What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4794080 about?

The tribunal order states: Dpm Property Group Limited - As Agent For Phinogen Trust must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4794080?

Compensation: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4794080?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4794080?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10316267-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4794080 about?

The tribunal order states: Dpm Property Group Limited - As Agent For Phinogen Trust must pay [The

How much money was awarded in case 4794080?

Compensation: $1,200.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4794080?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4794080?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10316267-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4794080 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4794080 — net $1,220.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$1,200.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,220.44
Bond	$4,200.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,220.44

Both parties attended the hearing, the tenant by telephone.

[The tenant/s] claim that the landlord has breached their obligations by failing to maintain the tennis court on the premises in a useable condition.

The tenant wanted compensation by way of a 16 week rent reduction amounting to $3,200.00 for the time they did not have the benefit of being able to use the tennis court.

The tenancy was initially for a fixed term from 1/7/2022 to 29/6/203 when the term was extended to 1/2/2024. Weekly rent was $1,050.00.

The tenant submitted that the owners’ parents failed to maintain the tennis court to such an extent that it was unusable.

Initially the tenant mentioned the problems with the tennis court to the owners’ parents in June 2023 and subsequently advised the landlord during an inspection on 28/7/2023.

In support of the claim the tenant provided photographs of the state of the tennis court.

While the landlord did not dispute that the tennis court needed maintenance, which they agreed was the responsibility of the landlord, they did not consider the time taken to complete the work unreasonable.

Nor did the landlord believe that telling the owners’ parents was notice to them as the landlord.

The landlord submitted that they were unaware of the issue until 28/7/2023 and the work was completed by 20/10/2023.

In support of their position the landlord provided a timeline of events and suggested that obtaining information about how to clean the Astro turf was difficult.

The landlord initially offered a rent rebate of $600.00, which was later increased to $1,000.00 or a release a week early from the tenancy.

Under section 45, a landlord must, among other matters, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.

Breaching this obligation 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.

I find the evidence supports that the landlord failed to maintain the tennis court and undertake remedial action in a reasonable timeframe.

The landlord has committed an unlawful act.

However, because the tenant did not ask for exemplary damages and I am satisfied there was no intent on behalf of the landlord, I have only looked at the issue of compensation by way of rent reduction.

I am not persuaded by the tenants’ suggestion that advising the owners’ parents about the problem with the tennis court was sufficient to comply with their obligations under section 40(1)(d) about notifying the need for repairs.

Both parties agreed that all other notifications were made direct to the landlord.

According to my calculations there were twelve weeks between the time the tenant advised the landlord on 28/7 and the time the work was completed on 20/10/2023.

At a rent reduction of $200.00 per week this would amount to $2,400.00.

However, I consider it not unreasonable in the circumstances for some investigation to be undertaken about the cleaning and the work to be completed, which I have estimated as six weeks.

This leaves a period of six weeks and an award has been made for a reduction in rent for this period.

As there is no claim against the bond an Order has been made for this to be refunded to the tenant

As [The applicant/s] have wholly succeeded with the claim I must awarded the filing fee.

Suppression is granted to the tenant pursuant to section 95A because they largely succeeded with the claim.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4794080 — net $1,220.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$1,200.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,220.44
Bond	$4,200.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,220.44