What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4821058 about?

The tribunal order states: Metro NZ Property Management Limited As Agent For Carolyn Hobson must

How much money was awarded in case 4821058?

Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4821058?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4821058?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10518830-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4821058 about?

The tribunal order states: Metro NZ Property Management Limited As Agent For Carolyn Hobson must

How much money was awarded in case 4821058?

Property Damage: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4821058?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4821058?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10518830-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

56 Hackett Street, Saint Marys Bay, Auckland 1011 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4821058 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4821058 — net $720.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages for non-lodgment of bond	$700.00	Exemplary damages for non-lodgment of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$720.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$720.44

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant seeks the return of her bond after the tenancy had ended on 10 January 2024. The tenant also seeks exemplary damages because the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre at all during her tenancy. The tenancy commenced on 16 June 2022.

In response to the tenant’s claims, the landlord returned the bond in full to the tenant on 8 March 2024. The landlord also offered an explanation on why the professional property management company has not lodged the bond.

The landlord says that they were initially not managing the tenancy and normally bonds paid to them would be forwarded to the owner. Here, they eventually managed the tenancy of close to 2 years. The landlord says that the non-lodgment of bond was due to an oversight.

However the bond was never paid to the owner. The tenant’s bond stayed with the property management company throughout the tenancy.

A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(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 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

By failing to lodge the bond at all during the entire tenancy from June 2022 to January 2024, 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.

Metro NZ Property Management Limited is an experienced and professional landlord.

As a professional property management company, an audit ought to be conducted on bond lodgements on their entire portfolio to ensure that any overlooked and unlodged bonds will be remedied by bond lodgment immediately. Because bond lodgment calls upon positive action on part of the landlord, this obligation to do so cannot be so easily circumvented by a plea of mere oversight before the Tribunal.

The tenant had to use her credit card to pay for another bond at the end of this tenancy as a result of untimely refund of her bond.

The factor that counts in the landlord’s favour is their full return the bond to the tenant unconditionally which occurred in March 2024 after the tenant has filed this application to the Tribunal.

Having regard to the above factors, I find it just to award exemplary damages of $700.00 against the landlord. In doing so, I have had regard to the professional property manager’s assertion of the reason for non-lodgment, the effect of the unlawful act to the tenant, the interests of the tenant, and the public interest to tenants in general to be assured that all landlords, especially professional landlords, lodge the bond within 23 working days from the receipt of the bond.

Because [The applicant/s] has succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee alongside the order for exemplary damages of $700.00 in her favour.

I also grant an order for the suppression of the tenant’s name as requested.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4821058 — net $720.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages for non-lodgment of bond	$700.00	Exemplary damages for non-lodgment of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$720.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$720.44

Order

Metro NZ Property Management Limited As Agent For Carolyn Hobson must pay [The tenant/s] $720.44 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant seeks the return of her bond after the tenancy had ended on 10 January 2024. The tenant also seeks exemplary damages because the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre at all during her tenancy. The tenancy commenced on 16 June 2022.
In response to the tenant’s claims, the landlord returned the bond in full to the tenant on 8 March 2024. The landlord also offered an explanation on why the professional property management company has not lodged the bond.
The landlord says that they were initially not managing the tenancy and normally bonds paid to them would be forwarded to the owner. Here, they eventually managed the tenancy of close to 2 years. The landlord says that the non-lodgment of bond was due to an oversight.
However the bond was never paid to the owner. The tenant’s bond stayed with the property management company throughout the tenancy.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(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 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
By failing to lodge the bond at all during the entire tenancy from June 2022 to January 2024, 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.
Metro NZ Property Management Limited is an experienced and professional landlord.
As a professional property management company, an audit ought to be conducted on bond lodgements on their entire portfolio to ensure that any overlooked and unlodged bonds will be remedied by bond lodgment immediately. Because bond lodgment calls upon positive action on part of the landlord, this obligation to do so cannot be so easily circumvented by a plea of mere oversight before the Tribunal.
The tenant had to use her credit card to pay for another bond at the end of this tenancy as a result of untimely refund of her bond.
The factor that counts in the landlord’s favour is their full return the bond to the tenant unconditionally which occurred in March 2024 after the tenant has filed this application to the Tribunal.
Having regard to the above factors, I find it just to award exemplary damages of $700.00 against the landlord. In doing so, I have had regard to the professional property manager’s assertion of the reason for non-lodgment, the effect of the unlawful act to the tenant, the interests of the tenant, and the public interest to tenants in general to be assured that all landlords, especially professional landlords, lodge the bond within 23 working days from the receipt of the bond.
Because [The applicant/s] has succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee alongside the order for exemplary damages of $700.00 in her favour.
I also grant an order for the suppression of the tenant’s name as requested.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4821058 — Exemplary damages at 56 Hackett Street, Saint Marys Bay, Auckland 1011

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4821058 — Exemplary damages at 56 Hackett Street, Saint Marys Bay, Auckland 1011

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