum heating capacity. Regulation 8, HHS provides that the main living room of the premises must be heated by 1 or more qualifying heaters with a total heating capacity of at least the required heating capacity for the main living room (there are alternative pathways and provisions for geothermal heating but it was not suggested that they apply here). The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.

A qualifying heater is a heater installed as a fixture and is installed in the living room (or must supply heat direct to the living room). It must have a heat capacity of at least 1.5kw and if it is an electric heater or fixed heat pump it must have a thermostat and it must not be an unacceptable heater.

Landlords must meet the requirements set out in HHS subparts 2 to 5 and ensure that all installed or provided things are appropriate for the purpose for which they are installed or provided and ensure that all installed or provided things (i) are maintained in good working order; or (ii) if they cannot be maintained in good working order, are replaced within a reasonable time (see Regulation 6, HHS).

The required heating capacity for a living room in this situation is determined in accordance with Schedule 2, HHS. Schedule 2, HHS sets out a formula for the calculation of the required heat capacity.

An online heating assessment tool can also be used. The formula used means that tenants are to benefit from a living room which can be heated to and maintained at 18ºC on the coldest day of the year. Analysis

This tenancy should now comply with the HHS. 120 days from the start of the tenancy has passed.

The heat pump supplied is fixed and is not an unacceptable heater (as defined in Regulation 9(2), HHS). It was not suggested that any exclusion applies.

I find the heat pump is in the living room. It was not seriously suggested that the heat pump was not in the living area – rather it was explained that it was in an area of the living room that was not the main area due to the shape of the room.

In the absence of probative evidence, I cannot accept the tenant’s position that a heat pump which has a higher heating capacity than that required by the formula set out in the HHS impacts upon performance so as to mean that the heat pump does not meet HHS. The HHS are also minimum standards.

I make no finding in relation to the fan in the outside unit. There was insufficient evidence to support this claim. In any event, there is no evidence from a heat pump specialist to say whether or not this function should occur and this is not a finding I can make without such evidence. I also find that the tenant has not established that the heat pump is not working simply due to its age.

There was some conflicting evidence about the capacity of heat pump required for the room.

I accept the landlord’s evidence that this heat pump has a heat capacity of

3kw. The landlord has the best evidence of the heat pump’s heating capacity because it is in the healthy homes report.

The landlord’s evidence in relation to the required heat capacity for the living room was limited to the healthy homes report. This found that the required capacity is 4.81kw. However, the healthy homes report states that the calculation undertaken has not been done using the publicly available calculator and instead sets out its own calculation at appendix 1.

The healthy homes report appendix sets out how the calculation was done and I accept that this echoes the main formula set out in Schedule 2, HHS. However, this is not the whole formula that needs to be used. Schedule 2 sets out formula relation to transmission heat loss and ventilation heat loss: there is no detail set out in the healthy homes appendix that specifies how the transmission heat loss and ventilation heat loss was calculated before it was incorporated into the main formula. I therefore cannot be satisfied that the healthy homes report has correctly calculated the required heat capacity.

Further, it is common ground that the heat pump is installed in a place that is not ideal to heat the living room. The healthy homes report does not make any findings or consider efficiency. A heat pump needs to be installed in a way so that it can adequately heat the area it is intended to heat.

The landlord’s own expert report sets out that the heat pump heats up the small area it is located in, senses heat and then shuts down. This is consistent with the tenant’s evidence that the heat pump does not sufficiently heat up the entire room.

A heat pump must have a working thermostat to comply with HHS. Here the thermostat/sensor (and therefore the heat pump itself) is not working correctly due to the location of the heat pump causing the heat pump to shut down.

If a thermostat prevents the heat pump from working as intended then I find that the heat pump itself cannot be said to be installed or provided in a way which was appropriate for the purpose for which it was installed (which is to heat the whole room). This is a breach of regulation 6, HHS.

I therefore find that the tenant has established that it is more likely than not that the heat pump does not operate sufficiently to meet the HHS.

The landlord would have known that the location of the heat pump was causing an issue from at least 6 July 2023. It has taken no steps to investigate the position further since then.

I have made a work order that the landlord engage a heat pump specialist to investigate the operation of the heat pump and provide a written report to both the tenant and the landlord by 1 September 2023.

The report is to set out what steps must be taken to ensure that the thermostat is fully operational and to ensure that the entire living room can be heated to 18 degrees so as to ensure compliance with HHS. If the landlord does not do this I have made provision for the tenant to undertake this.

The tenant may make a further application to the Tribunal if the landlord does not remedy any issue identified in the report relating to the operation of the heat pump. Compensation

The tenant seeks compensation due to an increase in her power bills. She says that they have increased because the outside heat pump fan is always on. She also referred to having to use fan heaters.

I cannot make an award in relation to any increased use of power due to the outside fan. The tenant has not sufficiently established this as an issue and in any event there is insufficient evidence relating to the effect this would have on the tenant’s power bill.

However, I award the tenant compensation for additional power use from 6 July 2023 to the date of the hearing for the cost of using other forms of heating. The landlord would have known that the location of the heat pump was causing an issue from at least 6 July 2023. In making my award I take into account the fact that more power can be expected to be used in the cooler winter months.

I award the tenant $100.00 which I consider to be a reasonable sum for this period. Draught stopping standard

The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS draught stopping standard (s 45(1)(bb) RTA).

The draught stopping standard requires that residential premises be free from unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances. Windows not sealed

The tenant says that foam strips around windows have started to hang off. The tenant had no probative evidence of this. The tenant says she did not report this to the landlord prior to making the application. The landlord says that the windows have been checked last week and they did not need redoing.

On the basis of the evidence presented I find that the tenant has not established that there are unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise.

Therefore, I decline to make a work order in respect of this. Backdoor

The tenant says that the back door is draughty due to a gap at the bottom. The landlord says this was fixed last week. A plastic draught guard has been fitted. The tenant says it is still draughty but there is no probative evidence of the present condition of the door. The tenant has not raised the issue with the landlord.

On the basis of the evidence presented I find that the tenant has not established that there are there are unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise. Further, the issue has not been raised with the landlord since the repair.

Therefore, I decline to make a work order in respect of this. Glass panelled door

The tenant’s application refers to a door with wood rot. The tenant says that the door is draughty as it does not shut properly due to wood warping. She also says that a glass panel broke and that a contractor replaced it with some form of plastic which was screwed in. The tenant says this panel has a gap due to the warping of the wood. The tenant says that the landlord was going to replace the door but that has not been done.

The landlord admits that these doors are not great. The landlord wants to put in a ranch slider. Work was meant to have been done but finding a builder has not been easy. The landlord says that the tenant has not told them that the replacement glass panel is draughty.

The landlord’s healthy homes report sets out that the doors are not HHS compliant.

On the basis of the evidence presented, which includes the landlord’s own healthy homes report, I find that it is more likely than not that the doors are not HHS compliant.

The landlord is ordered to fix the doors so are there are no unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the door, which allow draughts to arise. Ventilation

The tenant’s application referred to vents, but she confirmed there was no claim in relation to those.

This claim was therefore withdrawn. Power switch in kitchen

The tenant says the landlord has not fixed a switch in the kitchen that is cracked. It was pointed out to her by an electrician who came to visit in relation to the oven.

She says she pointed it out to the property manager in one or two inspections – likely in May. The tenant says it is a hazard.

The landlord says that the electrician did mention it after the visit relating to the oven but that the electrician was not concerned about it and did not identify it as a hazard. The landlord did not recall anything being raised about it in an inspection.

In the absence of probative evidence to evidence the extent of the problem I decline to make a work order in relation to the switch. I cannot establish if the issue is cosmetic or otherwise, and the tenant has not sufficiently established that there has been a failure to maintain. Leak in plumbing

The tenant explained the position in relation to a leak in the laundry. The landlord explained how insurance had delayed remedying the issue.

The landlord agreed that the issue would be fixed. The landlord and tenant both agreed that the leak in the laundry would be fixed by Friday 18 August 2023 at 8pm.

I have therefore made a work order by consent in relation to the leak in the laundry. Roof

The tenant says there was a leak in the roof in her storage cupboard. A temporary fix was put in place. The tenant was unsure if there was an existing issue with a leak. There was no evidence before me of any present issue.

The landlord’s position is that the temporary fix is fine and the tenant has not reported another problem.

I find that the tenant has not established that there is an existing issue with the roof which requires fixing. She has not established that there has been a failure to maintain. Therefore, I decline to make a work order in respect of this. Carpets – cleaning

The tenant says her carpets have not been cleaned but that she was told this would be done. She says painters had left a mess before she moved in and she would like the carpets cleaned. There was no probative evidence of the condition of the carpets.

The landlord says the carpet was spot cleaned prior to the tenant moving in. The landlord says the carpets were reasonably clean and tidy. The landlord says the first time this was raised since the tenant moved in was in this application.

I am not satisfied on the balance of the evidence provided that the condition of the carpet means that it requires cleaning by the landlord. The tenant did not provide any documentary evidence of the cleanliness of the carpet generally so I cannot determine if the carpets do require cleaning.

Therefore, I decline to make a work order in respect of this.

SUPPRESSION AND FILING FEE

I award the tenant her filing fee because she has been partially successful. She has sought work orders and her application in relation to HHS (which formed a large part of her application and the majority of the hearing) has been successful (s 102, RTA).

Both parties requested suppression of their identifying details.

I award both parties name suppression. Both parties can be said to have been substantially successful. The tenant has successfully obtained HHS work orders, but the landlord has defeated a significant number of issues raised and the tenant’s compensation claim was limited in her success (s 95A, RTA).

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4638276 — net $120.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Power	$100.00	Power
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$120.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$120.44