What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4702770 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4702770?

Is Case, And The Tribunal Orders Sup…: $207.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4702770?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4702770?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9988509-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4702770 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 4702770?

Is Case, And The Tribunal Orders Sup…: $207.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4702770?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4702770?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9988509-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4702770 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4702770. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
is case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2. The landlord must immediat	$207.00		is case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2. The landlord must immediat

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
The landlord must immediately pay $207.00 to Lloyd Electrical for its invoice 53929 dated 20 July 2023 and for any late penalty payments charged by Lloyd Electrical because this invoice has remained outstanding from 27 July 2023 to the date of this hearing.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant applied for orders holding the landlord responsible for the costs associated with the tenants calling out an electrician on 30 June 2023 and requiring the landlord to immediately pay Lloyd Electricals’ invoice 53929, dated 20 July 2023. Is the landlord liable for Lloyd Electricals’ call out costs? Background
The tenancy began on 31 December 2021. This issue was the first of this kind that the tenants had experienced.
The tenants gave evidence that at the commencement of their tenancy they did not receive any information regarding what to do in the case of an emergency or for afterhours maintenance needs, except for a welcome pack booklet, that on page 2 instructed them to call the office during business hours and to call the property manager and leave a voice mail message. They confirmed that they had taken all reasonably practicable steps before calling Lloyd Electrical for assistance, and that they were under a reasonable belief at the time that the fault was with the premises and not with the network supplier because: a. The power went out around 7:20pm, right at the time they were trying to prepare their children for bed and the children had been unable to engage in their normal nightly routine and were feeling very scared and anxious; b. The tenants went outside in the dark to see if the power was out at the neighbouring properties and could see that some houses had power while others around them did not; c. The tenants contacted Vector to lodge the fault and left a message for Vector to call them and let them know if there was a more general power outage; d. The tenants checked the circuit breaker board to see if there were any obvious issues with any of the fuses. There did not appear to be anything that would cause the entire house to have no power; e. At 7:59pm, the tenants’ children were getting overly anxious and stressed and so the tenant sent the property manager a text message saying “lost power 30 minutes ago. Switchboard looks fine. Raised incident with vector- no response. Do we have an after-hours electrician that can look at this asap?”; f. The property manager did not respond, and confirmed during the hearing that she has never responded to this message, not even to follow up whether the issue was resolved and if the tenants needed any further assistance. In her evidence, the property manager stated that she had missed the text as it was late on a Friday night, she had not followed up with the tenants on Monday as most of these power issues are with the network supply and she assumed the issue would have been resolved by Monday morning, and she had not heard anything further from the tenants and assumed she would have it the problem had persisted; g. The tenants then called the office, but it was outside of normal business hours and there was no answer phone to leave a message on; h. The tenants had noticed a sticker from Lloyd Electrical in the circuit breaker board that contained its contact details, and the tenants assumed the landlord had put that sticker there as this was its preferred electrical supplier; i. The power was not restored by 8:45pm, they had not had any response from their text to the property manager, Vector had not come back to them, most of the houses around them had their power still on, their children were too afraid to go to bed in the dark and were getting over tired and the tenants formed a reasonable belief the issue was with the property. The tenants are not power specialists and based on these factors they called Lloyd Electrical to come and look at the property to isolate and fix the issue; j. The electrician informed them that the issue was with the network supplier and that the reason they could see lights on in some properties around them, but not others, was because the power in the area was connected in a cluster that meant one in every three houses would experience the outage while the other properties still had power.
The tenants also gave evidence that the first time the property manager engaged with them about this issue was 5 weeks after the call out, on 7 August 2023. The property manager emailed the tenants requiring them to pay the invoice that she had received from Lloyd Electrical on 4 August 2023. The tenants say that had the property manager responded to their 30 June 2023 text message, the matter could have been resolved earlier and they would have been able to get access to their phone data to prove the calls they had made to her and the office.
The property manager gave evidence that she did not undertake the tenants’ induction at the time they picked up the keys for the premises, but she is aware that tenants are generally verbally told the Barfoot & Thompson Limited’s procedures for afterhours emergency and maintenance call outs at the time they pick up the keys to their new rental property, that the tenants had not followed these procedures, Barfoot & Thompson Limited had not approved the call out, the fault was a network supply issue and not the premises being in need of repair, it refuses to pay the cost of the call out, and requires the tenants to pay Lloyd Electricals’ invoice 53929.
Both parties confirmed that 11 weeks after the 30 June 2023 incident, that led to these proceedings, Barfoot & Thompson Limited provided an After-Hours Maintenance Procedure Pack to all its tenants. This pack contains the procedures tenants must follow and its preferred suppliers’ names and contact details.
The property manager gave evidence: a. Had the tenants called her and left a voice message she would have been alerted earlier to the issue, as she subscribes to a voicemail service, and that 45 minutes from when the tenants texted her to when they called out the electrician did not give her sufficient time to get back to them late on a Friday night. The tenants claimed they did call her and leave a voice mail message, but the landlord denied receiving any such call or voice message. Regardless, the tenants had taken reasonable steps to contact her, in a situation that to them was an emergency, before calling out the electrician they believed to be a preferred supplier of Barfoot & Thompson Limited; b. If the tenants had followed the same process that they did on 30 June 2023, and had called and left her a voice message and called a Barfoot & Thompson preferred supplier, the landlord would have agreed to pay the Lloyd Electrical invoice; and c. The landlord will not agree to pay the Lloyd Electrical invoice as the invoice is not for any “repair” to the property, the power outage was not “likely to cause injury to persons or property or is otherwise serious and urgent” and the tenant had not “given the landlord notice of the state of disrepair or made a reasonable attempt to do so”. See section 45(1)(d) (i) and (ii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). The law applied to the background facts
Section 45(1)(d) (i) and (ii) of the RTA confirms “the landlord shall compensate the tenant for any reasonable expenses incurred by the tenant in repairing the premises where (i) the state of disrepair has arisen otherwise than as a result of a breach of the tenancy agreement by the tenant and is likely to cause injury to persons or property or is otherwise serious and urgent and (ii) the tenant has given the landlord notice of the state of disrepair or made a reasonable attempt to do so”.
The landlord argued that the expense incurred by the tenants was not in “repairing the premises” but in an unnecessary call out for a network supply issue that they could have easily identified by looking at the Vector outage webpage, that the expense was not authorised by it and that the tenants had not made reasonable efforts to contact the property manager before incurring an unauthorised expense on the landlord’s behalf.
The word “repair” is not defined in the interpretation section of the RTA. Refer to section 2 of the RTA. The Tribunal is not required to interpret the word repair strictly, as Barfoot & Thompson has done in its arguments, and as such I have read the provision more liberally to mean “to fix the situation”.
The words “serious” and “urgent” are also not defined in the RTA. What is considered serious or urgent is contextual.
I find: a. The tenants acted on a reasonable belief at the time they called the electrician the outage was property related, given they had not had a response from their call to Vector and numerous properties around them had power; b. The tenants have proven that they considered the situation they and their children faced was serious and urgent and requiring prompt action and I accept the tenants’ evidence that they considered this matter to be serious and urgent due to the levels of stress and anxiety the unexplainable power outage was causing them and their children; c. The tenants have proven that they took reasonable steps to try to alert the property manager to their plight and to the premises needing “repair” and I accept that on the balance of probabilities, the tenants were so distraught that it is more likely than not that they did try to call the property manager on her mobile phone, as well as the office. In any case they sent a text message, which they considered an effective way to get a rapid response from the property manager and they received no response to that text message at all, not even for a follow-up post the incident they had reported to her; and d. It is reasonable that the tenants, not being power experts, got an expert to diagnose the problem;
For the reasons outlined above, I order the landlord to pay the $207.00 Lloyd Electrical invoice and any late penalty payment owing. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because the tenants have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4702770. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
is case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2. The landlord must immediat	$207.00		is case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2. The landlord must immediat

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
The landlord must immediately pay $207.00 to Lloyd Electrical for its invoice 53929 dated 20 July 2023 and for any late penalty payments charged by Lloyd Electrical because this invoice has remained outstanding from 27 July 2023 to the date of this hearing.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant applied for orders holding the landlord responsible for the costs associated with the tenants calling out an electrician on 30 June 2023 and requiring the landlord to immediately pay Lloyd Electricals’ invoice 53929, dated 20 July 2023. Is the landlord liable for Lloyd Electricals’ call out costs? Background
The tenancy began on 31 December 2021. This issue was the first of this kind that the tenants had experienced.
The tenants gave evidence that at the commencement of their tenancy they did not receive any information regarding what to do in the case of an emergency or for afterhours maintenance needs, except for a welcome pack booklet, that on page 2 instructed them to call the office during business hours and to call the property manager and leave a voice mail message. They confirmed that they had taken all reasonably practicable steps before calling Lloyd Electrical for assistance, and that they were under a reasonable belief at the time that the fault was with the premises and not with the network supplier because: a. The power went out around 7:20pm, right at the time they were trying to prepare their children for bed and the children had been unable to engage in their normal nightly routine and were feeling very scared and anxious; b. The tenants went outside in the dark to see if the power was out at the neighbouring properties and could see that some houses had power while others around them did not; c. The tenants contacted Vector to lodge the fault and left a message for Vector to call them and let them know if there was a more general power outage; d. The tenants checked the circuit breaker board to see if there were any obvious issues with any of the fuses. There did not appear to be anything that would cause the entire house to have no power; e. At 7:59pm, the tenants’ children were getting overly anxious and stressed and so the tenant sent the property manager a text message saying “lost power 30 minutes ago. Switchboard looks fine. Raised incident with vector- no response. Do we have an after-hours electrician that can look at this asap?”; f. The property manager did not respond, and confirmed during the hearing that she has never responded to this message, not even to follow up whether the issue was resolved and if the tenants needed any further assistance. In her evidence, the property manager stated that she had missed the text as it was late on a Friday night, she had not followed up with the tenants on Monday as most of these power issues are with the network supply and she assumed the issue would have been resolved by Monday morning, and she had not heard anything further from the tenants and assumed she would have it the problem had persisted; g. The tenants then called the office, but it was outside of normal business hours and there was no answer phone to leave a message on; h. The tenants had noticed a sticker from Lloyd Electrical in the circuit breaker board that contained its contact details, and the tenants assumed the landlord had put that sticker there as this was its preferred electrical supplier; i. The power was not restored by 8:45pm, they had not had any response from their text to the property manager, Vector had not come back to them, most of the houses around them had their power still on, their children were too afraid to go to bed in the dark and were getting over tired and the tenants formed a reasonable belief the issue was with the property. The tenants are not power specialists and based on these factors they called Lloyd Electrical to come and look at the property to isolate and fix the issue; j. The electrician informed them that the issue was with the network supplier and that the reason they could see lights on in some properties around them, but not others, was because the power in the area was connected in a cluster that meant one in every three houses would experience the outage while the other properties still had power.
The tenants also gave evidence that the first time the property manager engaged with them about this issue was 5 weeks after the call out, on 7 August 2023. The property manager emailed the tenants requiring them to pay the invoice that she had received from Lloyd Electrical on 4 August 2023. The tenants say that had the property manager responded to their 30 June 2023 text message, the matter could have been resolved earlier and they would have been able to get access to their phone data to prove the calls they had made to her and the office.
The property manager gave evidence that she did not undertake the tenants’ induction at the time they picked up the keys for the premises, but she is aware that tenants are generally verbally told the Barfoot & Thompson Limited’s procedures for afterhours emergency and maintenance call outs at the time they pick up the keys to their new rental property, that the tenants had not followed these procedures, Barfoot & Thompson Limited had not approved the call out, the fault was a network supply issue and not the premises being in need of repair, it refuses to pay the cost of the call out, and requires the tenants to pay Lloyd Electricals’ invoice 53929.
Both parties confirmed that 11 weeks after the 30 June 2023 incident, that led to these proceedings, Barfoot & Thompson Limited provided an After-Hours Maintenance Procedure Pack to all its tenants. This pack contains the procedures tenants must follow and its preferred suppliers’ names and contact details.
The property manager gave evidence: a. Had the tenants called her and left a voice message she would have been alerted earlier to the issue, as she subscribes to a voicemail service, and that 45 minutes from when the tenants texted her to when they called out the electrician did not give her sufficient time to get back to them late on a Friday night. The tenants claimed they did call her and leave a voice mail message, but the landlord denied receiving any such call or voice message. Regardless, the tenants had taken reasonable steps to contact her, in a situation that to them was an emergency, before calling out the electrician they believed to be a preferred supplier of Barfoot & Thompson Limited; b. If the tenants had followed the same process that they did on 30 June 2023, and had called and left her a voice message and called a Barfoot & Thompson preferred supplier, the landlord would have agreed to pay the Lloyd Electrical invoice; and c. The landlord will not agree to pay the Lloyd Electrical invoice as the invoice is not for any “repair” to the property, the power outage was not “likely to cause injury to persons or property or is otherwise serious and urgent” and the tenant had not “given the landlord notice of the state of disrepair or made a reasonable attempt to do so”. See section 45(1)(d) (i) and (ii) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). The law applied to the background facts
Section 45(1)(d) (i) and (ii) of the RTA confirms “the landlord shall compensate the tenant for any reasonable expenses incurred by the tenant in repairing the premises where (i) the state of disrepair has arisen otherwise than as a result of a breach of the tenancy agreement by the tenant and is likely to cause injury to persons or property or is otherwise serious and urgent and (ii) the tenant has given the landlord notice of the state of disrepair or made a reasonable attempt to do so”.
The landlord argued that the expense incurred by the tenants was not in “repairing the premises” but in an unnecessary call out for a network supply issue that they could have easily identified by looking at the Vector outage webpage, that the expense was not authorised by it and that the tenants had not made reasonable efforts to contact the property manager before incurring an unauthorised expense on the landlord’s behalf.
The word “repair” is not defined in the interpretation section of the RTA. Refer to section 2 of the RTA. The Tribunal is not required to interpret the word repair strictly, as Barfoot & Thompson has done in its arguments, and as such I have read the provision more liberally to mean “to fix the situation”.
The words “serious” and “urgent” are also not defined in the RTA. What is considered serious or urgent is contextual.
I find: a. The tenants acted on a reasonable belief at the time they called the electrician the outage was property related, given they had not had a response from their call to Vector and numerous properties around them had power; b. The tenants have proven that they considered the situation they and their children faced was serious and urgent and requiring prompt action and I accept the tenants’ evidence that they considered this matter to be serious and urgent due to the levels of stress and anxiety the unexplainable power outage was causing them and their children; c. The tenants have proven that they took reasonable steps to try to alert the property manager to their plight and to the premises needing “repair” and I accept that on the balance of probabilities, the tenants were so distraught that it is more likely than not that they did try to call the property manager on her mobile phone, as well as the office. In any case they sent a text message, which they considered an effective way to get a rapid response from the property manager and they received no response to that text message at all, not even for a follow-up post the incident they had reported to her; and d. It is reasonable that the tenants, not being power experts, got an expert to diagnose the problem;
For the reasons outlined above, I order the landlord to pay the $207.00 Lloyd Electrical invoice and any late penalty payment owing. Reimbursement of filing fee
Because the tenants have wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4702770 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 4702770 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions