What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4901273?

The tribunal order states: The application for work orders is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4901273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4901273?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4901273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10866733-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4901273?

The tribunal order states: The application for work orders is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4901273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4901273?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4901273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10866733-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4901273 — State of repair

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4901273 — State of repair | TenantCheck

Order

The application for work orders is dismissed.
The application for compensation for the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the premises and for high power costs is dismissed.
The application for exemplary damages for the late lodgement of the bond is dismissed.

Reasons

Background

I first began hearing this application on 29 July 2024. I heard the tenant’s application for exemplary damages for the late lodgement of the bond and the landlord’s response to it.
I adjourned the tenant’s applications for work orders and for compensation for the alleged failure by the landlord to repair and maintain the premises and for increased power costs.
I made directions for the parties to provide further evidence, although the landlord provided most of the evidence he relied on at that the hearing.
The tenant then filed some photographic evidence.
The parties agreed that the landlord would undertake an inspection at the premises on 1 August 2024 so he could see what work was needed.
Today, Mr Keown attended the hearing; the tenant did not attend. Mr Keown advised the Tribunal that the tenant had messaged him to say she would not be attending. Issues
The Tribunal must decide: •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond within time and if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

•Has the tenant proved claims for compensation? •Should the Tribunal make work orders? Law – compensation and exemplary damages

The Tribunal may award compensation to a tenant for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the landlord of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
The tenant’s compensation claims are for actual losses (high power costs) and for the loss of use of and therefore enjoyment of the tenancy due to what she considers was the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the premises.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party committed a defined unlawful act intentionally. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). Those factors are: (a) The intention of the person; (b) The effect of the unlawful act; (c) The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and (d) The public interest. Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond within time and if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Mr Keown admitted that he lodged the bond late (it was paid on 13 October 2023 and lodged on 8 January 2024).
Mr Keown said he was very ill with covid during that time and was bed ridden for 2 weeks. He said lodging the bond was something he forgot to do during the time he was unwell.
The failure to lodge the bond within the defined statutory timeframe (23- working-days after receipt) is a defined unlawful act for which the Tribunal can award exemplary damages up to $1,500.00.
In this case, I do not find that the landlord acted intentionally. His failure to lodge the bond was due to illness for part of the relevant time. At most he was negligent. That is not sufficient to satisfy the statutory test.
The period of time was relatively short. There was no effect on the tenant. Her bond was eventually lodged and is protected. This is not a situation where the tenant’s interests or the public interest require the landlord to be penalised.
I dismiss the tenant’s application for exemplary damages.

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

The tenant did not attend the hearing today so the Tribunal could not hear from her concerning her compensation claims. I dismiss those claims for lack of proof.

Should the Tribunal make work orders?

Because the tenant did not attend the hearing the Tribunal heard no evidence from her concerning her application for work orders.
Mr Keown said he inspected the premises as agreed at the last hearing and had attended to various repairs. He said the relationship between him and the tenant had improved.
I dismiss the tenant’s application for work orders for lack of proof. Result
The tenant’s applications for exemplary damages, compensation, and work orders are dismissed.

Order

The application for work orders is dismissed.
The application for compensation for the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the premises and for high power costs is dismissed.
The application for exemplary damages for the late lodgement of the bond is dismissed.

Reasons

Background

I first began hearing this application on 29 July 2024. I heard the tenant’s application for exemplary damages for the late lodgement of the bond and the landlord’s response to it.
I adjourned the tenant’s applications for work orders and for compensation for the alleged failure by the landlord to repair and maintain the premises and for increased power costs.
I made directions for the parties to provide further evidence, although the landlord provided most of the evidence he relied on at that the hearing.
The tenant then filed some photographic evidence.
The parties agreed that the landlord would undertake an inspection at the premises on 1 August 2024 so he could see what work was needed.
Today, Mr Keown attended the hearing; the tenant did not attend. Mr Keown advised the Tribunal that the tenant had messaged him to say she would not be attending. Issues
The Tribunal must decide: •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond within time and if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

•Has the tenant proved claims for compensation? •Should the Tribunal make work orders? Law – compensation and exemplary damages

The Tribunal may award compensation to a tenant for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the landlord of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
The tenant’s compensation claims are for actual losses (high power costs) and for the loss of use of and therefore enjoyment of the tenancy due to what she considers was the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the premises.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party committed a defined unlawful act intentionally. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). Those factors are: (a) The intention of the person; (b) The effect of the unlawful act; (c) The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and (d) The public interest. Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond within time and if so, should the

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Mr Keown admitted that he lodged the bond late (it was paid on 13 October 2023 and lodged on 8 January 2024).
Mr Keown said he was very ill with covid during that time and was bed ridden for 2 weeks. He said lodging the bond was something he forgot to do during the time he was unwell.
The failure to lodge the bond within the defined statutory timeframe (23- working-days after receipt) is a defined unlawful act for which the Tribunal can award exemplary damages up to $1,500.00.
In this case, I do not find that the landlord acted intentionally. His failure to lodge the bond was due to illness for part of the relevant time. At most he was negligent. That is not sufficient to satisfy the statutory test.
The period of time was relatively short. There was no effect on the tenant. Her bond was eventually lodged and is protected. This is not a situation where the tenant’s interests or the public interest require the landlord to be penalised.
I dismiss the tenant’s application for exemplary damages.

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

The tenant did not attend the hearing today so the Tribunal could not hear from her concerning her compensation claims. I dismiss those claims for lack of proof.

Should the Tribunal make work orders?

Because the tenant did not attend the hearing the Tribunal heard no evidence from her concerning her application for work orders.
Mr Keown said he inspected the premises as agreed at the last hearing and had attended to various repairs. He said the relationship between him and the tenant had improved.
I dismiss the tenant’s application for work orders for lack of proof. Result
The tenant’s applications for exemplary damages, compensation, and work orders are dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4901273 — State of repair at 8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4901273 — State of repair at 8 McLean Street, Linwood, Christchurch 8062

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

Should the Tribunal make work orders?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Tribunal award the tenant exemplary damages?

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

Should the Tribunal make work orders?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions