What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4868060 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4868060?

The reconciled net award was $750.00.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4868060?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4868060?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10600526-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4868060 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 4868060?

The reconciled net award was $750.00.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4868060?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4868060?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10600526-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

768B State Highway 1, Otaki, Otaki 5573 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4868060 — Mould & damp

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
The landlord is to pay the tenant $750.00 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant’s application was for compensation for the landlord failing to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards and failing to maintain the property. See sections 45(1)(b) and (bb) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
As this tenancy started on 1 January 2019, the landlord is under no legal obligation to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards until 1 July 2025.
The tenant’s claims in relation to the Healthy Homes Standards are therefore dismissed. Standard of proof and evidence
In considering the tenant’s claims, the standard of proof is “on the balance of probabilities”. In other words, the tenant must establish with evidence that his claims are more likely than not. I have considered the tenant’s claims bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding each claim, I have considered all the evidence presented, including oral testimony. I have weighed this evidence to decide what is more likely. Certain types of evidence carry more weight, which must be considered when weighing all the evidence.
While I may not have referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered. It is for an applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove their claims. If the applicant fails to do so then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not, because it is for the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not the Tribunal’s responsibility to extract evidence.
Section 85(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires the Tribunal to determine each dispute according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. I have determined the tenant’s application with this requirement in mind. The tenant’s claim
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached its obligation under section 45(1)(b) RTA to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
Specifically, the tenant claims that the following matters required repair: a. There was paint and wallpaper peeling in the two bathrooms. b. There was a leak in a bathroom and a bedroom ceiling. c. The gutters required clearing. d. A light was not working in a bedroom. e. There was paint and wallpaper peeling in the kitchen/dining area. f. The toilet cistern leaks into the toilet bowl. g. Windowsills need painting. h. Black mould was present in the premises.
The tenant gave a 14-day notice to the landlord dated 1 February 2024 requiring: “Regular maintenance and black mould removal as previously requested. House brought up to Healthy Homes Standards.”
The landlord provided a copy of its routine inspection report dated 30 May 2024 which noted: a. The ceiling needs to be painted in the kitchen/dining area. b. Bedroom 1 ceiling water damage evident and noted in previous reports. c. Bedroom 3 the paint is peeling on the ceiling and windowsills. d. “The wallpaper needs to be removed in the bathroom and painted as well as the ceiling as noted in previous reports.” e. “Ceiling in shower room near the laundry has a large area of paint peeling on the ceiling. Needs to be painted.” f. “Gutters were being cleaned today. Noted in previous reports.”
The parties agreed that the gutters have been cleaned out and a contractor is redecorating the two bathrooms, including replacing gib and insulation in the main bathroom. In addition, an area of the roof has been sealed with butanol.
The landlord acknowledged that the sealing of the roof was required because of “small leaks”.
The landlord maintained that the bathroom work required was cosmetic redecoration.
The tenant argued that he had been complaining about the lack of maintenance on the property for at least two years. He objected to three rent increases during his tenancy of five and a half years when, he claimed, maintenance issues had not been addressed. The law
A landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes.
A landlord therefore must repair within a reasonable time after knowledge of the need for repair: “...the obligation of the landlord, under s 45, is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances, and as to what that time is, I think, depends not only on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be.” Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington CIV-2009- 085-1431
The obligation to repair applies even if the tenant has notice of the state of the premises when entering into the tenancy agreement. A tenant’s remedy, where premises need minor repairs, is to require repair by the landlord within a reasonable time. A tenant may give the landlord a 14-day notice to remedy. However, notice from the tenant is not needed if the landlord knew of the need for repair or the need for repair is apparent from observation.
The age of the house and rent are relevant to what is a reasonable state of repair.
The standard of repair is not “as new” or perfect, but reasonable given the age and character of the premises.
A landlord must provide premises not prone to mould, but there is a joint responsibility to control humidity by the landlord providing a means of heating and the tenant properly ventilating the premises. There is no failure to repair by a landlord where mould is remedied by cleaning with soapy water, drying, a dehumidifier or electrical heating, mould is not caused by the state of the premises or mould is caused by a lack of ventilation of the premises by the tenant. Discussion and decision
The tenant has claimed compensation for the presence of “black mould”. While photographs of mould were presented by the tenant, the Tribunal is not satisfied on the balance of probabilities and on the evidence before it that the mould was caused by the lack of repair by the landlord or that it could not be removed by simple cleaning.
The landlord had an obligation to clear the gutters, especially as the rainwater went into a water tank which provided the drinking water for the premises. The landlord was aware that the gutters needed clearing.
While the windowsills do require repainting, the Tribunal is not persuaded that the requirement is more than cosmetic.
The areas in the ceiling and walls of the kitchen/dining area which require attention are not so widespread as to require immediate attention. They are unsightly but are not of sufficient extent or cause to impede significantly the tenant’s enjoyment of the property.
The tenant’s 14-day notice did not specifically refer to the ceilings. However, it is apparent from the landlord’s report and the photographs that this was a self- evident issue that required repair.
It is not relevant that the landlord had other properties which required work and which it had chosen to address. The landlord had specific obligations to this tenant and which are not reduced by its obligation to other tenants.
The tenant’s evidence supports his claim that he began complaining about the state of repair of the property from February 2024. He did not provide any corroborating evidence of any other complaints prior to this time.
The landlord gave evidence that it responded to the tenant’s 14-day notice regarding Healthy Homes Standards by noting that they did not yet apply to this property and supplying the tenant with a copy of the Healthy Homes Assessment.
The landlord advised that it had its contractor inspect the bathroom ceilings on 30 May 2024 during the routine inspection. Her evidence is that “The builder looked at the supposed leak that [the tenant] had pointed out. He told him that the paint could be flaking on the ceiling due to a number of reasons, age of the property, nonventilation(windows unopened).”
The tenant denied not ventilating the house. It seems most unlikely from an examination of the photographic evidence that such extensive paint failure could be caused by non-ventilation. It is significant in the works being carried out this month that the roof has been sealed because of what the landlord described as “minor leaks”.
The tenant has persuaded the Tribunal that the state of the bathrooms required repair because the paint was hanging off large parts of the ceiling and the damage was likely caused at least partially by leaks in the roof.
It is appropriate that the landlord compensate the tenant for the state of the bathrooms and its failure to clear the gutters. In determining an amount of compensation, I have considered these factors: a. The age of the property. b. The rent being charged is at the lower rate of rents being charged in Levin. c. The period proven by the tenant when the landlord should have taken action is approximately four months, but the state of the bathrooms was evident to the landlord for a longer period. d. The tenant had chosen not to use the bathrooms for his own reasons, but the landlord was nonetheless obliged to provide them in a reasonable state of repair. e. The fact that the failure to clean the gutters must have impacted on the quality of the tenant’s drinking water.
Assessing amounts of compensation in such circumstances is not an exact science. It is appropriate here to award a sum of $750.00 to reflect the need for the landlord to address such maintenance issues in a timely fashion. Other issues
It is appropriate for the landlord to investigate and repair, if necessary, the ceiling and light in the bedroom and the cistern leak. There is not sufficient evidence before the Tribunal for it to determine whether these are live issues and that the landlord has failed in its duty to maintain in relation to them.
The landlord is now on notice that they require investigation and repair if necessary. Suppression
As the tenant has had success in his application, it is appropriate that his name be suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4868060 — Mould & damp at 768B State Highway 1, Otaki, Otaki 5573

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4868060 — Mould & damp at 768B State Highway 1, Otaki, Otaki 5573

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