What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4790817 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4790817?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4790817?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4790817?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10119803-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4790817 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4790817?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4790817?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4790817?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10119803-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4790817 — Exemplary damages

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Mr [U] attended on behalf of the landlord.

The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.

The applicant claimed exemplary damages for discrimination and $10,000.00 compensation for the effort, cost and time of searching for another home. Background

The tenants were the successful applicants for the property and the landlord arranged to meet with them on Friday 19 January at 4pm.

The parties reviewed the Tenancy Agreement for 45 minutes, but the tenants requested more time to consider the agreement before signing. The landlord gave them a copy of the contract (which had already been signed by the landlord) to take away.

There is some dispute as to what the process was intended to be but there is no dispute that the contract was never signed by the tenants.

The landlord gave evidence that he reverted to the owners who instructed that he withdraw the offer to these tenants.

The offer was withdrawn by the landlord within an hour of the end of the meeting by email with confirmation of the withdrawal sent by text message.

The landlord gave evidence that he signed up new tenants the next day. Discrimination

The tenant gave evidence that she considered that the landlord had been unreasonable in wanting the agreement to be signed immediately and wanting the bond payment the next day. She felt she was being pressured to sign the agreement and considered it would be normal for a tenant to take time to review a contract before signing. She felt that the landlord had got angry when they did not want to sign the agreement that day and had behaved in an unreasonable manner.

She believed that she and her co-tenant had until Monday 22 January to return the signed agreement.

It is clear that the tenant found this process stressful and difficult. However, she was unable to point to any discrimination that would give rise to a claim for exemplary damages under the Residential tenancies Act 1986 (the Act).

The tenant was also unable to point to any breach of the Act that would give rise to a compensation claim.

The tenant is unable to establish any claim on the balance of probabilities and therefore the claims must be dismissed. Suppression and costs

The tenant requested suppression in her application and although she has not been successful, having regard to the interests of the parties I am ordering suppression under s95A(4) of the Act.

As the landlord’s cross application was actually a defence to the tenant’s claim and was filed unnecessarily, costs lie where they fall.