What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4684930 about?

The tribunal order states: Upper House Property Management Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,306.58

How much money was awarded in case 4684930?

Compensation: Loss Of Amenity: $1,280.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Water Refund: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $2,443.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4684930?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4684930?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10397229-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4684930 about?

The tribunal order states: Upper House Property Management Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,306.58

How much money was awarded in case 4684930?

Compensation: Loss Of Amenity: $1,280.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Water Refund: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $2,443.86 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4684930?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4684930?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10397229-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

146 Lynn Road, Bayview, Auckland 0629 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4684930 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4684930 — net $1,306.58 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 May 2024	$2,443.86		Rent arrears to 29 May 2024
Compensation: Loss of amenity		$1,280.00	Loss of amenity
Compensation: Water refund		$50.00	Water refund
Exemplary damages: Section 45		$1,200.00	Section 45
Exemplary damages: Unlawful notice		$1,200.00	Unlawful notice
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$2,443.86	$3,750.44
Net award		$1,306.58
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,306.58

Order

Upper House Property Management Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,306.58 as set out in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy began on 8 May 2023 and is due to end on 16 June 2024. As recorded in the tenancy agreement, the tenancy was for a fixed term due to end on 8 May 2024. Landlord application
The landlord applied for rent arrears and produced a rent summary. The summary did not include a payment made by the tenant since the summary was updated. It was agreed that the tenant owed $2,443.86, being the amount owed at the date of hearing less one weeks rent of $660.00. That amount is ordered. Tenant application
The tenant applied for compensation in relation to loss of amenity (hot water), exemplary damages (unlawful notice, provide the premises in reasonable state, maintenance, smoke alarms) and compensation for water use. Unlawful notice
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 60AA.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord gave the tenant notice to end the tenancy on 25 March 2024. The notice was given during the fixed term and did not provide the length of notice as required in the legislation 1 . I find they have 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The notice dated 25 March 2024 advised the tenant that the tenancy will end on 5 May 2024. That amounts to 41 days’ notice even though the Act provides that the landlord must give 90 days’ notice where an owner requires the premises as a principal place of residence.
The tenant relied on the notice given by the landlord and began to look for alternate accommodation. On 28 April 2024 the tenant emailed the Property Manager advising that he has applied for 15 properties and viewed 12 but had only been shortlisted for one. He also mentioned that he had been advised that 63 days’ notice was required in the circumstances and that they should not 1 Section 51(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 need to vacate until 26 May 2024. The Property Manager took this as a request for an extension and did not respond to the unlawful notice period.
Eventually there was agreement for the tenant to vacate the premises on 16 June 2024 as that is when he managed to secure a new tenancy. But for the period from 25 March 2024 the unlawful notice caused the tenant undue stress.
In addition, this is a fixed term tenancy. While the Act provides that the parties to a fixed term tenancy can before the expiry agree not to continue with the tenancy 2 beyond the fixed term, the notice from the landlord is not seeking agreement. It is notice to end the tenancy without requiring or seeking the tenant’s agreement.
The landlord is represented by a professional Property Management company. Knowledge around what is required in relation to fixed term tenancies and notice periods is fundamental. This error has had a significant impact on the tenant. It is in the public interest that landlords comply with the legislation in relation to notice to end tenancies. In the circumstances I consider that an award of $1,200.00 is reasonable. Section 45
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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 and comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord had failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness because large items of furniture were not removed at the beginning of the tenancy. The landlord did not undertake maintenance within a timely manner and there were no smoke alarms in the premises at the commencement of the tenancy. I find they have 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 2 Section 60A(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
When the tenant moved into the premises the landlord had left large items in the lounge. This included a large desk, a cabinet, a 50-inch TV and a computer monitor. No arrangements were made to collect or remove these items by the landlord. Instead, on 17 June 2023 the Property Manager emailed the tenant with details of the inorganic rubbish collection and asked the tenant to remove the items to the front of the property.
This was not the responsibility of the tenant. The landlord should have removed these items before the tenancy commenced. Not only did the tenant have the inconvenience of these items in the lounge area he was also asked to dispose of them. That involved dismantling the furniture and carting large pieces of rubbish to the front of the property.
