What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4665950 about?

The tribunal order states: Fmra 2003 Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $395.44 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4665950?

Compensation: reimbursement for fee…: $175.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4665950?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4665950?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9797771-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4665950 about?

The tribunal order states: Fmra 2003 Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $395.44 immediately, calculated as

How much money was awarded in case 4665950?

Compensation: reimbursement for fee…: $175.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4665950?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4665950?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9797771-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4665950 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4665950 — net $395.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: reimbursement for fee charged without providing an itemised account	$175.00	reimbursement for fee charged without providing an itemised account
Exemplary damages: breach section 44A RTA	$200.00	breach section 44A RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$395.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$395.44

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Du Toit represented the landlord.

The tenancy application has been amended to remove three former tenants who were no longer living at the tenancy premises when the tenant decided to move out. As I explained in the hearing, I can only deal with the tenancy between the landlord and this tenant.

When the tenant contacted the landlord to say he wanted to assign his tenancy he was told he would need to pay an upfront fee of $275. The tenant did not agree the fee was reasonable. He questioned the fee but ultimately paid it because he needed to complete the paperwork and assign the tenancy. He was very clear that he would pay and file an application with the Tribunal for compensation. He has also claimed exemplary damages. The law relating to the recovery of expenses incurred by the landlord when there is an assignment is set out at section 44A Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). A landlord must now provide an itemised account to the tenant of any expenses incurred in respect to an assignment.

The tenant claims the landlord has attempted to recover expenses incurred in respect to the assignment without providing an itemised account. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 44A(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.

I have considered the emails and the evidence provided at the hearing. The landlord did tell the tenant he would need to pay and upfront fee. Because the landlord has not followed the proper process and provided an itemised account it is impossible for me to ascertain if the amount charged was reasonable. The tenant has agreed to pay $100 of the $275 charged. I find this is fair in this particular case and the landlord is ordered to reimburse the tenant.

I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

The tenant submitted that the landlord acted intentionally because it sent a table setting out possible charges, so it must have known the legal requirements. I find the landlord acted intentionally because this law changed in February 2021 - over two years ago - and the landlord is required to keep up with the changes in the law. The effect on the tenant was financial stress and the stress and inconvenience of having to argue the point with the landlord. It is in tenants’ interests that landlords provide the accounts required when a tenancy is assigned and there is public interest that landlords are penalised when they breach the RTA. The tenant has asked for $200 in exemplary damages and that seems reasonable to me because I am not aware of any similar Tribunal orders against the landlord.

Because the tenant has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The tenant’s application for suppression is also allowed because he is the most successful party.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4665950 — net $395.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: reimbursement for fee charged without providing an itemised account	$175.00	reimbursement for fee charged without providing an itemised account
Exemplary damages: breach section 44A RTA	$200.00	breach section 44A RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$395.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$395.44

Order

Fmra 2003 Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $395.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Du Toit represented the landlord.
The tenancy application has been amended to remove three former tenants who were no longer living at the tenancy premises when the tenant decided to move out. As I explained in the hearing, I can only deal with the tenancy between the landlord and this tenant.
When the tenant contacted the landlord to say he wanted to assign his tenancy he was told he would need to pay an upfront fee of $275. The tenant did not agree the fee was reasonable. He questioned the fee but ultimately paid it because he needed to complete the paperwork and assign the tenancy. He was very clear that he would pay and file an application with the Tribunal for compensation. He has also claimed exemplary damages. The law relating to the recovery of expenses incurred by the landlord when there is an assignment is set out at section 44A Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). A landlord must now provide an itemised account to the tenant of any expenses incurred in respect to an assignment.
The tenant claims the landlord has attempted to recover expenses incurred in respect to the assignment without providing an itemised account. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 44A(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
I have considered the emails and the evidence provided at the hearing. The landlord did tell the tenant he would need to pay and upfront fee. Because the landlord has not followed the proper process and provided an itemised account it is impossible for me to ascertain if the amount charged was reasonable. The tenant has agreed to pay $100 of the $275 charged. I find this is fair in this particular case and the landlord is ordered to reimburse the tenant.
I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
The tenant submitted that the landlord acted intentionally because it sent a table setting out possible charges, so it must have known the legal requirements. I find the landlord acted intentionally because this law changed in February 2021 - over two years ago - and the landlord is required to keep up with the changes in the law. The effect on the tenant was financial stress and the stress and inconvenience of having to argue the point with the landlord. It is in tenants’ interests that landlords provide the accounts required when a tenancy is assigned and there is public interest that landlords are penalised when they breach the RTA. The tenant has asked for $200 in exemplary damages and that seems reasonable to me because I am not aware of any similar Tribunal orders against the landlord.
Because the tenant has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant’s application for suppression is also allowed because he is the most successful party.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4665950 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4665950 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions