What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4851187 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4851187?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4851187?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4851187?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10302857-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4851187 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4851187?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4851187?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: Exemplary damages, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4851187?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10302857-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 4851187 — Mould & damp

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has lived in this house since 2020. He is concerned that the house is mouldy and grows fungi, and there are spores and a terrible smell which make it an unhealthy place for him to live. His application is for work orders to address the damp, the mould and the smell, exemplary damages because the work has not been done, and compensation. He is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. The questions I have to decide include: • Has the tenant proved there is a smell? • Has the tenant proved the need for work orders? • Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

Has the tenant proved there is a smell?

The tenant said there is a terrible smell coming from cupboards under the kitchen sink. He has had these taped up to prevent the smell coming into the kitchen. He blocks the kitchen off at night so the smell does not go through to the rest of the house, and he covers his mouth and nose when he enters in the morning before opening all the windows. He believes the smell is coming from mould and spores. I note the report done by [inspector] in 2022 noted the cupboards were taped up then, and the report writer recorded a ”musty smell” at the time he inspected. There are two recent photos, taken this year, which show under the cupboards. One shows bora dust and the other shows marks which are hard to identify as mould. The tenant said that his tenancy manager was in the house in November or December 2023 and her comment was she could “taste the smell”.
The landlord submitted that it was likely there would be a musty smell because the cupboards were taped up. The tenancy manager did not give evidence. The annual inspection is being done on 9 May 2024, and they will consider the smell then.
This is the tenant’s claim to prove. It is very hard to prove a smell. I accept there was a musty smell in 2022. I am also persuaded there is likely to be a smell if the cupboards are taped up. I cannot tell from the photo if the marks in the cupboard are mould. I am not more persuaded by the tenant’s evidence, which means this claim is dismissed.

Has the tenant proved the need for work orders?

The tenant wants me to make an order that the black mould and fungi growing out of the subfloor is removed. This is an order the Tribunal can make, if the tenant proves there is a problem. See s 45(1)(a)-(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant’s evidence starts with [the inspector]’s report, which states it is likely the subfloor is “may be wet” below the lino. At the time the report was written there was a blocked drain and a leaking pipe outside that was causing damp in the bathroom and under the house. There is photo in the report of the bathroom trim which had come away from the walls “due to moisture under the lino”. The tenant has also provided me with some poor quality photos of the kitchen lino. He states that the wooden flooring under the lino is rotten.
The landlord provided copies of their work orders which show that the landlord has installed a ground vapour barrier, repaired the leaking pipe, and repaired the blocked drains. All this work was done after the landlord received a copy of [the inspector]’s report. There is also a work order from May 2023 and notes on the file after a plumber went to the house. The file records note there were no leaks, that the flooring was not soft, and that the lino had not been compromised in any way.
I have read the information provide by both parties. I am not more persuaded by the tenant’s evidence. I note there are no recent photos showing mould or fungi or evidence the floor is rotten. I find the landlord has the best evidence on this point, which means the tenant’s claim is dismissed.

Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

I cannot order compensation or exemplary damages because the tenant has not proved his claims. Suppression
The tenant made an application for suppression. 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 Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. See section 95A RTA.
I am using my discretion to allow suppression for the tenant. This is because there have been no breaches of the RTA, tenants are encouraged to use the Tribunal to resolve disputes, and any interest in the decision is in the law rather than the tenant’s name.

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has lived in this house since 2020. He is concerned that the house is mouldy and grows fungi, and there are spores and a terrible smell which make it an unhealthy place for him to live. His application is for work orders to address the damp, the mould and the smell, exemplary damages because the work has not been done, and compensation. He is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities. The questions I have to decide include: • Has the tenant proved there is a smell? • Has the tenant proved the need for work orders? • Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

Has the tenant proved there is a smell?

The tenant said there is a terrible smell coming from cupboards under the kitchen sink. He has had these taped up to prevent the smell coming into the kitchen. He blocks the kitchen off at night so the smell does not go through to the rest of the house, and he covers his mouth and nose when he enters in the morning before opening all the windows. He believes the smell is coming from mould and spores. I note the report done by [inspector] in 2022 noted the cupboards were taped up then, and the report writer recorded a ”musty smell” at the time he inspected. There are two recent photos, taken this year, which show under the cupboards. One shows bora dust and the other shows marks which are hard to identify as mould. The tenant said that his tenancy manager was in the house in November or December 2023 and her comment was she could “taste the smell”.
The landlord submitted that it was likely there would be a musty smell because the cupboards were taped up. The tenancy manager did not give evidence. The annual inspection is being done on 9 May 2024, and they will consider the smell then.
This is the tenant’s claim to prove. It is very hard to prove a smell. I accept there was a musty smell in 2022. I am also persuaded there is likely to be a smell if the cupboards are taped up. I cannot tell from the photo if the marks in the cupboard are mould. I am not more persuaded by the tenant’s evidence, which means this claim is dismissed.

Has the tenant proved the need for work orders?

The tenant wants me to make an order that the black mould and fungi growing out of the subfloor is removed. This is an order the Tribunal can make, if the tenant proves there is a problem. See s 45(1)(a)-(ca) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The tenant’s evidence starts with [the inspector]’s report, which states it is likely the subfloor is “may be wet” below the lino. At the time the report was written there was a blocked drain and a leaking pipe outside that was causing damp in the bathroom and under the house. There is photo in the report of the bathroom trim which had come away from the walls “due to moisture under the lino”. The tenant has also provided me with some poor quality photos of the kitchen lino. He states that the wooden flooring under the lino is rotten.
The landlord provided copies of their work orders which show that the landlord has installed a ground vapour barrier, repaired the leaking pipe, and repaired the blocked drains. All this work was done after the landlord received a copy of [the inspector]’s report. There is also a work order from May 2023 and notes on the file after a plumber went to the house. The file records note there were no leaks, that the flooring was not soft, and that the lino had not been compromised in any way.
I have read the information provide by both parties. I am not more persuaded by the tenant’s evidence. I note there are no recent photos showing mould or fungi or evidence the floor is rotten. I find the landlord has the best evidence on this point, which means the tenant’s claim is dismissed.

Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

I cannot order compensation or exemplary damages because the tenant has not proved his claims. Suppression
The tenant made an application for suppression. 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 Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published. See section 95A RTA.
I am using my discretion to allow suppression for the tenant. This is because there have been no breaches of the RTA, tenants are encouraged to use the Tribunal to resolve disputes, and any interest in the decision is in the law rather than the tenant’s name.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4851187 — Mould & damp

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4851187 — Mould & damp

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the tenant proved there is a smell?

Has the tenant proved the need for work orders?

Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the tenant proved there is a smell?

Has the tenant proved the need for work orders?

Can I order compensation and exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions