How much money was awarded in case 4667341?

Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4667341?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4667341?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9633205-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4667341?

Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4667341?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4667341?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9633205-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4667341 — Exemplary damages

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4667341 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 4667341 — net $3,020.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Retaliatory notice	$1,500.00	Retaliatory notice
Compensation: Breach of repairing obligations	$1,500.00	Breach of repairing obligations
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,020.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,020.44

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

Wenhai Sun must pay [The tenant/s] $3,020.44 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

The landlord must carry out the following work to the premises (to the extent that the work has not been done since the hearing on 18 September 2023), which must be completed by 4 December 2023. a. Repair the sunroom so that it does not leak when it rains. b. Repair the sliding doors to the sunroom so that they open and close easily. c. Check the guttering and clean and repair as necessary to prevent water overflowing from them when it rains. d. Check the premises for any unreasonable gaps and carry out any work necessary to stop draughts. e. Clean or replace mouldy curtains (supplied by the landlord) as necessary. f. Professionally clean the carpet in the premises as necessary (where workmen have walked through the premises causing soiling)

As an alternative to compliance with Order 3, the landlord must pay the tenant $100 per week from 5 December 2023 for every week or part week that the necessary work has not been completed.

The landlord’s termination notice served on 20 July 2023 is declared invalid and retaliatory and therefore of no effect.

The tenant’s other claims are dismissed

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr Yang represented the landlord.

The application named Mr Yang and the current property managers Sunshine Housing Limited as respondents. Neither is the landlord and so I have removed them from the application. I have named the landlord as the respondent.

The tenant asserts that the landlord has not complied with their maintenance obligations. She also claims that the landlord’s 90-day termination notice served on 20 July is retaliatory. She has applied for work orders, compensation and exemplary damages Background

This tenancy began in August 2021.

In July 2022 the basement of the premises was flooded. The basement is under the rear section of the premises. The front section is single story. The basement is not part of the tenancy.

In June 2023 there was a fire in the basement. It seems that it was caused by faulty electrics in the basement probably due to the flooding.

The fire did not affect the premises above. There was some structural damage to the basement and the landlord produced an engineer’s report dated 7 August giving details of the repair work required. The landlord was insured.

The tenant has not been happy with the condition of the premises for some time and on 14 July 2023 she served a breach notice on the landlord.

On 20 July the landlord served a 90-day termination notice on the tenant. Termination Notice

For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord.

Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00.

Where a party has issued a retaliatory notice, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so taking into account the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. For completeness giving of a retaliatory notice does not have to be intentional to award exemplary damages for a breach.

The termination notice was invalid because it does not state the ground for termination. I am aware from the landlord’s submissions that the landlord asserts that it is not reasonably practical for the tenant to remain in occupation of the premises while the repair work to the basement is being completed. The notice refers to the fire damage but does not state the ground relied on. The Act requires that, and the tenant is entitled to it.

In any case, I do not accept that the tenant needs to vacate while the remedial work is carried out. The landlord did not produce any real evidence of that. There may be some inconvenience to the contractors, but in the main, the tenant’s presence in the premises above the basement will not affect them.

I find also that the notice was retaliatory. It came shortly after the tenant’s breach notice and, as I have said, I do not accept that the tenant needs to vacate to allow the work to be completed. It is likely that, in my view, that the tenant’s complaints played at least some part in the decision to serve the termination notice.

I find that an award of exemplary damaged is warranted. A termination notice has a serious effect on a tenant and landlords should think carefully about the lawfulness of the notice before serving it. That has not happened here. I accept that the repair work may have played a part and so an award towards the lower end of the scale is appropriate. I have therefore awarded $1,500. The Condition of the Premises

Under section 45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.

Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00.

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.

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.

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.

The tenant gave evidence about water leaking into the sunroom, gaps causing draughts, difficulty using the sunroom sliding doors, flooding of the driveway, water overflowing the guttering, mouldy curtains provided with the tenancy, carpets dirty from contractors using the premises and the basement being insecure. She also suggested that insulation in the premises was inadequate.

The tenant did not produce much in the way of supporting evidence such as photographs. But her evidence was not seriously challenged, and the landlord did not produce any counter evidence. I largely accept her evidence.

I understand that the basement has been secured and so no order is needed for that. Lacking photographs, there are some things that I cannot assess such as whether gaps are unreasonable. I have therefore made some orders that require the landlord to check and carry out work as required.

There was no real evidence in relation to insulation and so that claim must be dismissed.

In relation to the defects that I do accept, these have persisted for some time. I note that the landlord agreed not to increase the rent due to the condition of the sunroom, but the tenant has not been compensated for other breaches.

I have taken a broad-brush approach and made an award of $1,500 that is meaningful but not excessive.

I do not consider that an award of exemplary damages is warranted. The landlord has been lax, but this is not a case, in my view, where the landlord has intentionally ignored their obligations. Filing Fee

The tenant has had some success and I have awarded her the filing fee. Suppression

Because the tenant had had significant success, I have granted her name suppression.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4667341 — net $3,020.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Retaliatory notice	$1,500.00	Retaliatory notice
Compensation: Breach of repairing obligations	$1,500.00	Breach of repairing obligations
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,020.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,020.44