What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4662049 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and

How much money was awarded in case 4662049?

Compensation: $1,600.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662049?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11097901-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4662049 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and

How much money was awarded in case 4662049?

Compensation: $1,600.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4662049?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4662049?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11097901-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4662049 — Healthy homes

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662049 — net $1,620.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation failure to meet HHS and HIR regulations and failure to maintain	$1,600.00	Compensation failure to meet HHS and HIR regulations and failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,620.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,620.44

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4662049 — net $1,620.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation failure to meet HHS and HIR regulations and failure to maintain	$1,600.00	Compensation failure to meet HHS and HIR regulations and failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,620.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,620.44

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s and landlord’s name and identifying details, the names of the witnesses and all other non-parties.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $1,620.44 immediately, as set out in the table below.

Reasons

[The tenant/s] appeared with his partner [The tenant’s partner] who resided at the property with him. [The landlord’s representative 1] and [The landlord’s representative 2] appeared for the landlord. One day prior to the hearing the landlord made a request to be represented by [The landlord’s representative 3], a farm consultant. The grounds for representation are set out in section 93 of the Act. Having considered the nature of the claims and the timing of the request, I am not satisfied there are sufficient grounds to grant the request and it was therefore declined. However, [The landlord’s representative 3] remain seated next to the landlord and has provided assistance during the hearing. Background
The tenancy in this matter is a Service Tenancy commencing on 01 June 2022 and ending on 22 July 2023. On 21 August 2023, the tenant filed a claim with the Tribunal. On 08 December 2023, the matter was listed for an in person hearing at the [Event location suppressed] on 11 March 2024.
Prior to the hearing, it was discovered that the named respondent was not the landlord. The actual landlord is [The landlord/s]. The respondent party was amended, and the matter was subsequently adjourned for a Case Management Conference on 25 June 2024. Both [The tenant/s], [The tenant’s partner], and [The landlord’s representatives] attended the conference.
Following the conference the matter was set down for an in person hearing at the [Event location suppressed] on 07 November 2024. Tenant’s claims:
The tenants’ claims are that: i. The landlord has failed to provide and maintain the property free from excessive dampness / mould (Section 45 (1)(c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (The “Act”) & Regulation 15 Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 (“HIR”)). ii. That the landlord has failed to meet the HHS concerning heating, and that they have failed to maintain the heating in a reasonable condition (Section 45(1) (bb) & HHS heating standard, Section 45(1)(b)). iii. That the landlord has failed to meet the HHS relevant to draught stopping (section 45(1) (bb) of the Act & Healthy Homes Standards (“HHS”)). iv. That the landlord has failed to maintain the window in the bathroom (Section 45(1) (bb) & HHS ventilation standard, Section 45(1)(b). v. That the landlord has failed to maintain the windows (Section 45(1)(b)). vi. That the landlord has failed to maintain the ceiling (Section 45(1)(b)). vii. That the landlord has failed to maintain the hot water cylinder (Section 45(1)(b)). viii. That the landlord has failed to complete renovations (Section 45(1)(b).
The tenant is seeking compensation for loss of amenity. At the conference, they had advised of an intention to also claim for monetary loss. Although, they have been unable to quantify that loss.
The onus is on the tenant to prove these claims. The standard of proof in civil claims is on the balance of probabilities. The tenant must establish more likely than not the landlord has breached the terms of the tenancy agreement or the provisions of the Act.
Apart from a 14-day notice issued by the tenant a few days before the end of the tenancy, which had been incorrectly served on the owner, there are no letters, emails, or text messages between the parties concerning the matters giving rise to these claims. The tenant states that all of their concerns had been raised verbally at inspections and while working alongside the landlord on the farm.
The property is around a hundred years old, and consists of three bedrooms, toilet / bathroom, kitchen / dining room, lounge, and a laundry. Healthy Homes Standards and Housing Improvement Regulations
Addressing the claims made under the Healthy Homes Standards Regulations 2019 (“HHS”) and the Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 (“HIR”)
The tenant states that shortly after the commencement of the tenancy, they discovered mould forming. They claim they raised this with the landlord on multiple occasions, but despite the landlord’s undertaking to look into the matter, the issue remained unresolved.
The tenant produced photographs of what they claim is mould on the ceiling: in the bathroom from October 2022, the master bedroom from June 2023, and the living room from July 2023.
The living room ceiling has a hole approximately the size of a fist near the heat pump, around the hole are signs of paint damage and what appears to be mould. The photographs of the master bedroom ceiling show some mould as do the photographs of the bathroom ceiling.
The tenant states that apart from the mould in the living room, none other was evident at the commencement of the tenancy.
The tenant claims that they raised the issue of the living room ceiling at the commencement of the tenancy during the pre-inspection, but that this was not addressed until July 2023. The bathroom had been raised sometime between the first inspection in September 2022 and November 2022, but was not addressed until April 2023.
The tenant states that the likely cause of the mould to be: • A broken window in the bathroom which could not be opened, • New windows that had been fitted shortly before the commencement of the tenancy but had not had their flashings fitted, • A leak in the roof above the living room, • The fact that the heat pump had insufficient capacity and did not comply with the HHS, • The drainage, in particular the spouting was insufficient,
The landlord stated they had been advised by the owner of a possible leak in the living room ceiling around July 2022, and they had engaged a tradesperson to find and repair the leak. Prior to this, the landlord had noted a discoloured patch on the ceiling but believed it to be the site of an historic, not ongoing leak.
The landlord stated that the issue of mould on the ceiling in the bathroom was first raised during an inspection in September 2022 and not before, as claimed by the tenant. The landlord accepted that although the bathroom had a ventilation fan and complied with the HHS, the inability to open the window may have contributed to the issue. The window was repaired in April 2023.
Regarding the mould in the master bedroom ceiling, the landlord stated that despite numerous investigations, the cause remained unresolved. The landlord stated they had cleaned the gutters, inspected the ceiling void, the roof above the room, and had engaged a tradesperson to investigate. However, no issues were detected.
The landlord states that the tenant dried clothes inside using the heat pump with the windows closed, and had also used an unvented clothes drier, both of which may have contributed to the formation of mould.
The landlord stated that in early July 2023, prior the tenant giving notice, that they had engaged professional cleaners to remove any remnants of mould from the ceiling in the bathroom, living room, and master bedroom.
The service tenancy agreement does not specify whether the property complies with the HHS. The landlord state that as first-time landlord’s they were unaware of their obligations and had largely relied on the owner of the property, whom they considered knowledgeable and experienced in such matters. At the request of the tenant, the landlord obtained an HHS report on 06 July 2023.
The landlord called [The plumber]. [The plumber] stated that he had around June / July 2022, the owner had employed him to fix a hole in the roof, that he had attended the same day and screwed down a loose section of roof above the living room.
[The plumber] stated that the tenant had asked him if he had noticed any mould, [The plumber] stated that he had previous knowledge of the property and had not observed any mould.
The landlord called [The electrician], who stated that he had completed some work at the property for the owner. [The electrician] stated that the tenant had asked him about mould and that he had suggested opening windows, but that the tenant did not accept his advice.
The landlord called [Builder 1]. [Builder 1] stated that he had been engaged by the owner in June 2022 to complete some remedial work. That he had visited the property once or twice but not returned due to difficulties in dealing with the tenant. [Builder 1] stated he was asked about mould by the tenant, that he had observed clothes drying inside and suggested the tenant open some windows, but the tenant did not accept the advice.
The landlord called [Builder 2]. [Builder 2] stated that he was the builder who had been engaged in March 2023 to complete the remedial work following the departure of [Builder 1]. [Builder 2] stated that he had inspected the ceiling space above the master bedroom and had detected a small area of mould. That he was satisfied there was no obvious leak in the roof. [Builder 2] stated while at the property he had witnessed the tenant drying clothes inside with the windows closed, suggesting the practice may have increased humidity.
The landlord stated they too had witnessed washing being dried inside which they claim creates moisture, and unless the property is properly ventilated may cause mould to form.
The tenant denies failing to ventilate the property. They state that they were forced to leave the back door open while showering. The accepted they occasionally dried small amounts of washing inside, but that it was neither excessive nor frequent. They denied using the clothes dryer without proper ventilation. In response to [Builder 2]’s evidence, the tenant explained that while he was working at the property, they had closed the windows to stop dust from entering.
