What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4700172?

The tribunal order states: Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman to pay The Property Boss

How much money was awarded in case 4700172?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,165.71 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Mat: $20.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4700172?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4700172?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9736110-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4700172?

The tribunal order states: Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman to pay The Property Boss

How much money was awarded in case 4700172?

Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord; Lawns and Garden Work: $30.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,165.71 awarded to landlord; Replace Furnishings: Mat: $20.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4700172?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4700172?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9736110-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

36 Gilby Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4700172 — Rent arrears

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4700172 — net $1,236.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,165.71	Rent arrears
Replace furnishings: Mat	$20.00	Replace furnishings: Mat
Lawns and Garden work: reduced to cover landlord lawn mow only	$30.00	Lawns and Garden work: reduced to cover landlord lawn mow only
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,236.15
Bond	$2,040.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,236.15

Order

Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman to pay The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street $1,236.15 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,040.00 (3504420-014) immediately apportioned as follows: The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street: $1,236.15 Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman: $803.85
Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightmans’ claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, partial refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenants have applied for exemplary damages, full refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was initially for a fixed term ending on 14 August 2024. Due to circumstances outlined below, the tenancy ended by agreement on 22 September 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy being $1165.71 and an email confirming that the tenants’ request to end the tenancy early was accepted on the basis that rent would continue to be paid to the new agreed end date.
The tenants accepted that this amount is owing for rent to the agreed end date but considered that they should not be liable for rent as they considered the property uninhabitable and physically left the premises on 1 September 2023. As a consequence of their departure, they were paying costs of accommodation elsewhere and could not afford to cover both payments.
The tenant acknowledged, however, that they had not removed their possessions from the tenancy address or handed over possession until 22 September 2023.
The amount ordered is proved.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit under section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy in that the lawns were not mowed prior to the end of the tenancy.
The landlord claimed $120.00 for lawn and garden work. This included dumping fees of $39.38. The property owners completed this work themselves so there is no invoice detailing the work involved. I do not consider that such a short tenancy could reasonably result in these costs, so this amount has been reduced to $30.00 to reflect the reasonable time for the landlord to mow the lawns (which was the tenant’s responsibility under the tenancy agreement).
A mat that had been placed in front of the fire was missing at the end of the tenancy. The tenants acknowledged that they had disposed of the mat.
The original amount claimed was $25.00 but this was reduced to $20.00 by the landlord to reflect the actual replacement cost for which an invoice was provided.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Did the landlord comply with its obligations under the Healthy Homes Regulations?

Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman claim that the landlord has breached its obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Act by failing to insulate the premises and/or by failing to comply with the moisture ingress and drainage standard in accordance with the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
From 1 July 2019, all residential premises must be insulated to a minimum standard. Where the premises were insulated before 1 July 2016, the ceiling insulation must have an R-value of at least 1.9 (or 1.5 for houses of a brick or concrete block construction). The underfloor insulation must have an R-value of at least 0.9. The insulation must be in reasonable condition.
Where insulation is installed after 1 July 2016, the minimum R-value for ceiling insulation is 2.9 in Zones 1 and 2, and 3.3 for Zone 3 (Zone 3 covers the South Island and central North Island). The minimum R-value for underfloor insulation is 1.3.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard require that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes, and drains. The Standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space.
There are exceptions to these requirements, for example, where it is not reasonably practicable, or where there is a habitable space above or below the ceiling or floor that would otherwise have to be insulated.
Breaching these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00 under section 45 (1)(A) and Schedule 1A of the Act.
The landlord provided photographs and oral evidence to confirm that the gutters, downpipes, and drains are in working order and that the gutters are cleared at least once each year.
The landlord signed the Healthy Homes statement on the tenancy agreement which included a statement confirming an exemption for under floor insulation due to the underfloor being too low to safely access. The landlord made this claim in reliance on a Healthy Home Assessment completed in August 2019 and a Statement of Insulation completed in June 2018. Copies were provided to the Tribunal and confirm that this was the advice received.
The tenants gave evidence that shortly after moving to the property they began to feel unwell and suffered varying symptoms of ill health including coughing, trouble breathing, itchy skin, stomach upsets, itchy eyes, spots on skin, headaches, sore joints, insomnia, a lingering and unpleasant taste in the mouth and nausea.
The tenants communicated their concerns to the landlord and gave evidence that, after having researched their symptoms, they believed their health problems were due to mould under the house releasing spores into the air. The tenants physically left the property on 1 September 2023 but left their possessions at the premises.
The landlord arranged for an inspection of the underfloor and, on discovering that it was in fact possible to install underfloor insulation, they had the required insulation installed by Green Dog Insulation.
Despite the underfloor insulation being installed, the tenant did not want to return to the tenancy as they believed that any mould spores would continue to be present at the premises for some considerable time. The landlord agreed to accept three weeks’ notice to end the fixed term tenancy early.
Given that it transpired that it was possible to install underfloor insulation at the premises, I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. Exemplary damages
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 under section 109(3) of the Act.
The landlord relied on professional advice (from two different specialists) in concluding that the premises were exempt from the underfloor insulation requirements. On discovering that underfloor insulation could be installed, the landlord had this attended to immediately. The insulation company invoice is dated within a month of the start date of this tenancy.
In these circumstances, I am not satisfied that the landlord has committed an unlawful act intentionally and therefore it would not be just to award exemplary damages under section 109(3) of the Act.
The tenants’ claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.
The landlord and tenant both provided additional information in relation to matters such as the heavy rainfall at the time just prior to the tenancy, the positive experience of the prior tenant, the behaviour and continuing effects of mould spores and the destruction by the tenant of clothing and soft furnishings regarded as contaminated.
I acknowledge this information and it was reviewed before or during the hearing but, given my finding regarding the landlord’s lack of intention to commit an unlawful act, I do not need to review it here. Filing fee
As The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4700172 — net $1,236.15 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Rent arrears	$1,165.71	Rent arrears
Replace furnishings: Mat	$20.00	Replace furnishings: Mat
Lawns and Garden work: reduced to cover landlord lawn mow only	$30.00	Lawns and Garden work: reduced to cover landlord lawn mow only
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,236.15
Bond	$2,040.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,236.15

Order

Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman to pay The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street $1,236.15 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,040.00 (3504420-014) immediately apportioned as follows: The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street: $1,236.15 Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman: $803.85
Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightmans’ claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, partial refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenants have applied for exemplary damages, full refund of the bond and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

How much is owed for rent?

The tenancy was initially for a fixed term ending on 14 August 2024. Due to circumstances outlined below, the tenancy ended by agreement on 22 September 2023. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy being $1165.71 and an email confirming that the tenants’ request to end the tenancy early was accepted on the basis that rent would continue to be paid to the new agreed end date.
The tenants accepted that this amount is owing for rent to the agreed end date but considered that they should not be liable for rent as they considered the property uninhabitable and physically left the premises on 1 September 2023. As a consequence of their departure, they were paying costs of accommodation elsewhere and could not afford to cover both payments.
The tenant acknowledged, however, that they had not removed their possessions from the tenancy address or handed over possession until 22 September 2023.
The amount ordered is proved.

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

At the end of the tenancy the tenant must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy, remove all rubbish, and leave all chattels provided for their benefit under section 40(1)(e)(ii)-(v) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).
The tenant did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy in that the lawns were not mowed prior to the end of the tenancy.
The landlord claimed $120.00 for lawn and garden work. This included dumping fees of $39.38. The property owners completed this work themselves so there is no invoice detailing the work involved. I do not consider that such a short tenancy could reasonably result in these costs, so this amount has been reduced to $30.00 to reflect the reasonable time for the landlord to mow the lawns (which was the tenant’s responsibility under the tenancy agreement).
A mat that had been placed in front of the fire was missing at the end of the tenancy. The tenants acknowledged that they had disposed of the mat.
The original amount claimed was $25.00 but this was reduced to $20.00 by the landlord to reflect the actual replacement cost for which an invoice was provided.
The amounts ordered are proved.

Did the landlord comply with its obligations under the Healthy Homes Regulations?

Julie Rae Wightman and Stephen James Wightman claim that the landlord has breached its obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Act by failing to insulate the premises and/or by failing to comply with the moisture ingress and drainage standard in accordance with the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
From 1 July 2019, all residential premises must be insulated to a minimum standard. Where the premises were insulated before 1 July 2016, the ceiling insulation must have an R-value of at least 1.9 (or 1.5 for houses of a brick or concrete block construction). The underfloor insulation must have an R-value of at least 0.9. The insulation must be in reasonable condition.
Where insulation is installed after 1 July 2016, the minimum R-value for ceiling insulation is 2.9 in Zones 1 and 2, and 3.3 for Zone 3 (Zone 3 covers the South Island and central North Island). The minimum R-value for underfloor insulation is 1.3.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard require that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes, and drains. The Standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space.
There are exceptions to these requirements, for example, where it is not reasonably practicable, or where there is a habitable space above or below the ceiling or floor that would otherwise have to be insulated.
Breaching these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00 under section 45 (1)(A) and Schedule 1A of the Act.
The landlord provided photographs and oral evidence to confirm that the gutters, downpipes, and drains are in working order and that the gutters are cleared at least once each year.
The landlord signed the Healthy Homes statement on the tenancy agreement which included a statement confirming an exemption for under floor insulation due to the underfloor being too low to safely access. The landlord made this claim in reliance on a Healthy Home Assessment completed in August 2019 and a Statement of Insulation completed in June 2018. Copies were provided to the Tribunal and confirm that this was the advice received.
The tenants gave evidence that shortly after moving to the property they began to feel unwell and suffered varying symptoms of ill health including coughing, trouble breathing, itchy skin, stomach upsets, itchy eyes, spots on skin, headaches, sore joints, insomnia, a lingering and unpleasant taste in the mouth and nausea.
The tenants communicated their concerns to the landlord and gave evidence that, after having researched their symptoms, they believed their health problems were due to mould under the house releasing spores into the air. The tenants physically left the property on 1 September 2023 but left their possessions at the premises.
The landlord arranged for an inspection of the underfloor and, on discovering that it was in fact possible to install underfloor insulation, they had the required insulation installed by Green Dog Insulation.
Despite the underfloor insulation being installed, the tenant did not want to return to the tenancy as they believed that any mould spores would continue to be present at the premises for some considerable time. The landlord agreed to accept three weeks’ notice to end the fixed term tenancy early.
Given that it transpired that it was possible to install underfloor insulation at the premises, I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. Exemplary damages
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 under section 109(3) of the Act.
The landlord relied on professional advice (from two different specialists) in concluding that the premises were exempt from the underfloor insulation requirements. On discovering that underfloor insulation could be installed, the landlord had this attended to immediately. The insulation company invoice is dated within a month of the start date of this tenancy.
In these circumstances, I am not satisfied that the landlord has committed an unlawful act intentionally and therefore it would not be just to award exemplary damages under section 109(3) of the Act.
The tenants’ claim for exemplary damages is dismissed.
The landlord and tenant both provided additional information in relation to matters such as the heavy rainfall at the time just prior to the tenancy, the positive experience of the prior tenant, the behaviour and continuing effects of mould spores and the destruction by the tenant of clothing and soft furnishings regarded as contaminated.
I acknowledge this information and it was reviewed before or during the hearing but, given my finding regarding the landlord’s lack of intention to commit an unlawful act, I do not need to review it here. Filing fee
As The Property Boss Limited as agent for Heritage Rental Homes - Gilby Street has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4700172 — Rent arrears at 36 Gilby Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4700172 — Rent arrears at 36 Gilby Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8011

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Did the landlord comply with its obligations under the Healthy Homes Regulations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Did the tenant comply with their obligations at the end of the tenancy?

Did the landlord comply with its obligations under the Healthy Homes Regulations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions