What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4873262 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders

How much money was awarded in case 4873262?

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

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4873262?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4873262?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10745015-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4873262 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders

How much money was awarded in case 4873262?

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

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4873262?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4873262?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10745015-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit 1, 187 Matsons Avenue, Papanui, Christchurch 8053 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4873262 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4873262 — 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
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,220.44

All parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by their property manager, Mr Ternus.

The tenants claim that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act) in relation to the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) relating to insulation and moisture ingress.

Under section 13A of the Act, a landlord must include in the tenancy agreement a statement that provides information to the tenant as to the insulation installed in the premises and as to the premises’ compliance with the HHS.

Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $750.00.

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. Background

This tenancy was from November 2021 to April 2024. The tenancy agreement contained an insulation statement confirming that there was polyester insulation under the floor of the entire premises, that there was ground vapour barrier (GVB), also polyester, and that the premises would comply with the HHS.

The tenants’ complained to the property manager during the tenancy about dampness and mould in the bathroom and toilet room. The fan in the bathroom was compliant but the landlord installed a dome over the shower and a new extractor fan. They also installed a new range hood in the kitchen.

The conditions in the bathroom were significantly improved but the tenants continued to feel that the premises generally were cold, damp and difficult to keep warm. They said that it was those conditions that caused them to end the tenancy.

They said that their young son frequently suffered from colds which was not normal for him. He was not so ill that they had to consult a doctor for him.

At the end of the tenancy, they inspected under the floor through a manhole and found that there was no GVB and no insulation.

The landlord produced a Healthy Homes Report following an inspection after the tenancy ended that found that the clearance under the floor was too little for it to be practicable to install a GVB or insulation there. The landlord was therefore exempt from the requirement for insulation and a GVB under the floor.

The landlord also produced a Healthy Homes Report by All Clear Healthy Homes following an inspection immediately before the tenancy began confirming the contents of the HHS statement with the tenancy agreement. It includes a photograph taken through a manhole into the sub floor space. The photograph has been taken from above the manhole and therefore shows the area of ground directly below the manhole.

The photograph shows bare ground with no evidence of a GVB. Mr Ternus suggested that because it was dark below the floor, it might have appeared that there was a GVB there. I don’t accept that. I’m sure that anyone looking through the manhole would know that there was no GVB.

The photograph does not show whether there was any insulation under the floor, and it is not known whether the inspector checked.

The tenants said that they were aware of the HHS, and they wanted a home that complied with them. They said that if the statement had disclosed that there was no insulation and GVB installed in the premises, they would not have taken the tenancy. Discussion and Decision

I accept the tenants’ evidence. I have no reason not to. It follows that not only has there been a breach by the landlord by providing incorrect information with the tenancy agreement, but there has also been a misrepresentation that induced the tenants to enter the tenancy agreement. That entitles the tenants to compensation for the effects of the breach and the misrepresentation on their enjoyment of the premises.

I accept that the premises were colder, damper and less comfortable to live in due to the absence of a GVB and insulation under the floor. That was inevitable. I also accept that it affected their son’s health and the health of one of the tenants who suffered from asthma. It exacerbated the tenant’s asthma.

The tenants initially claimed the rent they paid for the two winter period periods that they occupied the premises. They have since reduced their claim to $50 for 24 weeks being 12 weeks of winter for two years amount to $1,200.

In this type of case there is no science to assessing an appropriate sum for compensation. In my view the tenants’ revised claim is reasonable. The consequences of the conditions under the floor would vary according to the weather conditions and the tenant’s approach seems fair and produces, in my view, a fair result proportionate to the harm. I have therefore awarded them $1,200 compensation. Exemplary Damages

Exemplary damages can be awarded if the landlord was aware that the information given was known to them to be false or misleading. I accept that the landlord would have relied on the report they received. But the company responsible for the report was the landlord’s agent and their knowledge must therefore be imputed to the landlord. I cannot accept that the inspector believed that there was a GVB and insulation under the floor. That would have been egregious incompetence. The landlord cannot delegate the responsibility for providing accurate information to the tenants.

I note as well that there were warning signs in the report. The photo provided does not show a GVB and it did not show any insulation and nor could it due to the position from which it was taken. It also stated that the GVB was polyester which is not material used for GVBs. That said, after considering all the relevant circumstances, I find that an award of exemplary damages is not warranted in this case. It is unlikely that the landlord made a conscious decision to rent a noncompliant house to the tenants. Filing Fee

The tenants have succeeded and so I have awarded them the filing fee. Suppression

For the same reason I have granted them name suppression.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4873262 — 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
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,220.44

All parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by their property manager, Mr Ternus.

Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $750.00.

They said that their young son frequently suffered from colds which was not normal for him. He was not so ill that they had to consult a doctor for him.

At the end of the tenancy, they inspected under the floor through a manhole and found that there was no GVB and no insulation.

The photograph does not show whether there was any insulation under the floor, and it is not known whether the inspector checked.

The tenants have succeeded and so I have awarded them the filing fee. Suppression

For the same reason I have granted them name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4873262 — Tenancy dispute at Unit 1, 187 Matsons Avenue, Papanui, Christchurch 8053

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4873262 — Tenancy dispute at Unit 1, 187 Matsons Avenue, Papanui, Christchurch 8053

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