What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4656691 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 4656691?

Anted Possession Of The Premises At…: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4656691?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4656691?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9578947-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4656691 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 4656691?

Anted Possession Of The Premises At…: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4656691?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4656691?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9578947-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit 8, 7 Drummond Street, Regent, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4656691 — 14-day notice

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4656691. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
anted possession of the premises at at 9.00am on Monday 6 th November 2023. 3. [The tenant/s] is to pay Rentals.co.nz Lt	$20.44		anted possession of the premises at at 9.00am on Monday 6 th November 2023. 3. [The tenant/s] is to pay Rentals.co.nz Lt

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4656691. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
anted possession of the premises at at 9.00am on Monday 6 th November 2023. 3. [The tenant/s] is to pay Rentals.co.nz Lt	$20.44		anted possession of the premises at at 9.00am on Monday 6 th November 2023. 3. [The tenant/s] is to pay Rentals.co.nz Lt

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
is granted possession of the premises at at 9.00am on Monday 6 th November 2023.
[The tenant/s] is to pay Rentals.co.nz Ltd $20.44 being the filing fee for the landlord’s application.
The tenant’s application is dismissed.

Reasons

Background

[The tenant/s] moved into unit 11, 7 Drummond Street in 2007.
Unit 11 is a small ‘studio’ room with a separate shower. [The tenant/s]’s initial rent was $100.00 per week inclusive of power and water.
At some point the rent was increased to $110.00, and it remains at that rate.
The owner decided to renovate / upgrade the units.
There was communication between Ms Inglis and [The tenant/s] about [The tenant/s] vacating unit 11 so that renovation work could be done.
On 15 February 2023 [The tenant/s] sent Ms Inglis a text message stating: Could I have unit 8? I need us to do a deal though at the beginning. I could possibly pay the full amount of rent from two or three weeks after I move in
Unit 8 is a larger unit on the upper floor of the building. It was vacant at the time.
On 3 April, [The tenant/s] sent Ms Inglis a message stating: Hey Odette wondering if you could possibly let me just SLEEP in unit 8 (on the floor) until I find alternative accommodation? If not...If I can urgently find places to sleep in the coming days/weeks could you refund some of my rent to enable me to pay rent elsewhere?
Ms Inglis replied: That’s fine you can sleep in unit 8
On the agreed moving day, it appears that Ms Inglis had an understanding that [The tenant/s] intended to move into unit 8, whereas [The tenant/s] understood that she had permission to sleep there, but she did not intend to move in there.
[The tenant/s] has a hyper-sensitivity to mould. She experienced health problems in unit 8. [The tenant/s] also experienced mould-related health problems when she was living in unit 11.
On 30 May, [The tenant/s] sent Ms Inglis an email stating: On Sunday morning it became clear to me that I don’t want to live downstairs again. This morning I realised I need to give notice of my vacating both Unit 11 and Unit 8. Unless we decide that I’ll do so sooner, I’ll return these keys in three weeks from today, on Tuesday 20 June.
[The tenant/s] was unable to find alternative accommodation. At the date of hearing, she was still living in unit 8.
The landlord’s application seeks an order for possession.
The tenant’s application seeks compensation and other orders under a number of headings.
The hearing took place in [Event location suppressed] on 20 October 2023. Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Odette Inglis represented the landlord. Landlord application
A tenant may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving notice to the landlord 1 .
A notice of termination must be given in writing. It must identify the property that it relates to, and it must give a date for termination 2 .
Tenants must give 28 days’ notice to terminate a tenancy, but a landlord may waive this and accept a shorter period.
No particular wording or format is required for a valid notice of termination 3 .
Any party who issues a notice to terminate a tenancy may revoke the notice, with the consent of the other party, before the expiry of the notice period 4 .
In this instance: a. [The tenant/s] gave notice to terminate her tenancy at unit 11 and her short-term tenancy at unit 8. b. The notice was in writing, and it clearly stated that [The tenant/s] wanted to terminate her tenancies at both unit 11 and unit 8. The notice stated the termination date. c. Rentals.co.nz accepted the notice and the proposed end date. It waived the requirement for 28-days’ notice. d. The notice was not revoked before the expiry of the notice period with the consent of the landlord. e. The notice was effective, and it terminated both tenancies on 20 June 2023.
[The tenant/s] has failed to move out of the premises, but that action does not create a new tenancy unless the landlord allows the tenant to remain at the premises for longer than 90-days without obtaining a possession order 5 .
In this instance the tenancy terminated on 20 June 2023. Given the circumstances, Ms Inglis allowed [The tenant/s] a reasonable period to try to find new premises. Ms Inglis filed an application with the Tenancy Tribunal on 15 August 2023.
At the date of hearing, more than 90-days had passed since the termination of the tenancy. However, the Tribunal is not prevented from making an order for possession more than 90-days after the date of termination where the delay is caused by administrative delays or court procedures 6 . 1 Section 51(2B) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) 2 Section 51(3) RTA 3 Section 51(4) RTA 4 Section 51(6)(a) RTA 5 Section 60(2) RTA 6 Crockers Property Management Ltd v Ransfield [2013] NZTT 3813
I am satisfied that Rentals.co.nz did not permit the tenant to remain in the premises, thereby allowing a new tenancy to form. It is clear that [The tenant/s] did not want (and still does not want) a new tenancy for either property. The only reason why [The tenant/s] has not moved out is that she has been unable to find alternative accommodation.
Therefore, I will grant an order for possession in this instance. Tenant application Paint fumes
[The tenant/s] seeks compensation on the grounds that: The paint fumes coming from the shaft in the bathroom cupboards in the last week has caused great time-consuming difficulties with my health
Ms Inglis submitted that there is no painting work underway in the surrounding units. Ms Inglis submitted that the building is concrete slab construction and there are no ‘shafts’ between the units.
It seems that [The tenant/s] has an acute sensitivity to the smell of toxins or chemicals.
I accept that [The tenant/s] did experience discomfort because of a smell from the bathroom cupboards.
However, landlords cannot be required to eliminate all smells from tenanted premises. That is too high an obligation. Landlords are obliged to maintain the premises in a “reasonable state of repair” 7 .
There is no evidence of any careless action by the landlord, or of any failure to maintain the premises. [The tenant/s] moved into a new environment after living in unit 11 for fifteen years – it is perhaps not surprising that her smell sensitivities were triggered.
There is no basis for an award of compensation under this heading. Failure to provide written tenancy agreement and healthy homes compliance statement
Since February 2021, landlords have had an obligation to provide a written tenancy agreement 8 . The tenancy agreement must include a healthy homes statement, an insurance statement, and an insulation statement 9 . 7 Section 45(1)(b) RTA 8 Section 13 RTA 9 Section 13A RTA
Failure to provide a written tenancy agreement is an unlawful act. Exemplary damages of up to $750.00 can apply.
Failure to provide a healthy homes compliance statement is an unlawful act. Exemplary damages of up to $750.00 can apply.
[The tenant/s]’s claim states that she is “seeking compensation of $750.00”. I understand that [The tenant/s] is in fact seeking exemplary damages because: a. There is no reasonable basis for an award of compensatory damages for a breach of these obligations. [The tenant/s] has suffered no loss as a consequence of not receiving a written tenancy agreement. b. The amount of ‘compensation’ that [The tenant/s] is seeking corresponds with the maximum amount of exemplary damages for these breaches.
This part of [The tenant/s]’s claim relates to her occupancy of unit 8.
It is not disputed that Rentals.co.nz did not provide [The tenant/s] with a written tenancy agreement or a healthy homes statement for unit 8.
The Tenancy Tribunal may award exemplary damages if it is satisfied that an unlawful act was committed intentionally. Exemplary damages are punitive.
In this instance, both [The tenant/s] and Ms Inglis understood that [The tenant/s]’s occupancy of unit 8 was a temporary arrangement while unit 11 was being renovated. The intention at that time was that [The tenant/s] would move back in to unit 11 once the renovation was complete.
Technically speaking, the arrangement with unit 8, although short term, was a tenancy. It was the grant of a right to occupy premises in return for rent 10 . It cannot be seen as a continuation of the unit 11 tenancy.
However, I do not agree that it is appropriate to award exemplary damages for the landlord failing to provide a written agreement or a healthy homes statement for this ‘tenancy’.
It was not in the contemplation of either party that they were embarking on a new tenancy for unit 8 and that a tenancy agreement was required.
[The tenant/s], who thought that she was going to be doing no more than sleeping on the floor of unit 8, would certainly not have welcomed a written tenancy agreement from Rentals.co.nz. It seems that this has only become an issue for [The tenant/s] in retrospect, after she decided that Ms Inglis had “manipulated and deceived” her into occupying unit 8. Electricity costs 10 See the definition of “tenancy” in section 2 RTA. [The tenant/s] continued to pay $110 per week, excluding power, when she occupied unit 8
[The tenant/s] seeks reimbursement of her electricity costs on the grounds that: a. Ms Inglis deceived her into agreeing to occupy unit 8 “thereby distracting me from a crucial opportunity to live in affordable accommodation with a close friend of family”; and b. She has incurred high electricity costs due to “airborne mould-spores in this old uninsulated building as well as the damp, mouldy smell from the carpet”.
[The tenant/s] provided a statement from her friend, [The tenant's friend], who states that she “would have been happy to live with me from April for a few months at minimal rent”. [The tenant's friend]’s use of the words “would have been” indicates that [The tenant/s] had not approached [The tenant's friend] at the time.
[The tenant/s] submitted that Ms Inglis “de-railed” her plan, but it is difficult to understand what her plan was at the time. [The tenant/s] herself had requested to sleep in unit 8. [The tenant/s]’s belongings had to be removed from unit 11 so that it could be renovated, and they needed to go somewhere. [The tenant/s] had an option with [The tenant's friend], but it seems she had not talked to [The tenant's friend] about this at the time.
It is also difficult to understand how the mis-understanding about whether [The tenant/s] intended to move into unit 8 or simply sleep on the floor “forced” [The tenant/s] into a situation that she didn’t want. The landlord was willing to offer unit 8 as an alternative whilst unit 11 was being renovated, but [The tenant/s] did not have to stay there. She could have stayed with her friend, or she could have made other arrangements as she saw fit.
Ms Inglis submitted that unit 8 is healthy homes compliant. [The tenant/s] did not provide any evidence of excess mould or dampness in this unit.
The landlord could have given [The tenant/s] notice to terminate her tenancy of unit 11 on the grounds that it intended to carry out extensive renovations and the work could not reasonably be done with [The tenant/s] in situ 11 . The offer of alternative accommodation whilst the renovation was carried out, still at the extraordinarily low rate of $110.00 was intended to assist [The tenant/s].
It is reasonable that [The tenant/s] pays for her power use. Other orders / remedies sought
[The tenant/s]’s claim seeks other remedies / orders that: a. Are not types of orders that the Tenancy Tribunal can make or; 11 Section 51(2)(f) RTA b. For which there is no arguable evidential or legal basis.
The following claims fall into this category: a. Seeking compensation of $19.50 doctor’s fee for supporting letter: The Tenancy Tribunal has no power to award cost to any parties, except in certain limited circumstances (none of which apply in this instance) 12 . b. Seeking compensation of $150 for professional flea prevention / eradication at my next residence: Rentals.co.nz, as the landlord of these tenancies, cannot have liability in respect of [The tenant/s]’s future tenancies. c. Seeking that within 14 days Unit 8 is completely sealed off from the shaft seen through bathroom cupboards: It is not proven that there is any ‘shaft’ that allows airflow between the units. Whatever [The tenant/s] has identified as a ‘shaft’ may serve some function as a drain (or similar) which it would be unwise to ‘seal off’. d. Seeking that if it is decided the owner must receive any higher rent than the $110.00 per week that I am paying, that the difference is paid to him each week by Rentals.co: [The tenant/s]’s tenancies have ended. It is up to her and the landlord to negotiate a new tenancy if both parties want one. At the hearing I raised this possibility, but [The tenant/s] was adamant that she wanted to move out. In any event, Rentals.co.nz has no obligation to pay any part of [The tenant/s]’s rent. e. Seeking that Rentals.co provide a healthy homes assessment with 14 days: The tenancy has ended. There is no legal basis for such an order. f. Seeking that Ms Inglis be prohibited from contact with me until after I have vacated: The Tribunal cannot make an order of this type, but Ms Inglis stated that her colleague Sean will be taking over management of this tenancy until [The tenant/s] vacates. g. Seeking that I be allowed to vacate without notice: This request is moot now that the tenancies have ended, and I have made a possession order to the landlord. h. Seeking that upon vacating I will be exonerated from unintentional damage to paintwork as a result of my need to seal off the kitchen and bathroom cupboards and the bathroom extractor fan: Any claim for tenant damage must be determined if and when the landlord makes a claim in respect of it. Tenants are liable for damage that they carelessly or intentionally cause. Outcome, filing fee, name suppression 12 Section 102(1) RTA
Possession is granted to the landlord following termination of the tenancies.
The landlord was successful in its application, and I must also award the landlord the filing fee of $20.44.
The tenant’s application is dismissed for the reasons detailed above.
This decision contains some personal information about the tenant. Having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, I will grant name suppression to the tenant 13 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 4656691 — 14-day notice at Unit 8, 7 Drummond Street, Regent, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4656691 — 14-day notice at Unit 8, 7 Drummond Street, Regent, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions