What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4691912 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, the landlord must carry out the following work to the premises,

How much money was awarded in case 4691912?

Compensation: $850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4691912?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4691912?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10328475-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4691912 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, the landlord must carry out the following work to the premises,

How much money was awarded in case 4691912?

Compensation: $850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4691912?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4691912?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10328475-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

161 Riverside Avenue, Point England, Auckland 1072 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4691912 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4691912 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$850.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44

By consent, the landlord must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 27 May 2024: a. Obtain moisture and humidity readings for the premises to determine whether the levels remain high following remediation work; b. If the moisture and humidity readings remain as high as in the report dated 25 September 2023 then the landlord is to consider other remedial work including installing a home ventilation system as recommended in that report.

The landlord must pay the tenant $870.44 as set out in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant applied for a work order, for a claim related to the Healthy Homes standards, for compensation and exemplary damages.

This matter was before the Tribunal on 10 November 2023 when it was referred to mediation. The Tribunal order from that date summarised the issues and the tenant’s claim. Work order

The tenant claims that the landlord did not address the mould issue. The tenant wants the problem fixed.

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.

Has the landlord failed to comply with their obligations?

The tenant has been complaining of mould in her home for many years. On 25 September 2023 the landlord commissioned a report to consider moisture and mould. At the beginning of the report, it states that safe moisture levels are recommended to be around 20% or under. Safe humidity levels are recommended to be between 30-50%.

The report records elevated humidity levels in the lounge, kitchen/dining room, bedroom 1, bedroom 2, bedroom 3, bathroom, toilet and laundry. For all areas of the house the levels were between 70% to 75%.

The report recommended decontamination of the affected areas, installation of a home ventilation system, the use of dehumidifiers and for the tenant to ventilate.

The landlord did not come to the Tribunal hearing prepared with any significant evidence other than the report mentioned above. There was no evidence of compliance with the recommendations. The landlord confirmed that the second recommendation of installing a home ventilation system was not complied with.

The mould, humidity and moisture levels at the home have not been addressed. While the landlord says that it has taken steps this is not supported by evidence. If the mould issue has been resolved, then it is expected that the moisture and humidity levels with be at normal levels and not elevated.

I direct that further testing is carried out. If the levels are still high, then the landlord needs to consider alternate ways to address the issue such as installation of a home ventilation system. It may also be helpful to carry out the spore-trapping non-culturable sampling method as mentioned in the report. Healthy Homes standards

The Tribunal order dated 10 November 2023 identified that compliance with the Healthy Homes standards was an issue raised by the tenant and one that would be considered at the hearing.

Again, the landlord came unprepared to the hearing. The landlord did not have any evidence of compliance with the Healthy Homes standards despite giving verbal evidence that the premises complied.

During the hearing the landlord arranged for colleagues to email Healthy Homes documents to the Registry. The first document was undated and unsigned. While stating that the premises were compliant with the Healthy Homes standard it does not state when this applied.

A second document signed on 14 April 2022 sets out the work required for the premises to be Healthy Homes compliant. A third document states that the premises was compliant on 13 May 2022.

All this documentation should have been provided to the Tribunal for this hearing rather than requiring the Tribunal to direct that it be provided during the hearing.

In addition, the tenant says that she has repeatedly asked for a copy of the Healthy Homes report but has not been provided with one. The landlord should have provided this to the tenant as is required by section 45(1AC) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

As explained to the tenant at the hearing, the landlord, as a community housing provider, is not required to fully comply with the Healthy Homes standards until 1 July 2024. Therefore, the landlord has not breached the Healthy Homes standards at the date of hearing. Compensation

The tenant has had some significantly negative experiences in these premises. One of these occurred in September 2023 when the landlord arranged for mould to be removed from the eaves of the home. To prevent fumes from entering the home the inside of the windows was taped over with plastic sheeting. This meant that the windows could not be opened for fresh air.

At some stage the tenant turned on the heat pump and soon afterwards she felt short of breath with intermittent headaches and nausea. She passed out. Recent to this incident the tenant had suffered from respiratory infection/bronchitis. Her health was therefore vulnerable. Apparently, the fumes from the products used by the contractors may have entered the heat pump vent located outside.

Another issue for the tenant was the temporary shed that was provided for her to store her belongings while her home was renovated. That shed was rusty and leaked. Apparently much if not all the tenant’s belongings were damaged due to the leak. The tenant got some compensation from the landlord in relation to the damaged belongings, but not for all of them.

Another incident occurred when the water at the premises was brown. The tenant tried to get this looked at, but the instructions given to the tenant in relation to notifying issues is confusing. She has a Property Manager but is required to contact a different person to communicate with and the reason given for this was so that the tenant got a better service. The water issue was identified on the Friday, but a plumber did not attend the premises until the following Wednesday. Fortunately, the tenant was given bottled water by the council. This issue should have been acted upon quicker by the landlord.

The landlord acknowledged at the hearing that it has not always been responsive but that said that the tenant was challenging, and significant work was required.

I accept that significant work at the premises may have been required, but that is not the tenant’s fault. The work is required to provide a healthy and safe living environment, that the tenant is paying for.

Given the issues that the tenant has experienced I consider that she should receive some compensation. I consider that a reasonable amount of compensation is $850.00.

I don’t consider that an award of exemplary damages is warranted. That claim is dismissed.

At the hearing the tenant mentioned several times that she had requested information by way of a privacy access request. She said that some of the information was not provided or was unnecessarily redacted. That is an issue outside of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The tenant may have a remedy with the Office of the Privacy Commissioner.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4691912 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$850.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44