What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4647271 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 4647271?

Compensation: Gas Leak: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: retaining wall mainten…: $150.00 awarded to tenant

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4647271?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9482026-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4647271 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 4647271?

Compensation: Gas Leak: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: retaining wall mainten…: $150.00 awarded to tenant

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4647271?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9482026-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4647271 — Leaks

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4647271 — net $200.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: retaining wall maintenance	$150.00	retaining wall maintenance
Compensation: gas leak	$50.00	gas leak
Net award	$200.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$200.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $200.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both named tenants attended the hearing on 21 September 2023. Two representatives for the landlord attended by video conference.
This is a tenant application seeking an apology and appropriate compensation.
I use the word “landlord” to refer to either the property management company or the landlord owner.
I note that AD vacated the premises from 22 March 2023 and that WO is the sole remaining tenant. The claims relate to the time when AD and WO were joint tenants.
The issues of concern are:- a. Responsibility for retaining wall maintenance, b. Gas leak from hob, c. Rent and water ledger allocation issues, d. Unprofessional communication from a property manager.

What is the law that applies?

A landlord has certain obligations, as does a tenant.
Tenant obligations include to pay rent and outgoings on time, keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and to notify the landlord of any damage so that it can be repaired.
A landlord must keep accurate records, keep premises in a reasonable state of repair, give correct written notice before entering premises, and not interfere with a tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy. Discussion of claims
All claims were discussed fully in the hearing and both parties also provided helpful written evidence.
I have summarised the discussion on each issue and then outline my decisions. Responsibility for retaining wall maintenance
These premises were brand new when the tenancy started on 29 September 2022. Landscaping had not yet been completed.
The tenancy agreement said that the tenants were required to regularly cut the lawns and weed gardens. The landlord told them that this included a 3 to 4- metre-wide strip at the top of a retaining wall which ran the length of the property. There was no easy access to this strip. The tenants raised the difficulties several times over about 7 months.
The landlord has recently taken over maintenance of this area (May 2023).
I agree that this area is more appropriately the landlord’s responsibility to maintain especially as it is difficult to access. I accept the tenants’ oral evidence that they picked up and disposed of about one bag of rubbish at the start of the tenancy and later paid a family member $100.00 to use a weed- eater on the area.
I award $150.00 to compensate them for the extra costs and to recognise that the landlord could have relieved them of the responsibility much earlier (once the problems with access became known). Gas leak from hob
The tenants noticed a gas smell in the kitchen when the gas hob was not being used. They raised this with the landlord on 26 October 2022.
Someone sent by the landlord came to the house the next day and concluded that there was no gas leak. However, it turned out that the hob had been wrongly installed. This was resolved 12 days later, on 7 November 2023.
The tenants were without use of the gas hob for 7 days while the gas was shut off to make sure there were no more leaks until fixed. They were also concerned about the potential safety issue.
The landlord compensated the tenants $50.00 at the time to recognise the loss of gas paid for by the tenants.
I award an extra $50.00 as recognition of the loss of use of the hob for 7 days. There is no evidence as to the seriousness of any safety concerns and the landlord did attend to the issue promptly. Unfortunately, the first contractor or plumber who attended did not locate the problem, so the resolution was delayed. Rent and water ledger allocation issues
A landlord has an obligation to keep accurate rent records and to provide a written statement to a tenant showing payments made; see section 29(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The evidence shows that the landlord did keep accurate rent and water payment records. The difficulty was that it was receiving payments from three people via the Ministry of Social Development. Part of each payment was for rent and part for water (in advance) and AD also paid an additional $15.00 per week for water.
When AD vacated the tenancy, she asked for a statement of the amount that she alone had contributed.
A landlord is not strictly required to separate out payments made by multiple tenants. It is only required to show the overall amounts paid. This is because of joint liability which means that tenants must together cover all rent and costs.
The tenancy agreement does not split the rent between each tenant. It simply says that the rent is $1,050.00 per week.
In my view, the landlord did nothing wrong. In fact, after AD asked for a breakdown showing her individual payments and explained how she had intended them to be allocated, the landlord went to considerable effort to reallocate the payments and show these on a clear spreadsheet (emailed to AD on 13 June 2023).
This claim is dismissed. Unprofessional communication from a property manager.
The main issue and what led to this claim is that the tenants feel that they were not treated well by the property manager who dealt with them initially. The hearing allowed for this to be aired and an apology was made.
All I will say here is that a landlord has more power than a tenant simply because they own the property. Tenants often feel vulnerable if they raise an issue or complain. Listening is the key.
The evidence does not show a breach, so I do not award compensation. Filing fee and suppression of names
The tenants have been partially successful, but I do not award the filing fee.
After considering the issues, the interests of both parties, and the public interest, I have decided to suppress both tenants and landlord names. This was mainly about the tenants feeling respected and clear communication. Neither party is substantially at fault.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4647271 — net $200.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: retaining wall maintenance	$150.00	retaining wall maintenance
Compensation: gas leak	$50.00	gas leak
Net award	$200.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$200.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $200.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.