The landlord took too long to attend to some maintenance issues. This included the clothesline which was broken and unusable at the beginning of the tenancy and which was only repaired six months later on 20 November 2023. The kitchen drawers were jammed, and the landlord was notified on 1 August 2023. They were not fixed until 12 September 2023. There were gaps in the toilet window which the tenant showed the Property Manager on 17 July 2023. The gaps were not fixed until 18 August 2023. Also, on that day the broken glass in the door (from the beginning of the tenancy) was fixed. The tenant notified that the shower was leaking on 10 May 2023. It was not fixed until 27 July 2023. The laundry door could not be opened, and the tenant advised the Property Manager during an inspection on 17 July 2023. That door was not fixed until 10 November 2023.
The tenant claims that there was no smoke alarm at the premises. The landlord produced a Healthy Homes report dated 10 May 2023 prepared by Affordable Energy Solutions. On page 22 of the report, it states that the property is compliant in relation to smoke alarms. There is a photograph on that page but there is no smoke alarm in the photograph.
The tenant had enquired about the Healthy Homes status for the premises given the lack of a smoke alarm. The landlord provided the tenant with a copy of the report on 1 August 2023.
The tenant also produced text communication between he and the previous Property Manager. Before sending the report to the tenant the Property Manager had messaged several times asking for photographs of the smoke alarms which the tenant said were not installed until 27 July 2023, more than eleven weeks after the tenancy commenced.
At the hearing the tenant produced the photograph of the smoke alarm after it had been installed on 27 July 2023. It is in the same area where the report states that there was a smoke alarm, but it was clearly not in the report’s photograph.
Given that the HH report states that there is a smoke alarm it makes no sense for the Property Manager to request these photographs.
Given the evidence I am of the view that the premises did not have a smoke alarm in it, notwithstanding the report.
Clause 5(6) of the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 provides that “there must be at least 1 qualifying smoke alarm installed in the sleeping space; or otherwise at the premises within 3 metres of the entrance (or main entrance) to the sleeping space”.
For these breaches I consider that the tenant should be awarded exemplary damages. In determining the amount of the award, I have taken account of the impact on the tenant of having to live with and remove the landlord’s rubbish, the effect on the tenant from the delay in maintaining the premises and the risk to the tenant’s health and safety of having no smoke alarm for weeks after the tenancy commenced. I consider that an award of $1,200.00 is reasonable. Loss of amenity
The hot water at these premises is heated by gas. There are two large gas bottles that need to be filled and delivered.
There were considerable issues about the supply of the gas bottles. Two companies used to provide the gas bottles either refused to deliver or had difficulty and did not follow the rules when delivering the gas bottles to the premises. The problem was due to the access to where the gas bottles were located.
The gas bottles were around the side of the premises which was accessed by steps or a wooden ramp that had been installed. In the beginning the steps were not able to be used because they were covered in clay that had been dug up. This was cleared at some stage. However, due to the size of the gas bottles they needed to be delivered by using a hand trolley. That is probably why the wooden ramp was installed. The problem with the ramp was that it was slippery. The tenant had fallen on it when viewing the property. One of the delivery men also fell over with the gas bottle.
As the landlord did not provide a safe means for the gas bottles to be delivered the tenant went for some time without hot water.
When the delivered gas bottles ran out of gas new bottles were needed in October 2023. Again, the companies were not prepared to deliver the bottles due to safety issues.
A decision was made by the landlord to relocate the gas bottles to an area which was accessible for delivery of the gas bottles.
For the period between 15 November 2023 and 13 February 2024 the landlord provided the downstairs bedsit shower (which was not used) for the tenant to use. This required the tenant to go outside and around the house to enter the bedsit to shower. The tenant’s five-year-old daughter also showered in this way.
When the tenant did not have use of the bedsit, he and his daughter would need to go to other homes to shower. Also, during the whole period, the tenant did not have running hot water for dishes, the laundry. This caused a considerable inconvenience to the tenant.
I consider that the tenant should have an award for loss of amenity in relation to the hot water due to the landlord’s failure to enable safe delivery for the gas bottles. I have calculated the loss of amenity at $10.00 per day for 128 days. In awarding this amount I have taken account of the stress that this situation has caused the tenant, the inconvenience of having to travel for showers and the inconvenience of having to go outside to use the bedsit shower. In addition, I have taken account of the complete lack of hot water for dishes, laundry and hand washing when using the toilet. Water refund
When the contractors came to clear the stairs leading to the gas bottles, they left the outside hose running. This was discovered two weeks later. Also, the tenant water blasted the driveway as it was slippery and unsafe.
I consider that the tenant should have some reimbursement for the water used and for which he is to pay. I have awarded $50.00 for this. Filing fee and suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason I have suppressed the tenant’s name as sought.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4684930 — net $1,306.58 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 May 2024	$2,443.86		Rent arrears to 29 May 2024
Compensation: Loss of amenity		$1,280.00	Loss of amenity
Compensation: Water refund		$50.00	Water refund
Exemplary damages: Section 45		$1,200.00	Section 45
Exemplary damages: Unlawful notice		$1,200.00	Unlawful notice
Filing fee reimbursement		$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$2,443.86	$3,750.44
Net award		$1,306.58
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,306.58

Order

Upper House Property Management Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $1,306.58 as set out in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy began on 8 May 2023 and is due to end on 16 June 2024. As recorded in the tenancy agreement, the tenancy was for a fixed term due to end on 8 May 2024. Landlord application
The landlord applied for rent arrears and produced a rent summary. The summary did not include a payment made by the tenant since the summary was updated. It was agreed that the tenant owed $2,443.86, being the amount owed at the date of hearing less one weeks rent of $660.00. That amount is ordered. Tenant application
The tenant applied for compensation in relation to loss of amenity (hot water), exemplary damages (unlawful notice, provide the premises in reasonable state, maintenance, smoke alarms) and compensation for water use. Unlawful notice
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 60AA.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord gave the tenant notice to end the tenancy on 25 March 2024. The notice was given during the fixed term and did not provide the length of notice as required in the legislation 1 . I find they have 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The notice dated 25 March 2024 advised the tenant that the tenancy will end on 5 May 2024. That amounts to 41 days’ notice even though the Act provides that the landlord must give 90 days’ notice where an owner requires the premises as a principal place of residence.
The tenant relied on the notice given by the landlord and began to look for alternate accommodation. On 28 April 2024 the tenant emailed the Property Manager advising that he has applied for 15 properties and viewed 12 but had only been shortlisted for one. He also mentioned that he had been advised that 63 days’ notice was required in the circumstances and that they should not 1 Section 51(1)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 need to vacate until 26 May 2024. The Property Manager took this as a request for an extension and did not respond to the unlawful notice period.
Eventually there was agreement for the tenant to vacate the premises on 16 June 2024 as that is when he managed to secure a new tenancy. But for the period from 25 March 2024 the unlawful notice caused the tenant undue stress.
In addition, this is a fixed term tenancy. While the Act provides that the parties to a fixed term tenancy can before the expiry agree not to continue with the tenancy 2 beyond the fixed term, the notice from the landlord is not seeking agreement. It is notice to end the tenancy without requiring or seeking the tenant’s agreement.
The landlord is represented by a professional Property Management company. Knowledge around what is required in relation to fixed term tenancies and notice periods is fundamental. This error has had a significant impact on the tenant. It is in the public interest that landlords comply with the legislation in relation to notice to end tenancies. In the circumstances I consider that an award of $1,200.00 is reasonable. Section 45
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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 and comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord had failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness because large items of furniture were not removed at the beginning of the tenancy. The landlord did not undertake maintenance within a timely manner and there were no smoke alarms in the premises at the commencement of the tenancy. I find they have 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 2 Section 60A(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
When the tenant moved into the premises the landlord had left large items in the lounge. This included a large desk, a cabinet, a 50-inch TV and a computer monitor. No arrangements were made to collect or remove these items by the landlord. Instead, on 17 June 2023 the Property Manager emailed the tenant with details of the inorganic rubbish collection and asked the tenant to remove the items to the front of the property.
This was not the responsibility of the tenant. The landlord should have removed these items before the tenancy commenced. Not only did the tenant have the inconvenience of these items in the lounge area he was also asked to dispose of them. That involved dismantling the furniture and carting large pieces of rubbish to the front of the property.
The landlord took too long to attend to some maintenance issues. This included the clothesline which was broken and unusable at the beginning of the tenancy and which was only repaired six months later on 20 November 2023. The kitchen drawers were jammed, and the landlord was notified on 1 August 2023. They were not fixed until 12 September 2023. There were gaps in the toilet window which the tenant showed the Property Manager on 17 July 2023. The gaps were not fixed until 18 August 2023. Also, on that day the broken glass in the door (from the beginning of the tenancy) was fixed. The tenant notified that the shower was leaking on 10 May 2023. It was not fixed until 27 July 2023. The laundry door could not be opened, and the tenant advised the Property Manager during an inspection on 17 July 2023. That door was not fixed until 10 November 2023.
The tenant claims that there was no smoke alarm at the premises. The landlord produced a Healthy Homes report dated 10 May 2023 prepared by Affordable Energy Solutions. On page 22 of the report, it states that the property is compliant in relation to smoke alarms. There is a photograph on that page but there is no smoke alarm in the photograph.
The tenant had enquired about the Healthy Homes status for the premises given the lack of a smoke alarm. The landlord provided the tenant with a copy of the report on 1 August 2023.
The tenant also produced text communication between he and the previous Property Manager. Before sending the report to the tenant the Property Manager had messaged several times asking for photographs of the smoke alarms which the tenant said were not installed until 27 July 2023, more than eleven weeks after the tenancy commenced.
At the hearing the tenant produced the photograph of the smoke alarm after it had been installed on 27 July 2023. It is in the same area where the report states that there was a smoke alarm, but it was clearly not in the report’s photograph.
Given that the HH report states that there is a smoke alarm it makes no sense for the Property Manager to request these photographs.
Given the evidence I am of the view that the premises did not have a smoke alarm in it, notwithstanding the report.
Clause 5(6) of the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 provides that “there must be at least 1 qualifying smoke alarm installed in the sleeping space; or otherwise at the premises within 3 metres of the entrance (or main entrance) to the sleeping space”.
For these breaches I consider that the tenant should be awarded exemplary damages. In determining the amount of the award, I have taken account of the impact on the tenant of having to live with and remove the landlord’s rubbish, the effect on the tenant from the delay in maintaining the premises and the risk to the tenant’s health and safety of having no smoke alarm for weeks after the tenancy commenced. I consider that an award of $1,200.00 is reasonable. Loss of amenity
The hot water at these premises is heated by gas. There are two large gas bottles that need to be filled and delivered.
There were considerable issues about the supply of the gas bottles. Two companies used to provide the gas bottles either refused to deliver or had difficulty and did not follow the rules when delivering the gas bottles to the premises. The problem was due to the access to where the gas bottles were located.
The gas bottles were around the side of the premises which was accessed by steps or a wooden ramp that had been installed. In the beginning the steps were not able to be used because they were covered in clay that had been dug up. This was cleared at some stage. However, due to the size of the gas bottles they needed to be delivered by using a hand trolley. That is probably why the wooden ramp was installed. The problem with the ramp was that it was slippery. The tenant had fallen on it when viewing the property. One of the delivery men also fell over with the gas bottle.
As the landlord did not provide a safe means for the gas bottles to be delivered the tenant went for some time without hot water.
When the delivered gas bottles ran out of gas new bottles were needed in October 2023. Again, the companies were not prepared to deliver the bottles due to safety issues.
A decision was made by the landlord to relocate the gas bottles to an area which was accessible for delivery of the gas bottles.
For the period between 15 November 2023 and 13 February 2024 the landlord provided the downstairs bedsit shower (which was not used) for the tenant to use. This required the tenant to go outside and around the house to enter the bedsit to shower. The tenant’s five-year-old daughter also showered in this way.
When the tenant did not have use of the bedsit, he and his daughter would need to go to other homes to shower. Also, during the whole period, the tenant did not have running hot water for dishes, the laundry. This caused a considerable inconvenience to the tenant.
I consider that the tenant should have an award for loss of amenity in relation to the hot water due to the landlord’s failure to enable safe delivery for the gas bottles. I have calculated the loss of amenity at $10.00 per day for 128 days. In awarding this amount I have taken account of the stress that this situation has caused the tenant, the inconvenience of having to travel for showers and the inconvenience of having to go outside to use the bedsit shower. In addition, I have taken account of the complete lack of hot water for dishes, laundry and hand washing when using the toilet. Water refund
When the contractors came to clear the stairs leading to the gas bottles, they left the outside hose running. This was discovered two weeks later. Also, the tenant water blasted the driveway as it was slippery and unsafe.
I consider that the tenant should have some reimbursement for the water used and for which he is to pay. I have awarded $50.00 for this. Filing fee and suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason I have suppressed the tenant’s name as sought.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4684930 — Exemplary damages at 146 Lynn Road, Bayview, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4684930 — Exemplary damages at 146 Lynn Road, Bayview, Auckland 0629

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