The tenant denied being aggressive or obtrusive with tradespeople and stated they had simply pointed out issues with the property.
At the end of the tenancy the landlord removed the heat pump filters for cleaning. They have produced before and after photographs. They state the filters were completely blocked which would have affected the heat pumps efficiency.
The tenant states they sent the photographs to a heat pump specialist for comment. The document provided does not have the name of the author, is unsigned, and undated. It states, “A slightly dirty filter may not cost a lot nor cause higher energy bills. A fully blocked filter will cost slightly higher bills.” However, the author does not state whether they have viewed the photographs. The document contains general information about the inefficiency of under capacity heat pumps.
The landlord called [The new tenant] from August 2023. [The new tenant] moved into the property after the landlord completed the necessary work to meet the HHS. She gave a glowing report of both the property and the landlord. Law
The Healthy Homes Standards for this tenancy came into effect on 30 August 2022, which was 90 days of the commencement of the tenancy on 01 June 2022
Section 45(1) (bb) provides that the landlord must comply with the Health Homes Standards (“HHS”), which set out the minimum requirements for heating, insulation, ventilation, drainage, and draught stopping.
The Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019 defines a habitable space as a domestic living space excluding any bathroom, laundry, toilet, pantry, walk-in wardrobe, corridor, hallway, lobby, clothes-drying room, or other space of a specialised nature occupied neither frequently nor for extended periods.
All habitable rooms must have windows that open to the outside. While bathrooms and kitchens must have HHS compliant fans, they do not require opening windows.
Under section 45(1)(c) of the Act, the landlord must comply with any requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment applying. In the case of residential tenancies these are contained in the Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 (“HIR”), which set out minimum standards for residential properties. These regulations have not been replaced by and run alongside the HHS.
Regulation 15 of the HIR states that properties must be free from dampness and moisture.
Regulation 9 of the HIR states that every bathroom shall have at least one window opening to the outside unless other adequate means of ventilation are provided to the satisfaction of the local authority, which is this case would be the local Council.
The landlord has an obligation to investigate and repair any defect brought to their attention within a period which is reasonable in the circumstances. As to what that period is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right whatever the problem might be. Decision
The challenge for both parties has been establishing an accurate chronology. Although, the onus is on the tenant to proof the case. As stated, there is no documentary trail, such as emails and texts that may assist. Instead, the parties rely on their memory of verbal exchanges. The tenancy ended in July 2023. The events in question occurred some time ago. The witnesses faced equal challenges recalling dates.
The onus is on the tenant to establish that having been notified of the issue the landlord failed to respond appropriately. There is insufficient evidence to be satisfied that the landlord has failed in their obligations concerning the leak in the roof above the ceiling.
Concerning the mould on the ceiling in the master bedroom. [Builder 2], who appears suitably qualified, has inspected the area, and can find no obvious cause. The tenant states that the cleaning in early July 2023 removed the mould, but that it had started to reappear before the end of the tenancy on 22 July 2023. There is however no independent evidence to confirm this fact.
The landlord stated that remedial work had been undertaken but not completed before the commencement. They also stated that they had intended address the windows sooner, but the tradesperson engaged to complete the work, [Builder 1], had refused to return to the property, citing what they viewed as the tenant’s aggressive behaviour. Thereafter, the landlord state they had difficulty securing a tradesperson. This is denied by the tenant.
There is no evidence that the tenant has actually impeded any of the tradespeople. If a landlord genuinely believes that a tenant, having been given proper notice, is obstructing a tradesperson undertaking repairs or other remedial work, they should make an application to the Tribunal seeking orders that the tenant meet their obligations. The landlord has not done so. They cannot now rely on the tenants alleged conduct as an excuse.
Apart from the areas of mould shown in the bathroom, living room, and master bedroom, there are no other photographs showing excessive moisture or condensation.
The bathroom did not require an opening window under the HHS. The fan was HHS compliant. There is insufficient to determine whether the bathroom required an opening window under the HIR. However, the landlord conceded that the non- opening window in the bathroom had likely contributed to the formation of mould on the ceiling.
The HHS report shows the property failed the HHS drainage standard because some of the downpipes where discharging onto the ground and not into soak holes. It also highlighted draught gaps around the windows and external doors in the kitchen and the laundry, and window in the bathroom. The HHS report shows that the ceilings above all rooms have compliant insulation except for the bathroom. The property has a heat pump in the living room, but it does not have sufficient capacity, and the property requires a top up heater.
There is insufficient evidence to determine whether the bathroom, in addition to the fan, also required an opening window. However as stated the landlord has accepted that the lack of a functioning window may have been a factor in the mould forming. This was known to the landlord at the commencement of the tenancy but not remedied until April 2023.
I discount the evidence of [The new tenant] as it is not relevant to the claims.
There is insufficient evidence to establish that the tenant dried excessive amounts of clothes inside or failed to ventilate the property, thus contributing to mould or moisture.
Apart from the areas of mould shown in the bathroom, living room, and master bedroom, there are no other photographs showing excessive moisture or condensation.
The heat pump filters do not appear to be completely blocked as described by the landlord. Regardless, the heat pump did not have the necessary capacity to heat the main living room to the HHS standard.
The landlord accepts that relying on the owner of the property is an explanation but cannot be a defence. It is the landlord’s responsibility to ensure that the property complies with any applicable HHS standards or HIR regulations. The landlord is in breach of their obligations. Other claims Windows
The tenant claims that the landlord has failed to maintain the windows. As stated at the commencement of the tenancy, some remedial work had been started but not completed. The tenant states that half of the windows had been replaced, although some lacked exterior flashings. They state that shortly after the commencement of the tenancy, they discovered that the windows in the master bedroom and the bedrooms used by the children leaked when it rained. The tenant states that [Builder 1] had fixed the window in the master bedroom but then did not return.
Despite raising the issue with the landlord, which included the bathroom window, they remained unresolved until [Builder 2] attended in March / April 2023, at which time the bathroom window was also repaired.
The landlord accepts that there was a delay. They were aware that some of the windows did not have exterior flashings but maintain they were all sealed on the inside, and they had not been advised of any leaks. They have not seen any evidence of leaking windows.
The landlord stated that after [Builder 1] departed, they struggled to find a builder willing to take on the job, which was ultimately completed in April 2023. Hot water cylinder
The tenant states that the landlord has failed to maintain the hot water cylinder.
The tenant states that at the beginning of the tenancy, they pointed out to the landlord that the hot water cylinder was overflowing onto the roof and were told that it would be rectified. Initially, the overflow pipe was extended, which appears to have stopped the overflow. However, the tenant states that they experienced high power bills.
The tenant stated that they raised the issue with the landlord verbally 4 – 6 times, but that nothing was done. The tenant state that sometime in 2022 an electrician replaced the Ajax valve, but that this failed to address the issue.
The tenant states that they went away for the May school holidays 2023. While away they turned off all appliances, except for the fridge / freezer. Upon receiving the next power account, they noted that the power appeared to have “spiked” while they were away. The tenant state they have recently performed the same exercise at their new property, and state that there was no spike. The tenant suspects that the Ajax valve is faulty. The tenant states that the matter remained unresolved until the end of the tenancy.
The landlord accepts that the overflow was noted during the pre-tenancy inspection and that shortly afterward the overflow pipe was extended. The Ajax valve had been replaced on 19 June 2022.
In July 2022, an electrician visited the property and inspected the wiring to the cylinder but found no issues.
The landlord suggested any spike may have been caused by a faulty toilet cistern, which would cause the pump that supplied water to the property to switch on and off. The landlord stated they had asked the tenant to check and report if this was an issue, but they had not done so. The landlord states the toilet and pump were replaced in September 2022, and it would not have been an ongoing issue in any event.
[Builder 1] stated that he visited the property and was advised by the tenant that they had no hot water. He stated he found this claim surprising as he had recently changed the Ajax valve in 2020. He stated that he checked the valve as instructed. Despite detecting no fault, he replaced it as instructed by the owner. [Builder 1] stated that the property had a low-pressure system, common in older rural properties, and that the tenant’s expectations for high pressure may have been unrealistic. [Builder 1] stated that he had visited the property at the end of the tenancy and discovered that the Ajax valve had been significantly adjusted.
The tenant denies adjusting the valve, that they have experience of low-pressure plumbing systems, and were never advised to check the toilet cistern.
[The electrician] states that following the tenant’s report of high-power usage he had visited the property on 26 April 2023 and run some tests but could not detect any issues. Ceiling
The evidence is that the hole in the living room ceiling was not caused by a leak but had been made by someone inspecting the ceiling for the landlord in June/ July 2022, before the leak was fixed by [Builder 1]. The tenant has also produced a photograph showing a small hole and crack in the ceiling in the master bedroom. The tenant states that the damage was raised for the first time on or about 07 June 2023, but that despite raising it several times nothing was done.
The landlord acknowledged that the hole in the living ceiling had not been repaired, again citing the difficulty securing a tradesperson. The landlord also acknowledged being advised of the small hole in the corner of the ceiling and the small crack. However, at that time the parties enjoyed a good relationship, the tenant had not raised it as a significant “issue”, and the matter was left. General condition / exterior
The tenant claims that the landlord has failed to maintain the outside of the property.
The tenant has produced a photograph showing a hole in a weather board near a window. The tenant states that this was raised at the commencement of the tenancy. The tenant expressed concern that the hole compromised the weathertightness of the property. They state that despite assurances that it would be addressed nothing happened until around 23 April 2023 when [Builder 2] attended.
The tenant has produced a photograph showing a section of roof without a gutter, which they state, again, was not remedied until April 2023. Law
Under section 45(1)(b) of the Act, the landlord must provide and maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair, having regard to the age and character of the premises.
As stated, the landlord has an obligation to investigate and repair any defect brought to their attention within a period which is reasonable in the circumstances. As to what that period is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right whatever the problem might be. Decision
Regarding the hot water cylinder, I am not satisfied that the evidence produced by the tenant shows a power “spike.” I am not satisfied that the landlord once notified has failed to respond appropriately.
I find that the landlord has failed in their obligation concerning the hole in the ceiling in the living room, which was known to the landlord around July 2022. However, regarding the hole and crack in the ceiling of the master bedroom, I am not satisfied when these matters were raised.
I find that the landlord has failed in their obligations concerning the windows and the hole in the weather boards. These issues were both known to the landlord at the commencement of the tenancy. Compensation
Concerning the hole in the ceiling in the living room, while the hole is unsightly, I am not satisfied that it compromised the properties weathertightness.
Concerning the missing flashings and the hole in the weather boards, left unresolved over a prolonged period likely compromised the properties weathertightness.
The tenant has two young children, and state that during the autumn / winter months they struggled to heat the property, describing it as cold and unpleasant. The tenant is unable to quantify any financial loss. However, I am satisfied that the landlord’s failure to meet their obligations has more likely than not resulted in a loss of amenity for the tenant. Properties that comply with the HHS and/ or HIR are prima facie considered fit for purpose, those that do not, are not. In this case the tenant has failed to receive what they had bargained on under the agreement.
The rent was $290.00 per week. The landlord submits that this was well under market rent. However, I do not consider this relevant. This was a service tenancy; the property was provided as part of an employment package. If the landlord wished to charge more rent, they may have needed to offer a higher salary.
The tenancy was relatively short in duration. In my view the primary inconvenience occurred during the autumn / winter months. For this tenancy, those months were from June 2022 to the end of August 2022 and from March 2023 until 22 July 2023, a total of eight months.
I award the tenant $200.00 for each month, total compensation of $1,600.00 ($200 x 8 = $1,600.00) Costs
The tenant has been successful in their application, and I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression.
Both parties seek name suppression
Section 95A of the Act provides that on the application of a party that has been wholly or substantially successful in proceedings, the Tribunal must order that the name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that it is in the public interest to publish the names of the parties, or is justified because of the parties’ conduct, or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenant has been substantially successful in these proceedings and is granted name suppression.
Section 95A (4) of the Act allows the Tribunal, on the application of any party to the proceedings, or on its own initiative, having regard to the interest of the parties and the public interest, to order that all or part of the evidence, or the name or any identifying particulars of any witnesses or party, not be published.
Both parties have submitted, due to the nature of the relationship and the smallness of the community in which the tenancy occurred, that naming the landlord will invariably lead to the discovery of the tenant’s identity, who remain in the area. This is something that neither party desire. While public interest lies in the application of the law to the facts, I do not consider it necessarily extends to the names of the parties. I therefore exercise the discretion in section 95A(4) and order suppression of the landlord’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662049 — Healthy homes

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4662049 — Healthy homes

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