Reasons

Both named tenants attended the hearing on 21 September 2023. Two representatives for the landlord attended by video conference.
This is a tenant application seeking an apology and appropriate compensation.
I use the word “landlord” to refer to either the property management company or the landlord owner.
I note that AD vacated the premises from 22 March 2023 and that WO is the sole remaining tenant. The claims relate to the time when AD and WO were joint tenants.
The issues of concern are:- a. Responsibility for retaining wall maintenance, b. Gas leak from hob, c. Rent and water ledger allocation issues, d. Unprofessional communication from a property manager.

What is the law that applies?

A landlord has certain obligations, as does a tenant.
Tenant obligations include to pay rent and outgoings on time, keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy, and to notify the landlord of any damage so that it can be repaired.
A landlord must keep accurate records, keep premises in a reasonable state of repair, give correct written notice before entering premises, and not interfere with a tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy. Discussion of claims
All claims were discussed fully in the hearing and both parties also provided helpful written evidence.
I have summarised the discussion on each issue and then outline my decisions. Responsibility for retaining wall maintenance
These premises were brand new when the tenancy started on 29 September 2022. Landscaping had not yet been completed.
The tenancy agreement said that the tenants were required to regularly cut the lawns and weed gardens. The landlord told them that this included a 3 to 4- metre-wide strip at the top of a retaining wall which ran the length of the property. There was no easy access to this strip. The tenants raised the difficulties several times over about 7 months.
The landlord has recently taken over maintenance of this area (May 2023).
I agree that this area is more appropriately the landlord’s responsibility to maintain especially as it is difficult to access. I accept the tenants’ oral evidence that they picked up and disposed of about one bag of rubbish at the start of the tenancy and later paid a family member $100.00 to use a weed- eater on the area.
I award $150.00 to compensate them for the extra costs and to recognise that the landlord could have relieved them of the responsibility much earlier (once the problems with access became known). Gas leak from hob
The tenants noticed a gas smell in the kitchen when the gas hob was not being used. They raised this with the landlord on 26 October 2022.
Someone sent by the landlord came to the house the next day and concluded that there was no gas leak. However, it turned out that the hob had been wrongly installed. This was resolved 12 days later, on 7 November 2023.
The tenants were without use of the gas hob for 7 days while the gas was shut off to make sure there were no more leaks until fixed. They were also concerned about the potential safety issue.
The landlord compensated the tenants $50.00 at the time to recognise the loss of gas paid for by the tenants.
I award an extra $50.00 as recognition of the loss of use of the hob for 7 days. There is no evidence as to the seriousness of any safety concerns and the landlord did attend to the issue promptly. Unfortunately, the first contractor or plumber who attended did not locate the problem, so the resolution was delayed. Rent and water ledger allocation issues
A landlord has an obligation to keep accurate rent records and to provide a written statement to a tenant showing payments made; see section 29(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The evidence shows that the landlord did keep accurate rent and water payment records. The difficulty was that it was receiving payments from three people via the Ministry of Social Development. Part of each payment was for rent and part for water (in advance) and AD also paid an additional $15.00 per week for water.
When AD vacated the tenancy, she asked for a statement of the amount that she alone had contributed.
A landlord is not strictly required to separate out payments made by multiple tenants. It is only required to show the overall amounts paid. This is because of joint liability which means that tenants must together cover all rent and costs.
The tenancy agreement does not split the rent between each tenant. It simply says that the rent is $1,050.00 per week.
In my view, the landlord did nothing wrong. In fact, after AD asked for a breakdown showing her individual payments and explained how she had intended them to be allocated, the landlord went to considerable effort to reallocate the payments and show these on a clear spreadsheet (emailed to AD on 13 June 2023).
This claim is dismissed. Unprofessional communication from a property manager.
The main issue and what led to this claim is that the tenants feel that they were not treated well by the property manager who dealt with them initially. The hearing allowed for this to be aired and an apology was made.
All I will say here is that a landlord has more power than a tenant simply because they own the property. Tenants often feel vulnerable if they raise an issue or complain. Listening is the key.
The evidence does not show a breach, so I do not award compensation. Filing fee and suppression of names
The tenants have been partially successful, but I do not award the filing fee.
After considering the issues, the interests of both parties, and the public interest, I have decided to suppress both tenants and landlord names. This was mainly about the tenants feeling respected and clear communication. Neither party is substantially at fault.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4647271 — Leaks

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4647271 — Leaks

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is the law that applies?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is the law that applies?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions