What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4874685 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4874685?

Compensation: Refund Of “Deposit: $559.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Stress and inconvenien…: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4874685?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4874685?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10939242-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4874685 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 4874685?

Compensation: Refund Of “Deposit: $559.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Stress and inconvenien…: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $900.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4874685?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4874685?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10939242-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

4 Horniblow Road, Matakohe 0594 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4874685 — Exemplary damages

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4874685 — net $3,479.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Landlord requiring key money	$1,000.00	Landlord requiring key money
Exemplary damages: Incorrect information in insulation statement and healthy homes statement	$900.00	Incorrect information in insulation statement and healthy homes statement
Compensation: Refund of “deposit	$559.00	Refund of “deposit
Compensation: Stress and inconvenience	$1,000.00	Stress and inconvenience
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,479.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,479.44

The adjournment order dated 18 September 2024 sets out the background to the application.

The second hearing took place in [Event location suppressed] on 9 October 2024. [The tenant/s] attended the hearing. There was no appearance by Mr Miles.

The landlord breached the following legal duties: a. Requiring the tenant to pay key money. b. Including information in the insulation statement that is false. c. Including information in the healthy homes statement that is misleading. Key money

Key money is defined in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) as: 1 Any sum of money demanded by way of fine, premium, foregift, reimbursement of expenses, administration charges, or otherwise as consideration for the grant, continuance, extension, variation, or renewal of a tenancy agreement

In this instance the landlord required the tenants to pay $59.00 to make an application for the tenancy, and then a ‘deposit’ of $500.00 to secure the property.

Both of these payments meet the definition of key money.

Requiring the payment of key money is an unlawful act. 2 Exemplary damages of up to $1,500.00 can apply.

The Tenancy Tribunal may award exemplary damages if the Tribunal is satisfied that an unlawful act was committed intentionally. In considering an award of exemplary damages, the Tribunal must have regard to: 3 a. The intention of the person who committed the unlawful act. b. The effect of the unlawful act. c. The interests of the person against whom the act was committed. d. The public interest.

In this instance: a. Mr Miles has not availed himself of the opportunity to explain why he required the payment of key money. b. The fact that the tenants had paid a deposit made it difficult for them when they were presented with a house that was non-compliant with the healthy homes standards and in a poor state of repair. Not proceeding with the 1 Section 2 RTA 2 Section 17(1) and (2) RTA 3 Section 109 RTA tenancy meant that they ran the risk of the landlord unlawfully keeping the deposit, which is in fact what happened. c. The prohibition on requiring key money has been a consistent part of New Zealand tenancy law since 1987.

Having regard to these factors, I will award exemplary damages of $1,000.00.

The tenants are also entitled to a refund of the deposit and ‘application fee’ that were improperly charged. Incorrect and misleading information in the insulation statement and healthy homes statement

Landlords must provide a written tenancy agreement that includes an insulation statement and a healthy homes statement. 4

The insulation statement must provide information about: a. Whether there is insulation in the ceiling, floors, or walls of the premises; and b. Details of the location, type, and condition of the insulation.

The healthy homes statement must: a. Be signed by the landlord; and b. State that the landlord will comply with the healthy homes standards; and c. Provide information about the heating, insulation, draught stopping, and drainage. 5

A landlord commits an unlawful act if: a. They fail to provide a healthy homes statement or insulation statement; or b. The landlord’s statement includes anything that the landlord knows to be false or misleading.

The tenancy agreement included an insulation statement.

The landlord stated that the insulation met the minimum requirements for underfloor insulation. In another part of the statement, the landlord stated that he did not know the location / coverage of the underfloor insulation because the subfloor area is inaccessible. The landlord then goes on to state that the insulation is polystyrene and that it is in reasonable condition.

The statement is internally inconsistent and also false. The tenants provided a photograph of the subfloor area. There is no underfloor insulation. 4 Section 13(1A) and 13(1CA) RTA 5 As detailed in the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019

Therefore: a. The landlord’s statement that the property met the minimum requirements for underfloor insulation was false. b. It is not the case that the landlord made all reasonable efforts to obtain and provide accurate information in the statement. The subfloor area is not inaccessible. The tenants accessed it without difficulty and took a photograph.

There is a healthy homes statement in the tenancy agreement. Mr Miles put his name on both the “will comply” and “already comply” statements in the standard agreement. The “will comply” statement is optimistic. The “already comply” statement is plainly false. The property does not have a compliant means of heating in the main living area (there is an open fireplace only), and the tenants’ photographs of the rotten windows show that the house does not meet the standard for draught stopping.

I am satisfied that the landlord put information in the insulation statement and healthy homes statement that they knew to be false.

It is appropriate to award exemplary damages. Exemplary damages of up to $900.00 can apply to each breach. In this instance: a. It is reasonable to infer that Mr Miles intended to put false information in the statements, but it is possible that it was due to a fairly extreme level of careless rather than intention. b. There is a legitimate public interest in ensuring that landlords ensure that they provide complete and accurate information in tenancy agreements.

I will award total exemplary damages of $900.00 for the two breaches. Compensation

A party to a contract may cancel the contract if they were induced into the contract by a misrepresentation, and the effect of the misrepresentation is to substantially reduce the benefit of the contract. 6

In this instance the tenants were induced into the contract by misrepresentations by the landlord, including that: a. The premises were healthy homes compliant; and b. The landlord would ensure that the premises were reasonably clean and tidy and have compliant smoke alarms at the start of the tenancy. 6 Section 37, Contract and Commercial Law Act 2017 (“CCLA”)

The effect of the misrepresentation was to substantially reduce the benefit of the contract for the tenants. They understandably did not want to move into a home that had no lawful and effective means of heating, that was unclean and untidy, that did not have compliant smoke alarms, and where there was obvious rot and gaps around windows.

The tenants were entitled to cancel the contract.

If a contract is lawfully cancelled, a court or tribunal may direct a party to pay any other party the sum that the court thinks just. 7

The tenants suffered significant stress and inconvenience due to the tenancy not proceeding. They had a 6-month old child. They had to store their belongings in three places while they looked for temporary accommodation.

In the circumstances it is just to award compensation of $1,000.00 to the tenants for stress and inconvenience. Filing fee

The tenants have been successful in this application and I must also award them the filing fee.

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4874685 — net $3,479.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Landlord requiring key money	$1,000.00	Landlord requiring key money
Exemplary damages: Incorrect information in insulation statement and healthy homes statement	$900.00	Incorrect information in insulation statement and healthy homes statement
Compensation: Refund of “deposit	$559.00	Refund of “deposit
Compensation: Stress and inconvenience	$1,000.00	Stress and inconvenience
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,479.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,479.44

The adjournment order dated 18 September 2024 sets out the background to the application.

The second hearing took place in [Event location suppressed] on 9 October 2024. [The tenant/s] attended the hearing. There was no appearance by Mr Miles.

In this instance the landlord required the tenants to pay $59.00 to make an application for the tenancy, and then a ‘deposit’ of $500.00 to secure the property.

Both of these payments meet the definition of key money.

Requiring the payment of key money is an unlawful act. 2 Exemplary damages of up to $1,500.00 can apply.

Having regard to these factors, I will award exemplary damages of $1,000.00.

Landlords must provide a written tenancy agreement that includes an insulation statement and a healthy homes statement. 4

The tenancy agreement included an insulation statement.

I am satisfied that the landlord put information in the insulation statement and healthy homes statement that they knew to be false.

I will award total exemplary damages of $900.00 for the two breaches. Compensation

The tenants were entitled to cancel the contract.

If a contract is lawfully cancelled, a court or tribunal may direct a party to pay any other party the sum that the court thinks just. 7

In the circumstances it is just to award compensation of $1,000.00 to the tenants for stress and inconvenience. Filing fee

The tenants have been successful in this application and I must also award them the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4874685 — Exemplary damages at 4 Horniblow Road, Matakohe 0594

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4874685 — Exemplary damages at 4 Horniblow Road, Matakohe 0594

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