What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4684449 about?

The tribunal order states: Peter Cooper must pay [The tenant/s] $2,720.44. The payment can be in one

How much money was awarded in case 4684449?

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

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4684449?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4684449?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9566891-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4684449 about?

The tribunal order states: Peter Cooper must pay [The tenant/s] $2,720.44. The payment can be in one

How much money was awarded in case 4684449?

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

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4684449?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4684449?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9566891-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

141 Otonga Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4684449 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4684449 — net $2,020.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages – breach tenants rights to quiet enjoyment	$1,500.00	Exemplary damages – breach tenants rights to quiet enjoyment
Exemplary damages – unlawful entry	$500.00	Exemplary damages – unlawful entry
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,020.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,020.44

Order

Peter Cooper must pay [The tenant/s] $2,720.44. The payment can be in one lump sum or by way of a rent reduction sufficient to cover the amount owing.
The tenant’s name is to be supressed from the published order.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Unlawful entry
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant’s claim focussed on two separate occasions when he says Mr Cooper entered the property without his consent.
The first occurred on 17 October 2021 when Mr Cooper asked if he could attend to do some work in the garage. The tenants replied that they were not home for the day. I accept [The tenant/s] evidence that he had turned the power off to the shed and when he arrived home, he found the power had been switched on again from inside his home. While Mr Cooper said he did not specifically recall that day, I find the evidence suggests he committed an unlawful act. The text messages confirm [The tenant/s] advised him he would not be home. The power was turned off because [The tenant/s] and his family had become somewhat tired of Mr Cooper’s regular attendance at the property. When he arrived home to find Mr Cooper had been there and entered his home, despite his advice that he was not home, he kept a track of the details.
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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I find it is appropriate to award exemplary damages. The RTA is very clear that a landlord cannot enter rental premises without permission and without giving the required notice. Breaching this obligation and entering a tenant’s home when they are not there and in fact in the face of their express advice that the day does not suit, is behaviour that the Tribunal cannot condone.
I have pitched the exemplary damages at the lower end of the scale as I accept Mr Cooper’s explanation that he considered the relationship was on a relatively friendly basis. That tends to overlook the power imbalance at play, the fact [The tenant/s] did not overtly express his growing frustration, does not mean he did not feel increasingly aggravated by the situation that was developing. It is more likely that he did not want to rock the boat for fear of loosing the home he and his young family enjoy in every other respect.
I decline to award exemplary damages for the other incident outlined on 19 December 2022 when Mr Cooper called to the property to drop a Christmas gift When the tenants were not home, he used his key to enter the garage and leave the gift in there securely and out of the sun. That is not a breach for which exemplary damages should be awarded. Breach quiet enjoyment
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has harassed them.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines harassment as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person, annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
[The tenant/s] went through a long list of dates and occasions when Mr Cooper attended at the property beginning shortly after the tenancy commenced when a garage door opener required replacement. That replacement on its own involved three attendances at the property and Mr Cooper staying until after 10 pm on two evenings to try and sort the issue.
[The tenant/s] and his partner had a young baby and were disturbed by the noises from the garage just a couple of meters away so late at night. While Mr Cooper trying to sort the issue himself, was not unreasonable at all, staying at the property until 10pm on multiple occasions was. In addition, the garage was unlocked which added to the tenants’ concerns.
Mr Cooper has also attended at the property regularly to weed spray, cut trees, install a new kitchen and shelving in the garage, repair the insulation in the garage and attend to other work. The text messages provided show that this has often been with less than the required notice.
[The tenant/s] expressed frustration at the additions in the garage which Mr Cooper have installed. He says the additions mean that he and his partner cannot use the garage to park their cars. His partner dinged her car trying to back it into a very tight space and after that they gave up and have parked their cars outside.
While Mr Cooper said he has unaware of this, there is a message sent to him on 2 November 2022 saying the kitchen installed is too big and “we can no longer get our cars in there and shut the door, would you be able to come sort out please”. Mr Cooper says he does not recall seeing that text but clearly it was sent to him. He said he will now remove part of the kitchen unit so cars can be parked in the shed.
The sheer number of attendances at the property and the extent of the communication means that the landlord has breached the tenants’ rights to quietly enjoy the property without interference from the landlord. The fact that most of the attendances are during weekends and in the evenings exacerbates things. That is when a young family most requires peace and privacy. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. His actions have been intrusive to an unreasonable degree for the tenants, they amount to harassment.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The exemplary damages are pitched at the midpoint of the scale. This is to reflect both the seriousness of the repeated attendances at the property, often without proper notice, and to balance this against Mr Cooper’s genuine remorse, which he expressed once he said he had an opportunity to reflect.
The public interest requires that the Tribunal send a clear message to landlords that the obligation to comply with notice requirements, before attendance at a rental property, is a strict one. In addition, even well-intentioned landlords must have regard to their tenants’ rights to exclusive occupation of rental premises, including garages and grounds.
To avoid any further issues Mr Cooper has agreed to remove all of the items he has stored in the garage (he will put some lining boards onto the walls this weekend) and then remove all possessions from the garage including his weed sprayer, paint, curtains and other items stored there. He will also remove as much of the alterations he has installed as are necessary to ensure the tenants can park their cars there and that they can fully utilise the shed. That is what they are paying rent for.
The tenants will attend to the lawns and gardens themselves going forward as the tenancy agreement requires. This will minimise the need for Mr Cooper to attend at the property at all. The 14 day notice provisions are available to either party if necessary. Failure to keep records
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not kept records of rent and bond paid.
A landlord must keep proper business records showing details of all rent payments and any bond paid by the tenant. See section 30(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $350.00. See section 30(2) and Schedule 1A RTA).
Mr Cooper said that he kept a close track of the rent paid at the beginning of the tenancy and then let things slip in that regard, until he put the property onto the market and was considering reducing the rent because of the inconvenience of that. He then discovered retrospectively that rent had not been paid at an earlier part of the tenancy.
[The tenant/s] complaint about this was that he had inadvertently paid rent to a wrong account and because Mr Cooper was not keeping proper records this was not discovered until a lot later than it should have been. He has been unable to recover the rent he paid into the wrong account.
Mr Cooper is not responsible for the error but his failure to keep contemporaneous records is both an unlawful act and does mean that the error was not discovered in a timely manner.
While an unlawful act has been committed as accurate and contemporaneous rent records were not kept, I am unable to find the required intentionality before an award of exemplary damages can be made. Mr Cooper was simply trusting that the rent was being paid, he was unaware it was not and not aware of his obligation to keep accurate records.
To rectify the breach Mr Cooper will now provide an up-to-date record of all rent paid since the beginning of the tenancy. The amount awarded above may be either deducted from ongoing rent liability or paid in one lump sum at Mr Cooper’s discretion.
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
[The tenant/s] requested name suppression which is granted as he has substantially succeeded with the claims made.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4684449 — net $2,020.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages – breach tenants rights to quiet enjoyment	$1,500.00	Exemplary damages – breach tenants rights to quiet enjoyment
Exemplary damages – unlawful entry	$500.00	Exemplary damages – unlawful entry
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,020.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,020.44

Order

Peter Cooper must pay [The tenant/s] $2,720.44. The payment can be in one lump sum or by way of a rent reduction sufficient to cover the amount owing.
The tenant’s name is to be supressed from the published order.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Unlawful entry
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant’s claim focussed on two separate occasions when he says Mr Cooper entered the property without his consent.
The first occurred on 17 October 2021 when Mr Cooper asked if he could attend to do some work in the garage. The tenants replied that they were not home for the day. I accept [The tenant/s] evidence that he had turned the power off to the shed and when he arrived home, he found the power had been switched on again from inside his home. While Mr Cooper said he did not specifically recall that day, I find the evidence suggests he committed an unlawful act. The text messages confirm [The tenant/s] advised him he would not be home. The power was turned off because [The tenant/s] and his family had become somewhat tired of Mr Cooper’s regular attendance at the property. When he arrived home to find Mr Cooper had been there and entered his home, despite his advice that he was not home, he kept a track of the details.
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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I find it is appropriate to award exemplary damages. The RTA is very clear that a landlord cannot enter rental premises without permission and without giving the required notice. Breaching this obligation and entering a tenant’s home when they are not there and in fact in the face of their express advice that the day does not suit, is behaviour that the Tribunal cannot condone.
I have pitched the exemplary damages at the lower end of the scale as I accept Mr Cooper’s explanation that he considered the relationship was on a relatively friendly basis. That tends to overlook the power imbalance at play, the fact [The tenant/s] did not overtly express his growing frustration, does not mean he did not feel increasingly aggravated by the situation that was developing. It is more likely that he did not want to rock the boat for fear of loosing the home he and his young family enjoy in every other respect.
I decline to award exemplary damages for the other incident outlined on 19 December 2022 when Mr Cooper called to the property to drop a Christmas gift When the tenants were not home, he used his key to enter the garage and leave the gift in there securely and out of the sun. That is not a breach for which exemplary damages should be awarded. Breach quiet enjoyment
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has harassed them.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
Black’s Law Dictionary defines harassment as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person, annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
[The tenant/s] went through a long list of dates and occasions when Mr Cooper attended at the property beginning shortly after the tenancy commenced when a garage door opener required replacement. That replacement on its own involved three attendances at the property and Mr Cooper staying until after 10 pm on two evenings to try and sort the issue.
[The tenant/s] and his partner had a young baby and were disturbed by the noises from the garage just a couple of meters away so late at night. While Mr Cooper trying to sort the issue himself, was not unreasonable at all, staying at the property until 10pm on multiple occasions was. In addition, the garage was unlocked which added to the tenants’ concerns.
Mr Cooper has also attended at the property regularly to weed spray, cut trees, install a new kitchen and shelving in the garage, repair the insulation in the garage and attend to other work. The text messages provided show that this has often been with less than the required notice.
[The tenant/s] expressed frustration at the additions in the garage which Mr Cooper have installed. He says the additions mean that he and his partner cannot use the garage to park their cars. His partner dinged her car trying to back it into a very tight space and after that they gave up and have parked their cars outside.
While Mr Cooper said he has unaware of this, there is a message sent to him on 2 November 2022 saying the kitchen installed is too big and “we can no longer get our cars in there and shut the door, would you be able to come sort out please”. Mr Cooper says he does not recall seeing that text but clearly it was sent to him. He said he will now remove part of the kitchen unit so cars can be parked in the shed.
The sheer number of attendances at the property and the extent of the communication means that the landlord has breached the tenants’ rights to quietly enjoy the property without interference from the landlord. The fact that most of the attendances are during weekends and in the evenings exacerbates things. That is when a young family most requires peace and privacy. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. His actions have been intrusive to an unreasonable degree for the tenants, they amount to harassment.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The exemplary damages are pitched at the midpoint of the scale. This is to reflect both the seriousness of the repeated attendances at the property, often without proper notice, and to balance this against Mr Cooper’s genuine remorse, which he expressed once he said he had an opportunity to reflect.
The public interest requires that the Tribunal send a clear message to landlords that the obligation to comply with notice requirements, before attendance at a rental property, is a strict one. In addition, even well-intentioned landlords must have regard to their tenants’ rights to exclusive occupation of rental premises, including garages and grounds.
To avoid any further issues Mr Cooper has agreed to remove all of the items he has stored in the garage (he will put some lining boards onto the walls this weekend) and then remove all possessions from the garage including his weed sprayer, paint, curtains and other items stored there. He will also remove as much of the alterations he has installed as are necessary to ensure the tenants can park their cars there and that they can fully utilise the shed. That is what they are paying rent for.
The tenants will attend to the lawns and gardens themselves going forward as the tenancy agreement requires. This will minimise the need for Mr Cooper to attend at the property at all. The 14 day notice provisions are available to either party if necessary. Failure to keep records
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not kept records of rent and bond paid.
A landlord must keep proper business records showing details of all rent payments and any bond paid by the tenant. See section 30(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $350.00. See section 30(2) and Schedule 1A RTA).
Mr Cooper said that he kept a close track of the rent paid at the beginning of the tenancy and then let things slip in that regard, until he put the property onto the market and was considering reducing the rent because of the inconvenience of that. He then discovered retrospectively that rent had not been paid at an earlier part of the tenancy.
[The tenant/s] complaint about this was that he had inadvertently paid rent to a wrong account and because Mr Cooper was not keeping proper records this was not discovered until a lot later than it should have been. He has been unable to recover the rent he paid into the wrong account.
Mr Cooper is not responsible for the error but his failure to keep contemporaneous records is both an unlawful act and does mean that the error was not discovered in a timely manner.
While an unlawful act has been committed as accurate and contemporaneous rent records were not kept, I am unable to find the required intentionality before an award of exemplary damages can be made. Mr Cooper was simply trusting that the rent was being paid, he was unaware it was not and not aware of his obligation to keep accurate records.
To rectify the breach Mr Cooper will now provide an up-to-date record of all rent paid since the beginning of the tenancy. The amount awarded above may be either deducted from ongoing rent liability or paid in one lump sum at Mr Cooper’s discretion.
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
[The tenant/s] requested name suppression which is granted as he has substantially succeeded with the claims made.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4684449 — Exemplary damages at 141 Otonga Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4684449 — Exemplary damages at 141 Otonga Road, Springfield, Rotorua 3015

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