What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4685712 about?

The tribunal order states: Margaret Scott must pay [The tenant/s] $2,270.44 immediately as shown in the

How much money was awarded in case 4685712?

Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4685712?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4685712?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9592631-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4685712 about?

The tribunal order states: Margaret Scott must pay [The tenant/s] $2,270.44 immediately as shown in the

How much money was awarded in case 4685712?

Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4685712?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4685712?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9592631-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4685712 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4685712 — net $2,270.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: section 38(3	$1,500.00	section 38(3
Exemplary damages: section 48(4)(a	$750.00	section 48(4)(a
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,270.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,270.44

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4685712 — net $2,270.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: section 38(3	$1,500.00	section 38(3
Exemplary damages: section 48(4)(a	$750.00	section 48(4)(a
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,270.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,270.44

Order

Margaret Scott must pay [The tenant/s] $2,270.44 immediately as shown in the table below. DescriptionTenant Exemplary damages: section 38(3) $1,500.00 Exemplary damages: section 48(4)(a) $750.00 Filing fee reimbursement $20.44 Total award $2,270.44 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $2,270.44

Reasons

The landlord was represented by counsel at the hearing but did not herself attend.
The tenant and an advocate attended the hearing. The claims
The landlord’s application was for termination of the tenancy under section 55A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant’s application was for compensation and exemplary damages for: a. The landlord’s failure to maintain the property under section 45(1)(b) RTA. b. The landlord’s noncompliance with the Healthy Homes Standards (“HHS”) under section 45(1)(c) RTA. c. The landlord’s unlawful entry of the property under section 48(4)(a) RTA. d. The landlord’s breach of the tenant’s quiet enjoyment under section 38(3) RTA.
The tenant also made application for a work order to have various matters fixed on the property. Standard of proof
In considering the claims, the “standard of proof” is “on the balance of probabilities.” In other words, the parties must establish with evidence that their claim is “more likely than not.” I consider each of the claims bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented, including oral testimony. I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely. Certain types of evidence carry more weight, which must be taken into account when weighing all the evidence.
Contemporaneous documents such as emails, texts and photographs are often helpful in making factual findings, especially where facts are disputed or there are gaps in the recollection of the parties.
While I may not have referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered.
By accepting the evidence of one person over that of another person, I am not saying that I do not believe the first person’s evidence, only that the evidence of the other person is more likely and may be supported by other evidence that makes it more likely. The landlord’s claim
In support of the landlord’s claim, the landlord submitted at the first telephone hearing a single notice of anti-social behaviour.
Section 55A RTA requires three separate occasions and three separate notices.
Before the hearing, the landlord filed three further notices of antisocial behaviour. There was no indication that these had been served on the tenant. None of these notices are clear or easy to understand but they appear not to disclose antisocial behaviour by the tenant.
The landlord’s application is dismissed. Failure to maintain
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached his obligations under specific sections of section 45(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) which provide that the landlord shall: a. (b) 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. b. (bb) comply with the healthy homes standards c. (c) comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises
The tenant claimed and provided photographic evidence that the following work was required: a. A down pipe outside a front bedroom needed to be channelled into a sump rather than discharging stormwater onto the ground. b. Some windows needed hinges repaired and needed to be eased open as they were jammed shut after painting. c. Tree roots needed to be cleared from the sewage pipe from the toilet. d. A ceiling in the sunroom required repair. e. The back door lock and latch required repair after damage by the landlord. f. A veranda support required repair. g. Tree trimmings cut by the landlord needed to be removed from the property. h. A louvre window required repair. i. The toilet and kitchen windows need to be unstuck. j. The front gate removed by the landlord needs to be reinstated.
As discussed at the hearing, I am not persuaded that the landlord is under an obligation to carry out all of these repairs as they do not impact on the tenant’s enjoyment of the property and the items are in reasonable condition given the age of the property.
The landlord completed the necessary work in relation to the downpipe and some of the windows and hinges within a reasonable time frame and the tenant’s claims for the landlord’s failure to maintain the property are not made out in relation to these items.
Until the toilet sewage becomes an issue, the landlord is not under any obligation to undertake repairs. Nor is the tenant under any obligation to flush down the toilet any tablets supplied by the landlord to inhibit root growth.
However, the landlord is required to repair the back door latch, reinstate the front gate, ease the remaining windows so that they open freely and remove all garden waste from the property by 16 November 2023. If the work is not satisfactorily completed by that date, then the landlord shall pay the tenant $1,500.00 in compensation pursuant to section 78(2) RTA.
This work order under section 78(1)(e) RTA is the appropriate response to the tenant’s claim rather than compensation or exemplary damages. Compliance with HHS
Neither the tenant nor the landlord provided the Tribunal with a copy of the landlord’s HHS statement or a report prepared on the landlord’s behalf.
The tenant provided a copy of a report prepared by an independent contractor which indicated that the downpipe issue meant that the property did not comply with the HHS.
The tenant did not supply evidence that the landlord had intended not to comply with her obligations under the HHS. When advised of the issue, the landlord did her best to correct the issue so that the property complied.
It is not appropriate to award compensation for an undiscovered defect that was corrected in a reasonable time once the tenant brought it to the landlord’s attention.
In the absence of proof of the landlord’s intention not to comply with the HHS, for instance by showing that the landlord knew that the property did not comply, it is not possible to award exemplary damages.
The tenant’s claim under this heading is dismissed. 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 claimed that on 10 July 2023 and 11 July 2023, the landlord made her way into the house property uninvited and without having given notice or being given consent. The tenant gave evidence that the landlord simply “barged” into the house property. On one occasion she threw a list of rentals available at the tenant and on the second she proceeded to take photos in the bedrooms where children were dressing for school.
Through her lawyer, the landlord denied that she had ever entered the property unlawfully.
I am persuaded by the tenant’s evidence that it is more likely than not that the landlord did enter the house property in this manner and that she did commit these unlawful acts.
I am satisfied that she committed these unlawful acts intentionally.
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 am satisfied that it is just to award the tenant exemplary damages taking into account: a. The repeated nature of the landlord’s actions. b. The fact that the landlord is an experienced landlord, owning a number of properties. c. The impact on the tenant of having a landlord burst in upon her and her whanau at an inappropriate time. d. The public interest in deterring landlords from ignoring the rights of tenants in their homes.
Having considered those factors, it is appropriate to award a sum of $750.00 to the tenant in exemplary damages being half the maximum available. Breach of 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.
The tenant gave evidence that the landlord: a. Gave appropriate notice that trades people would be at the property, but then turned up herself earlier without notice and without trades people. b. Came onto the property regularly without notice, ostensibly to garden although garden maintenance was the tenant’s responsibility under the Tenancy Agreement, but without any regard for the tenant’s peace and quiet enjoyment of the property. c. While outside at the property, on some occasions the landlord refused to talk to or communicate with the tenant and other residents. d. Watched the tenant and her whanau from the landlord’s neighbouring property. e. Cut down branches and left them lying around the property. f. Removed the front gate without warning and refused to reinstate it. g. Wrote to the Ministry of Social Development (“MSD”) to inform it – without any evidence - that the tenant was not living at the property and claiming that the tenant was defrauding MSD. At the same time, she asked MSD to stop making rent payments to her from the tenant’s benefit. h. (As noted above) Barged into the house property on two occasions without giving notice, throwing a list of vacant properties at the tenant, telling her she wanted her out and then taking photographs in rooms where children were dressing for school. i. Filing an application with the Tribunal for termination that could not succeed.
The tenant gave evidence that the landlord has made it clear that she wants the tenant to leave the property and for the tenancy to be ended.
The landlord has committed an unlawful act in repeatedly breaching the tenant’s right to peace, quiet enjoyment and privacy. The landlord has committed these acts intentionally.
It is just to make an award of exemplary damages. The landlord’s intention was to have the tenant end the tenancy without complying with the landlord’s obligations and the tenant’s rights under the RTA. The effect has been to seriously diminish the tenant’s ability to enjoy the peace and privacy of her own home. It is in the public interest that landlords be deterred from harassing tenants in such ways so that the provisions for the protection of tenants from such behaviour are not undermined.
It is appropriate to award a sum of $1,500.00 to the tenant being half of the maximum available to reflect the serious breaches by the landlord of her responsibilities. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4685712 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4685712 — Exemplary damages

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