What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4752707 about?

The tribunal order states: Aaa Property Management Limited As Agent For Junbai Jiang must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4752707?

Compensation: $1,672.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4752707?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4752707?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10569920-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4752707 about?

The tribunal order states: Aaa Property Management Limited As Agent For Junbai Jiang must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4752707?

Compensation: $1,672.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4752707?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4752707?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10569920-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

77 Kittiwake Drive, Schnapper Rock, Auckland 0632 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4752707 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4752707 — net $2,342.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation	$1,672.00	Compensation
Exemplary damages: change of details	$150.00	change of details
Exemplary damages: Termination	$500.00	Termination
Net award	$2,342.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,342.44

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4752707 — net $2,342.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation	$1,672.00	Compensation
Exemplary damages: change of details	$150.00	change of details
Exemplary damages: Termination	$500.00	Termination
Net award	$2,342.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,342.44

Order

Aaa Property Management Limited As Agent For Junbai Jiang must pay [The tenant/s] $2,342.44 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. A court appointed Mandarin interpreter assisted.
The tenant sought compensation and an extensive number of exemplary damages. Seven claims for infringement notices were also made. These are disregarded as an infringement notice is a notice issued to a landlord by the Chief Executive of MBIE for an offence (see s 126A RTA).
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof.
issue of evidence at Tenancy Tribunal hearings was considered by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02. Judge Mather stated: “...[the applicant] needs to be reminded that like anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or a Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.”
In the decision that follows I may not have referred to all the oral testimony and other evidence presented, but the parties should know it has been considered. Background
This tenancy commenced on 8 June 2021 as a fixed term tenancy. There have been three extensions of the fixed term, with the latest to end 14 July 2025.
The first scheduled hearing was adjourned after a late request from the landlord for a Mandarin interpreter. That adjourning order froze a pending rent increase for the reasons outlined in that order. The freeze is now removed.

Were the changes in the tenancy agreement end date an extension or a renewal?

The RTA does not specifically define, nor clarify, the difference between a renewal or extension of a tenancy agreement. Neither does the Healthy Homes Standards give clarity on the terms nor define them. As it has some bearing later, the changes in the fixed-term end dates during this tenancy are determined to be more appropriately considered extensions rather than renewals. This is consistent with the extension offer letters, the most recent example is below:
This tenancy is treated as a continuous tenancy with multiple extensions. That has an impact on Healthy Homes compliance timings. Property managers
Another feature of this tenancy has been a churn of agents for the owner. The named respondent to this application was agent for the owner at commencement (trading as Pukeko Rental Managers) before being replaced from 3 August 2023 by A Grade Property Management. This coincided with the agent being overseas for an extended period. For whatever reasons, the respondent here was reappointed as agent effective 10 October 2023, after he returned to New Zealand. This agency continued until 20 February 2024 when Golden Spring property management commenced as agent for the owner. I understand that agency continues today.
It is curious the applicant named only one respondent but that is their choice. This does mean however that any determination is for the two periods of the respondent’s agency only. Not surprisingly, there is some overlap between the other agencies and some tenancy issues.
For clarity, this determination will focus on the two distinct periods with this agent: 8 June 2021 to 2 August 2023 (“first period”), and 10 October 2023 to 20 February 2024 (“second period”). Tenancy agreement
The tenant claimed exemplary damages for four landlord unlawful acts pertaining to tenancy agreement failures per section 13 RTA.
The tenancy agreement was signed by the tenant on 24 May 2021.
While of no bearing, the tenant is a property manager. This is mentioned for completeness and because the landlord appeared at times in the hearing to have expected the tenant to have addressed any landlord failings, rather than accept his own errors.
Given this tenancy is treated as continuous, any claim for unlawful acts should have been made within 12 months of the commencement (see s 109(2)(b) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The claims for exemplary damages under s 13 RTA are dismissed due being out of time. Agency
The tenants claim the Landlord’s interest passed to another person, and they were not advised the other party of the contact details for that person.
When a landlord’s or tenant’s interest passes to some other person, that other person shall, within 10 working days, advise the other party to the tenancy of new contact details, an address for service, a contact phone number and an email address.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 15(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord has twice transitioned out of the agency. The intention of s 15 is that the “other person” instigates the contact with the tenant in such situations as here. The transition has not gone smoothly and the landlord here may have omitted to provide all or accurate records to the incoming agent but I do not consider exemplary damages against the landlord should be ordered here.
The tenants claim the other party has not provided particulars of a change of name or address.
When the name and contact address, including mobile telephone number or email address, or the address for service for one of the parties to the tenancy agreement changes, they must provide notice of these changes to the other party within 10 working days.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 16(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord initially traded as Pukeko Rental Managers Albany. The landlord’s email address was linked to that domain. The landlord later decided to end his relationship with Pukeko but he failed to advise the tenants, especially of any change in email address as he would not receive emails via the Pukeko platform. It was left to the tenant to investigate why emails being sent to the advised email address were not being responded to,
I find they have committed an unlawful act. See below – Exemplary damages. Receipt for rent
[The tenant/s] claim the landlord has not issued a receipt for rent.
A landlord must give a written receipt immediately for any rent paid by cash. See section 29(1) and (2)(a) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $350.00. See section 29(5) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Further, s 30 RTA requires the landlord to keep records showing all payments of rent paid by or on behalf of the tenant, sufficient to enable the landlord to comply within a reasonable time with any request made by the tenant under section 29(3).
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $350.00. See section 30(2)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The change in landlords created confusion regarding rent payments. One week of rent paid by the tenant was not accounted for and rent arrears claimed. The tenant claimed this was due to the landlord’s poor record keeping.
There were a number of frustrations for the tenant during the agency changes. This is one example. However, I do not find that the landlord committed an unlawful act here. Even if I did, I would struggle to find intent such that any exemplary damages would follow. The impacts on the tenants from such landlord errors are recognised and addressed as impacts on the tenants’ right to quiet enjoyment.
I do not find they have committed an unlawful act and dismiss this claim. Landlord’s failure to meet its responsibilities
[The tenant/s] claim that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Under section 45, a landlord must, amongst other things: provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety provide information described in section 123A(1)(e) (relating to the healthy homes standards) to the tenant, within 21 days after the date of receiving the request
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.
Like other issues raised, a number of these occurred early in the tenancy. As the tenant wrote in the introduction letter, “We have been tolerating this for too long and trying to deal with it on our own (for maintaining the peace) however we have reached this point recently that these issues (some serious) need to be properly assessed and adjudicated by professional services (i.e. Tenancy Tribunal).”
The tenants claimed no evidence had been provided to “support the property is Healthy Homes Compliant as per your obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986”. They commissioned their own report and have been compensated for it. That report confirmed the insulation was compliant. Given this tenancy commenced before 1 July 2021 (just) and has continued via extensions, the compliance date for the other HHS requirements is yet to land. That means there was no obligation regarding mechanical extraction at this time. Insufficient evidence of any detrimental impact.
Smoke alarms – the tenant asked at commencement regarding the type of smoke alarm at commencement and when they were last checked. The lack of a response does not establish a failure and the issue is inconclusive. In terms of any possible exemplary damages, the matter was raised in 2021 and if an unlawful act existed the time to raise this was prior to this application. time. I note the tenant has extended the smoke alarm coverage to a high standard and has been compensated for his costs.
The prolonged delays in some repairs, or for timely reimbursement to the tenants of repair costs incurred with landlord approval, are considered landlord failings but not such that I find they have committed an unlawful act and should order exemplary damages.
The unreasonable impacts on the tenants have been considered in the general compensation calculation. Retaliatory notice
On 27 November 2023 the landlord notified the tenants that the property was being placed on the market for sale. The listing agents were given incorrect information regarding the fixed-term period, believing it was ending in February 2024 rather than the actual 2025.
On 17 January 2024 the landlord gave the tenant a 90 day notice ending the tenancy without specifying a date. The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory.
Section 54 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that the Tribunal may declare a termination notice to be retaliatory, and of no effect, if an application is made within 28 working days after receipt of a notice terminating the tenancy, being a notice that complies with the requirements of section 51.
This section requires the termination notice complies with s 51 RTA. The notice did not comply with s 51(3)(c) as it did not specify the date by which the tenant is to vacate the premises. No further consideration of s 54 and any related unlawful act is provided for.
I dismiss this claim. Notice to terminate when not entitled.
The tenants claim that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 60AA in issuing a notice to termination on 17 January 2024.
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.
It is an unlawful act for a landlord to give a termination notice to a tenant knowing they are not entitled to give the notice (s 60AA RTA). Exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00 (s 60AA and Schedule 1A RTA).
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 notice failed to specify an end date but given it was headed 90 days Notice to Terminate it can be assumed it was not intending to align with the end of the fixed term in some 18 months’ time. It appears to be an outdated notice format, used prior to the amendments to s 51 RTA.
The landlord said he relied on a news article he had read in the New Zealand Herald, regarding the incoming governments intention to reinstate 90-day without cause terminations, as justification for the notice to terminate as served on 17 January 2024. At that time the 90-day termination without notice was not available to landlord and remains so now. Regardless, this was a fixed-term tenancy and such s 51 termination as claimed was not available. Given the previous extensions to the tenancy agreement drafted, it is a reasonable expectation the landlord should have been aware of the constraints on termination under such agreement.
It seems clear the owner was frustrated with impediments to selling and placed pressure on the agent. That is not an acceptable excuse for the landlord drafting a notice without any statutory authority. That should have been blatantly obvious to the landlord.
Unlike s 54, there is no requirement for the notice to conform with s 51 before considering the claim.
I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act. See below – Exemplary damages. Quiet enjoyment
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (see s 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 s 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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 s 109(3) 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).
Black’s Law Dictionary defines harassment as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person, annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
These definitions suggest there must be evidence of some ongoing intentional actions directed at a specific person which causes distress to them. Therefore, a single act of interference with the tenant’s quiet enjoyment would be unlikely to amount to harassment. However, in Whatiura v Shoulder [1987] NZTT Palmerston North TT 12/87, the Adjudicator noted that: although the term usually refers to repeated acts of some kind, I take the view that it can extend to a single act on one occasion of sufficient seriousness.
The landlord has contributed to adverse impacts on the tenant’s quiet enjoyment. These do not however reach the threshold of harassment and as such no unlawful act is established.
I do consider the quiet enjoyment has been adversely impacted by the agent failing to ensure transitioning agencies or third-parties were adequately informed of key tenancy terms. The failure to do so caused extra effort and angst for the tenants.
I do consider the tenant has established grounds for compensation.

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

As I have determined that the landlord committed unlawful acts I must decide if it is appropriate to award exemplary damages.
Exemplary damages under the Act are different from compensation. The provision of such damages is designed to punish and deter; Attorney-General (Commissioner of Crown Lands) v Little Bo Peep Sheep Company Ltd (HC CIV 2010-412-134).
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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) RTA
However, the Tribunal may draw an inference of intent where the landlord claims to have simply forgotten or been unaware, as a landlord should have systems in place to ensure this does not happen.
Two unlawful acts have been determined. Not notifying a change of address
The landlord failed to advise the tenants of the fact he had left the Pukeko structure, and with that access to the email address for service.
Having considered the limited impact on the tenant I have determined an order of $150.00 is appropriate. Landlord acting to terminate tenancy without grounds
The serving by the landlord of the notice to terminate dated 17 January 2024 had no legal basis. The reasonable expectation is the landlord would be well aware there were no grounds due to the fixed-term. It was compounded by the use of a 90-day without cause notice – an option removed almost three years earlier from the RTA. I consider the agent was under pressure from a frustrated owner who wanted to sell but that is of no consideration here.
While the tenant explained his wife has continuing anxiety from the notice and ongoing concern they might have to leave, I struggle to comprehend this. He had previously understood and asserted their right to the fixed-term and the deficiencies in the notice were such that any genuine concern of his wife should have been quickly allayed.
I consider an order of $500.00 exemplary damages, being at the lower end of the maximum amount, is appropriate here.

Should compensation be awarded?

The application commenced seeking directions regarding a change in property manager, given concerns regarding a number of failures by this agent. That has occurred already, with a new agent in place since 20 February 2024.
The tenure of this fixed-term tenancy has already been confirmed as to 14 July 2025.
I have considered the second agency as the one that had the greatest impact on the tenants. In part, the seeds of that were planted during the period between these two agency periods. The performance of that agent is not part of this application. The initial sales contact and confusion regarding the end date of the fixed-term were not during the two agency periods considered here but, like the rent arrears confusion (claimed incorrectly), the root cause is traced back to poor performance of this agent.
I cite quiet enjoyment as the basis for compensation but this is in some ways a catch all for a number of landlord failing that adversely impacted the tenants. I consider compensation is appropriate.
Appellate Courts have advised of the need to adopt a global approach when considering compensation awards. They have repeatedly emphasized that the assessment of the proper amount of compensation is a question of fact in each case; it is not an exact exercise and a common-sense approach is required; that there are no general or absolute rules for calculating the amount of compensation but that the primary purpose of awarding compensation is to reflect the extent of the loss actually and reasonably suffered by the injured party.
I have adopted a rent refund based on 10% of the rent during the 19-week second agency. This equates to $1,672.00. The use of 10% reflects prior problems during the first period, some of which flowed into the second agency. Other orders
The tenants had sought other orders. Some are now moot as the agency has changed to another agent. The current agent has provided a number of refunds for tenant costs incurred previously.
Any rent increase was frozen but that restriction is now removed. Any tenant claim regarding any future notice of an increase in rent that it believes exceeds market rent by a substantial amount can be made if appropriate.
This tenancy has already been confirmed as a fixed-term tenancy ending 14 July 2025. Any marketing of the property and subsequent sale and purchase agreement must reflect that, unless mutually agreed otherwise.
Other requests regarding bond name changes, water utility access are not orders I can make although some resolution appears to have occurred.
Any outstanding maintenance tasks should be clarified using a notice to remedy. Any failures, if a landlord responsibility, may be subject of a further tenant application, if desired.
The longstanding water leak now appears resolved. Any compensation for costs should be raised with the current agent once the loss can be quantified. Filing fee
The applicant has been substantially successful and the application filing fee is returned. Suppression
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that the Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
The tenants requested suppression in their application. As they have been substantially successful, suppression is ordered.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4752707 — Exemplary damages at 77 Kittiwake Drive, Schnapper Rock, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4752707 — Exemplary damages at 77 Kittiwake Drive, Schnapper Rock, Auckland 0632

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Were the changes in the tenancy agreement end date an extension or a renewal?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Should compensation be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Were the changes in the tenancy agreement end date an extension or a renewal?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Should compensation be awarded?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions