What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4897662 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 4897662?

Compensation: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $600.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4897662?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4897662?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13076021-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4897662 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 4897662?

Compensation: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $600.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4897662?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4897662?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13076021-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

14 Mills Lane, Albany, Auckland 0632, Karuna 1 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4897662 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4897662 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$600.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation by consent	$250.00	Compensation by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant name and identifying details.
The Prema Charitable Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $870.44 immediately as recorded in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the rehearing.
The tenant has applied for vacated exemplary damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant moved into the boarding house premises on or about 25 March 2022. The tenancy ended on 29 May 2024.
The landlord took over the boarding house in 2008. They purchased the land and several rundown buildings on the property. There was a separate unit used for a lounge and kitchen. There was also a separate toilet block along with several other separate buildings on site. The tenant’s room was a single room with a further 8 or 9 rooms within the building.
There has been a lot of communication between the parties by text and email. The tenant has provided documentary evidence in support of his application. The landlord also provided a written response with his rehearing request.
I heard oral evidence from the parties today. I have considered everything placed before the Tribunal even if I do not specifically refer to it. Issues
On the tenant’s application the issues to be determined are these: • Has the landlord breached his obligations under section 66I (1) (a) to (c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986? • Did the landlord fail to give the tenant a valid notice of termination? • Did the landlord fail to give the tenant notice that the premises was for sale? • Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a written tenancy agreement? Statutory provisions
Section 66I RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are (inter alia) the responsibility to ensure the premises are in a reasonable state of repair and comply with the Healthy Home Standards.
Section 66J (2) provides that a landlord must advise a tenant if they have put the premises on the market.
Section 13 provides that a tenancy agreement must be in writing and provided to the tenant prior to the start of a tenancy.
Section 66U(1) provides for termination of the tenancy. Legal Considerations
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence. Notice to terminate
The parties undertook private discussions during the hearing and reached a settlement of $250.00 in respect of this claim.
Accordingly, the claim in respect of the notice to terminate has settled.

Has the landlord failed to notify the tenant that the premises were for sale?

The RTA states that a boarding house landlord must immediately tell a tenant if they have put the premises on the market and tell any prospective tenant if the premises are already on the market. See section 66J(2) of the RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00 (s 66J(4) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
The tenant says that on 11 April 2023 he received an email from another resident that the landlord had listed the property for sale. The tenant says that this was not an official notice from management advising that the property was up for sale.
On 19 June 2023 the residents convened a meeting, with the landlord present. On 21 December 2023 Quotable Value recorded the sale of the property. The tenant did not find out about this until the following year on 8 July 2024. The landlord confirmed the property was sold in December 2023.
The tenant says that the landlord issued a letter to residents on 1 May 2024 advising that the property had now sold.
On 9 May 2024 the tenant sent the landlord a letter in respect of the breach of failing to notify that the property had been put on the market.
The landlord says that the tenants did receive a notice in respect of the sale. In early 2023 the property was formally placed on the market and the tenants were notified of this on 25 April 2023.
The tenant disputes this saying he never received it.
In late April 2024 the landlord was advised that the buyer wanted a clear site and would not continue with the boarding house.
The tenant maintains that he was not notified that the property was sold. The landlord was unable to provide a copy of the email from 25 April 2023 advising the tenant that the property was for sale.
Having carefully considered the evidence filed with the tenant’s application I am satisfied that the landlord failed to formally notify the tenant that the boarding house property was for sale. I am equally satisfied that the landlord committed an unlawful act by failing to tell the tenants the property was on the market prior to the sale in December 2023.
I assess this breach at the lower end of the scale and award one third of the maximum penalty in exemplary damages. Did the landlord breach Healthy Home Standards and/or fail to maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair?
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
A landlord must • provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair See sections 66I(1)(a) to (c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 66(4) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant says that the Healthy Homes compliance certificate was not issued until quite some time after he moved in.
The tenant provided a witness statement from a former receptionist at the boarding house in support of this claim.
The landlord responded by stating that in 2021 the trust was put into administration by the District Court. The Trust board appointed a manager to manage the premises. In 2023 the landlord and his wife were appointed to the Trust board. His wife spent time getting the premises Healthy Homes compliant.
The landlord says that the premises were brought up to compliance standards in early 2023. The landlord says that no photographic evidence has been provided by the tenant in support of this claim. Analysis
In my view the tenant has not proved the landlord committed an unlawful act. The tenant has failed to file any photographic evidence in support of this claim. At the very least I would have expected photographs and a specialist report.
Accordingly, the tenant’s claim for failure to maintain and a breach of Healthy Homes Standards has not been established. Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a copy of the tenancy agreement?
The RTA requires that a landlord ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. See section 13 of the RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to provide him with a copy of the tenancy agreement prior to the start of the tenancy. He states in his application that the residential manager failed to provide him with a copy of the contract.
The tenant was not provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement until 9 May 2024 when he requested it. The tenant provided a copy of the email sent to the residential accommodation centre requesting a full hard copy of his tenancy agreement. This was provided the next day.
Although I find that the landlord failed to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement at the start of the tenancy I am not satisfied that the landlord breached their obligations intentionally.
I have taken into account the landlord’s explanation during the hearing of events leading up to when the tenancy agreement was provided and find that the failure to provide the agreement was an oversight and not intentional.
Accordingly, the tenant’s claim for exemplary damages in respect of the landlord failing to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement has not been established and is dismissed.
Because [The applicant/s] has partially succeeded with the application I have reimbursed the filing fee.
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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The tenant applied for a name suppression order. The tenant has partially succeeded with his application and therefore I allow his request for name suppression.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4897662 — net $870.44 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages	$600.00	Exemplary damages
Compensation by consent	$250.00	Compensation by consent
Filing fee reimbursement	$20.44	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$870.44
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$870.44

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant name and identifying details.
The Prema Charitable Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $870.44 immediately as recorded in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the rehearing.
The tenant has applied for vacated exemplary damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant moved into the boarding house premises on or about 25 March 2022. The tenancy ended on 29 May 2024.
The landlord took over the boarding house in 2008. They purchased the land and several rundown buildings on the property. There was a separate unit used for a lounge and kitchen. There was also a separate toilet block along with several other separate buildings on site. The tenant’s room was a single room with a further 8 or 9 rooms within the building.
There has been a lot of communication between the parties by text and email. The tenant has provided documentary evidence in support of his application. The landlord also provided a written response with his rehearing request.
I heard oral evidence from the parties today. I have considered everything placed before the Tribunal even if I do not specifically refer to it. Issues
On the tenant’s application the issues to be determined are these: • Has the landlord breached his obligations under section 66I (1) (a) to (c) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986? • Did the landlord fail to give the tenant a valid notice of termination? • Did the landlord fail to give the tenant notice that the premises was for sale? • Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a written tenancy agreement? Statutory provisions
Section 66I RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are (inter alia) the responsibility to ensure the premises are in a reasonable state of repair and comply with the Healthy Home Standards.
Section 66J (2) provides that a landlord must advise a tenant if they have put the premises on the market.
Section 13 provides that a tenancy agreement must be in writing and provided to the tenant prior to the start of a tenancy.
Section 66U(1) provides for termination of the tenancy. Legal Considerations
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations.
That includes a requirement that the party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely.
This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence. Notice to terminate
The parties undertook private discussions during the hearing and reached a settlement of $250.00 in respect of this claim.
Accordingly, the claim in respect of the notice to terminate has settled.

Has the landlord failed to notify the tenant that the premises were for sale?

The RTA states that a boarding house landlord must immediately tell a tenant if they have put the premises on the market and tell any prospective tenant if the premises are already on the market. See section 66J(2) of the RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00 (s 66J(4) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
The tenant says that on 11 April 2023 he received an email from another resident that the landlord had listed the property for sale. The tenant says that this was not an official notice from management advising that the property was up for sale.
On 19 June 2023 the residents convened a meeting, with the landlord present. On 21 December 2023 Quotable Value recorded the sale of the property. The tenant did not find out about this until the following year on 8 July 2024. The landlord confirmed the property was sold in December 2023.
The tenant says that the landlord issued a letter to residents on 1 May 2024 advising that the property had now sold.
On 9 May 2024 the tenant sent the landlord a letter in respect of the breach of failing to notify that the property had been put on the market.
The landlord says that the tenants did receive a notice in respect of the sale. In early 2023 the property was formally placed on the market and the tenants were notified of this on 25 April 2023.
The tenant disputes this saying he never received it.
In late April 2024 the landlord was advised that the buyer wanted a clear site and would not continue with the boarding house.
The tenant maintains that he was not notified that the property was sold. The landlord was unable to provide a copy of the email from 25 April 2023 advising the tenant that the property was for sale.
Having carefully considered the evidence filed with the tenant’s application I am satisfied that the landlord failed to formally notify the tenant that the boarding house property was for sale. I am equally satisfied that the landlord committed an unlawful act by failing to tell the tenants the property was on the market prior to the sale in December 2023.
I assess this breach at the lower end of the scale and award one third of the maximum penalty in exemplary damages. Did the landlord breach Healthy Home Standards and/or fail to maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair?
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
A landlord must • provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair See sections 66I(1)(a) to (c) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 66(4) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant says that the Healthy Homes compliance certificate was not issued until quite some time after he moved in.
The tenant provided a witness statement from a former receptionist at the boarding house in support of this claim.
The landlord responded by stating that in 2021 the trust was put into administration by the District Court. The Trust board appointed a manager to manage the premises. In 2023 the landlord and his wife were appointed to the Trust board. His wife spent time getting the premises Healthy Homes compliant.
The landlord says that the premises were brought up to compliance standards in early 2023. The landlord says that no photographic evidence has been provided by the tenant in support of this claim. Analysis
In my view the tenant has not proved the landlord committed an unlawful act. The tenant has failed to file any photographic evidence in support of this claim. At the very least I would have expected photographs and a specialist report.
Accordingly, the tenant’s claim for failure to maintain and a breach of Healthy Homes Standards has not been established. Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a copy of the tenancy agreement?
The RTA requires that a landlord ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. See section 13 of the RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to provide him with a copy of the tenancy agreement prior to the start of the tenancy. He states in his application that the residential manager failed to provide him with a copy of the contract.
The tenant was not provided with a copy of the tenancy agreement until 9 May 2024 when he requested it. The tenant provided a copy of the email sent to the residential accommodation centre requesting a full hard copy of his tenancy agreement. This was provided the next day.
Although I find that the landlord failed to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement at the start of the tenancy I am not satisfied that the landlord breached their obligations intentionally.
I have taken into account the landlord’s explanation during the hearing of events leading up to when the tenancy agreement was provided and find that the failure to provide the agreement was an oversight and not intentional.
Accordingly, the tenant’s claim for exemplary damages in respect of the landlord failing to provide a copy of the tenancy agreement has not been established and is dismissed.
Because [The applicant/s] has partially succeeded with the application I have reimbursed the filing fee.
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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The tenant applied for a name suppression order. The tenant has partially succeeded with his application and therefore I allow his request for name suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4897662 — Exemplary damages at 14 Mills Lane, Albany, Auckland 0632, Karuna 1

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4897662 — Exemplary damages at 14 Mills Lane, Albany, Auckland 0632, Karuna 1

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the landlord failed to notify the tenant that the premises were for sale?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the landlord failed to notify the tenant that the premises were for sale?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions