What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4755276 about?

The tribunal order states: Faith Helsby must pay [the tenant] $870.44 immediately as set out in table

How much money was awarded in case 4755276?

Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4755276?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4755276?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10233862-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4755276 about?

The tribunal order states: Faith Helsby must pay [the tenant] $870.44 immediately as set out in table

How much money was awarded in case 4755276?

Property Damage: $850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4755276?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4755276?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10233862-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

83A Fraser Street, Tauranga South, Tauranga 3112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4755276 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4755276 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages for breach of section 46 RTA	$850.00	Exemplary damages for breach of section 46 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44

Both parties attended the rehearing before me today.

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has been overseas for longer than the Act permits without appointing an agent.

A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 16A(6) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

While the landlord has been out of New Zealand for more than 21 days, the landlord had appointed an agent who is a professional property management company at the start of the tenancy. Being dissatisfied with the agent’s services, the landlord subsequently terminated the agent after giving notice to the agent. The agent however immediately withdrew from acting for the landlord resulting in a situation whereby the landlord technically and immediately commits an unlawful act by not having appointed a replacement agent between 30 August 2023 to the end of the tenancy on 18 November 2023.

Despite the commission of the unlawful act, an award of exemplary damages is not automatic. It is only where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally that 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

In this case, I accept the landlord’s evidence that she had not committed the unlawful act under section 16A RTA intentionally. At the material times from the start of the tenancy the landlord had appointed an agent while the landlord is overseas. After the current agency has been terminated, I accept that the landlord took reasonable steps to find another agent; she reached out to 4 other local agents but was unable to find a local agent to act for her prior to the end of the tenancy.

I do not accept the tenant’s submission that the landlord commits an unlawful act to which exemplary should be awarded merely because the landlord has terminated the services of the existing agent without appointing another.

I prefer the landlord’s explanation in regard to the non-appointment of the agent which, due to the time differences between France and New Zealand, resulted in difficulties for the landlord to appoint a replacement agent.

For those reasons I do not consider an award of exemplary damages for technical breach of section 16A appropriate nor just.

The tenant’s claim that the landlord has breached section 46(1) RTA by failing to provide and maintain a lockable front door is successful.

A landlord must provide and maintain locks to ensure that the premises are reasonably secure. See section 46(1) 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 46(3) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The front door was not lockable and therefore not reasonably secure from 26 July 2023 to the end of the tenancy. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.

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.

Considering the seriousness of not having a lockable and secure front door and the fact that tenant has duly notified the landlord’s agent and landlord at the material times in July 2023, I consider it just to award exemplary damages of $850.00 against the landlord for breach of section 46(1) RTA.

I also award the reimbursement of filing fee to the tenant and an order for name suppression.

Only the ordered amounts are proved.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4755276 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages for breach of section 46 RTA	$850.00	Exemplary damages for breach of section 46 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44

Order

Faith Helsby must pay [the tenant] $870.44 immediately as set out in table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the rehearing before me today.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has been overseas for longer than the Act permits without appointing an agent.
A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 16A(6) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
While the landlord has been out of New Zealand for more than 21 days, the landlord had appointed an agent who is a professional property management company at the start of the tenancy. Being dissatisfied with the agent’s services, the landlord subsequently terminated the agent after giving notice to the agent. The agent however immediately withdrew from acting for the landlord resulting in a situation whereby the landlord technically and immediately commits an unlawful act by not having appointed a replacement agent between 30 August 2023 to the end of the tenancy on 18 November 2023.
Despite the commission of the unlawful act, an award of exemplary damages is not automatic. It is only where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally that 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
In this case, I accept the landlord’s evidence that she had not committed the unlawful act under section 16A RTA intentionally. At the material times from the start of the tenancy the landlord had appointed an agent while the landlord is overseas. After the current agency has been terminated, I accept that the landlord took reasonable steps to find another agent; she reached out to 4 other local agents but was unable to find a local agent to act for her prior to the end of the tenancy.
I do not accept the tenant’s submission that the landlord commits an unlawful act to which exemplary should be awarded merely because the landlord has terminated the services of the existing agent without appointing another.
I prefer the landlord’s explanation in regard to the non-appointment of the agent which, due to the time differences between France and New Zealand, resulted in difficulties for the landlord to appoint a replacement agent.
For those reasons I do not consider an award of exemplary damages for technical breach of section 16A appropriate nor just.
The tenant’s claim that the landlord has breached section 46(1) RTA by failing to provide and maintain a lockable front door is successful.
A landlord must provide and maintain locks to ensure that the premises are reasonably secure. See section 46(1) 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 46(3) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The front door was not lockable and therefore not reasonably secure from 26 July 2023 to the end of the tenancy. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
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.
Considering the seriousness of not having a lockable and secure front door and the fact that tenant has duly notified the landlord’s agent and landlord at the material times in July 2023, I consider it just to award exemplary damages of $850.00 against the landlord for breach of section 46(1) RTA.
I also award the reimbursement of filing fee to the tenant and an order for name suppression.
Only the ordered amounts are proved.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4755276 — Exemplary damages at 83A Fraser Street, Tauranga South, Tauranga 3112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4755276 — Exemplary damages at 83A Fraser Street, Tauranga South, Tauranga 3112

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