What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4671090 about?

The published order could not be summarised from available data.

How much money was awarded in case 4671090?

Compensation: Injury: $500.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4671090?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4671090?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9963476-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4671090 about?

The published order could not be summarised from available data.

How much money was awarded in case 4671090?

Compensation: Injury: $500.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4671090?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4671090?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9963476-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4671090 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4671090 — net $500.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Injury	$500.00	Injury
Net award	$500.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$500.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4671090 — net $500.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Injury	$500.00	Injury
Net award	$500.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$500.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The Tenant claimed work orders, compensation, exemplary damages and reimbursement of the filing fee.
Since the Tenant applied to the Tribunal, the windows in the lounge and bedroom have been repaired. Background
The Tenant commenced a tenancy on 2 May 2022 at an alternate property (“[redacted] property”) managed by the Landlord. Renovations were required for that property, so the parties agreed for the Tenant to temporarily move into the current property until these were completed. The Tenant moved into this property on 19 December 2022 and remains living at this property. There was no Tenancy Agreement signed for this property as there is a dispute regarding the termination of the [redacted] property.
In support of the Tenant’s case, the Tenant submitted their whole case file obtained from the Landlord which was over 300 pages. This was extensive and timely to navigate as the evidence was in support of multiple claims for two different properties and there was no easy reference to either. In making these Orders, all of the evidence was considered but may not be referred to. Work orders
The Tenant claims that the landlord did not repair the flooding issues to the garage area which was also used as a laundry. The garage would flood when it rained and ground water seeped through the cracks in the concrete. The Tenant submitted he initially noticed water damage on a partition in the garage when first viewing the property on 11 December 2022. He asked the Landlord to investigate. The Tenant then reported garage flooding issues to the Landlord on or about 9 May 2023, 2 November 2023, 31 October 2023, 30 December 2023, 25 and 27 January 2024. In May 2023, the Landlord cleared the downpipes in the property to stop the flooding. Photographs were provided of a partition with water damage and mould on the walls.
At a meeting in August 2023, the Tenant submitted the Landlord paused repair work because they believed the Tenant would move back into their previous property. On 18 October 2023, the Tenant submitted they were told the garage would be replaced. On 30 December 2023, a Tradesperson attended, took photographs and advised recommendations would be made but there has been no progress on this. Photographs were provided of the garage flooding on 9 May 2023, 3 November 2023 and 30 December 2023. The Tenant wants the problem fixed.
The landlord submits they sent a Tradesperson in October 2023 and were advised that the flooding issue was repaired by unblocking the gully trap. There was a lot of scoping of the repairs because the solution to fix the flooding potentially affected the neighbouring garages.
Under section 45(1)(a) - (ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986, the landlord has an obligation to provide and maintain certain standards and to comply with applicable requirements.
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. See section 78(1)(e) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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. See sections 78(2) and 78(2AA) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
A work order may also authorise the tenant to undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of doing the work, if the landlord should fail to comply with the work order and alternative monetary order. A monetary limit must be imposed by the Tribunal on the amount of costs that can be charged. These costs can be set off by the tenant against rent payable. See sections 78(2AAB) and 78(2AAC)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Has the landlord failed to comply with their obligations?

Although the Landlord submitted the garage repair was completed in October 2023, the Tenant provided email correspondence and photographs confirming the issue continued in December 2023. The Tenant was now waiting to hear from the Landlord when this issue would be fixed. The repair was drawn out because the flooding only occurred when it rained. Relying on the advice of the Tradespeople, the Landlord understood the issue was resolved in October 2023.
In considering the evidence, I find it more likely than not that the Landlord has acted proactively to repair the flooding. Repairs were hindered by the flooding occurring intermittently and the costs to repair. There is evidence that the Landlord sent a number of Tradespersons and staff to attend the property since the issue was raised. Had this been a repair where the Landlord failed to respond and failed to send Tradespeople over the course of the year, a work Order maybe justified. In this situation, the nature of the issue, the impact of the repair on the neighbouring properties and the process to obtain approval for the repairs were genuine causes of delays. I find that the Landlord has acted on repairing the issue and a work order is not required.
The claim for a work order is dismissed. Compensation
The Tenant sought compensation for leaks to the ceiling and window frames of the property.
The Tenant submitted the lounge/dining room ceiling leaked after it rained which he reported in June 2022. A Tradesperson attended and tiles were installed on the roof, but no repairs were made to the gib board.
The Tenant also submitted the window frames in the Tenants bedroom and lounge leaked. There was a build-up of condensation which he first noticed on 27 January 2023. A Tradesperson was sent on 3 February 2023, and they attempted to tape shut the top of the windows however the condensation persisted after that. It took the Landlord seven months of scoping with no definitive date of repair. Photographs were provided showing the ceiling leak, condensation on the windows and drops of water immersing from the window frames.
The Tenant reported the issue of window-frame leaks again on 9 May 2023, 18 May 2023 and 11 July 2023. Three Tradespersons, two field staff and a supervisor attended the property then a recommendation was made to replace the windows with aluminium windows. Repair work commenced on 18 September 2023 for the windows and these have since been completed.
The Tenant deposed their health and safety suffered from the ‘damp and chilly living conditions’. They provided a medical certificate stating the Tenant’s deterioration in his health was partially caused by the leaky windows and draughts. The Tenant described the ongoing maintenance as ‘deeply unsettling’.
The Landlord submitted that they approved aluminium windows being installed and there was no lack of effort on their part. The Landlord offered the Tenant a rent reduction of $10.00 for 70 weeks whilst simultaneously worked to find the Tenant a suitable property. The Landlord apologised to the Tenant there was a delay in responding to some of his emails. Their Tradespeople work on over 100 jobs in Tamaki because they manage multiple properties. Repairs sometimes require multiple scoping visits. Since the Tenant filed their application, the window frames have been repaired.
Section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“the RTA”) refers to a landlord’s obligations to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age, and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes. A landlord must comply with all requirements in respect of buildings and health and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises. Notably, the Housing Improvement Regulations 1947, specify the minimum standards of fitness for houses which include a requirement that every house be free from dampness (regulation 15).
A landlord’s obligation under section 45 is to investigate and repair a defect within a reasonable timeframe. This is dependent on the gravity of the problem and genuine attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and resolve the issue.
To claim compensation, a party must prove each of the following factors to the required evidential standard: a. A breach of the landlord’s maintenance obligation. b. That the breach caused the damage. c. That the damage was a foreseeable consequence of the breach. d. The Tenant suffered loss as a result of the leaks. e. The amount of the loss.
In considering the evidence, I find that there was a failure to maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair in terms of the ceiling and window-frame leaks.
In terms of the window frame leaks, the photographs indicate the leaks were not substantial however it is difficult to ascertain how cold the draughts caused the house to become. The Landlord acted proactively after being notified on 27 January 2023 of the leaks by sending a Tradesperson on 3 February 2023. This did not resolve the issue so the Landlord sent further staff and Tradespersons to find a more effective solution. The scoping took multiple visits. I find the landlord made genuine attempts to investigate and resolve the issue. The condensation in the windows as shown by the Tenant is not uncommon with New Zealand weather particularly if the windows are closed.
I find the medical evidence filed by the Tenant was based on what the Tenant reported to their GP and was in support of finding alternate accommodation. There could however be other reasons as to why the Tenants gout was aggravated which had nothing to do with the conditions of this house. No evidence was provided to rule this out and given the GP never visited the property, it cannot be substantiated that the cause of the flare ups was exclusively the house. There was also no loss of amenities or loss of income for the Tenant. For these reasons, I do not find any loss suffered by the Tenant should be awarded.
The claim for compensation is dismissed. Injury
The Tenant claimed $10,000.00 due to a knee injury he suffered when he slipped on moss outside the property on 13 April 2023. The Tenant provided photographs of his injured knee which suffered a stress fracture. Because the injury became infected it took longer to heal and required multiple visits to the Doctors.
As a result of the injury, the Tenant submitted he was traumatised having to stare at his injury all day and endure other hazards such as nails and screws on the ground left behind by Tradespeople. He now had permanent scarring.
The Landlord deposed the slippery surface was caused by a build-up of lichen which they subsequently had water blasted.
I find there was a breach of the Landlords obligations to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The fall by the Tenant is a foreseeable consequence of lichen build-up and as a result the Tenant was injured and traumatised.
I find however that the Tenants claim for compensation is excessive. The photos indicate these were not major knee wounds. The Tenant was still mobile after the fall and the injury unfortunately became infected which prolonged his recovery. There is no evidence to rule out that the Tenants lack of maintenance of the injury caused the infection. Whilst the Tenant submits he felt traumatised from his injury, there is no evidence to support he attended with a Counsellor to work through this trauma. The Tenant was still able to function in his daily life with the injury.
For these reasons, I find the appropriate amount to award is $500.00. Nails
The Tenant claimed compensation for his tyres that were punctured due to Tradespersons leaving behind nails and screws after working at the property. The Tenant submitted this was a repeated occurrence with the Tradespeople sent and it was not his obligation to clean up after them. An invoice was provided for the tyres and photographs of the nails on the ground.
Th Landlord did not agree to compensating because the Tenant did not report the nails until after the Tenant’s tire was punctured. They should have reported it immediately so the Landlord could advise the Tradespeople to remove the nails from the driveway.
In considering the evidence, I find given the Tenant did not report this issue to the Landlord immediately, the Landlord is not obliged to pay for the Tenants repairs. A Tenant has an obligation to report this immediately. Had the Tenant reported the residual nails on the ground to the Landlord and then they experienced a puncture, the Landlord would be liable.
For this reason, the claim is dismissed. Exemplary damages
The Tenant has claimed exemplary damages for ‘the lack of discomfort, unrest and lack of enjoyment of the property’. The Tenant submitted the Landlord acted intentionally to cause this because there was either a delay or lack of response to his notifications of repairs. He referred to the flooding and pathway he fell on. Because of this, the tenant is scarred for life.
The Landlord submitted they never intended to cause a lack of discomfort or enjoyment of the property. They have consistently tried to work with the Tenant and they acknowledged they did not always get this right. They are recipients of public funds and they have to use this sensibly. There are processes they have to follow particularly with complex repairs which means some delays. The have even gone out of their way from what their Tradespeople advised and consented to the Aluminium windows being installed for the Tenant. Their intention has always been to maintain a good relationship with their Tenants.
Exemplary damages are awarded for specific unlawful acts and not all breaches of a Landlords obligations. The Tenant has stipulated in their application to refer ‘to all pertinent violations listed in Schedule 1A and 1B’. There was no specific exemplary damage listed. At the hearing, they claimed exemplary damages for lack of discomfort, unrest and lack of enjoyment of the property’. These are not unlawful acts for which exemplary damages is awarded. The Tenant needed to identify which unlawful act in the schedules provided.
The claim is dismissed.
As the Tenant has not been substantially successful, a filing fee has not been awarded and name suppression is granted to the Landlord.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4671090 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4671090 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Reasons

Has the landlord failed to comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Reasons

Has the landlord failed to comply with their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions