What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902475 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 4902475?

Compensation: $7,000.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902475?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Healthy homes, Property damage, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Leaks, Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902475?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11071082-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902475 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 4902475?

Compensation: $7,000.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $20.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902475?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Healthy homes, Property damage, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Leaks, Unit Titles.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902475?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11071082-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 240 Pakuranga Road, Pakuranga Heights, Tenancy Tribunal Case 4902475 — Mould & damp

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902475. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
being compensation of	$7,000.00		being compensation of
as is set out in this decision and the filing fee of	$20.44		as is set out in this decision and the filing fee of

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902475. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
being compensation of	$7,000.00		being compensation of
as is set out in this decision and the filing fee of	$20.44		as is set out in this decision and the filing fee of

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the names of the First Respondent, the Second Respondent and the tenant.
By consent, the tenancy will end on 22 December 2024.
Kirk Soudom must pay the tenant $7,020.44, being compensation of $7,000 as is set out in this decision and the filing fee of $20.44.

Reasons

There were two hearing days in this matter. The first was on 19 August 2024 and the second on 8 November 2024.
The premises the subject of this application is a three bedroom, one bathroom/ one toilet home, with a separate standalone and lockable garage.
The tenancy commenced on 19 February 2022. At the second hearing, the parties agreed that the tenancy will come to an end on 22 December 2024. 1 The landlord indicated that there should be no issue with the tenant being able to access early release of the bond should she request it.
The first respondent, [The property manager/s], is the current property manager. [The property manager/s] took over as property manager in around May 2024. The second respondent, [The previous property manager/s], was the prior property manager and the owner is the third respondent. He bought the property from his [relative] in April 2022.
The claim was initially filed only against [The property manager/s].
The first hearing was adjourned because after the hearing commenced, it became clear that the tenant’s claim was directed also against [The previous property manager/s], and the owner, Mr Soudom. Indeed, most of the tenant’s dealings were with [The previous property manager/s]. An order was made for the joinder of these two parties.
The tenant claims as follows: a. From the outset of the tenancy, the garage has flooded and suffered water ingress issues. b. The Master bedroom has leaked on many occasions through the roof. c. The property had drafts, gaps between the windows and the sills and the outdoor stairs leading up to the main entrance of the house were rotting and unsafe. The alarm was faulty on one occasion at 4am in the morning. d. The premises suffered from a leaking shower and blocked toilet. e. The owner and [The property manager/s] entered the property unlawfully (without notice) on separate occasions. f. The tenant claims the number of contractors coming into the property amounts to a breach of quite enjoyment.
I now turn to deal with each of these issues. The tenant is seeking compensation for each of these items. Some of these issues have now been rectified. Garage Flooding
On the 23 rd of March 2022 the tenant noticed flooding in the garage for the first time. The water was coming in through the side of the garage and up through the floor. 1 There is therefore no need for me to consider any work orders.
The tenant had a lot of belongings in the garage, including a drier. The tenant is a competitive power lifter and had expensive equipment in the garage. She also had other items including a car seat. Having the ability to store and use the garage for that purpose was a key draw card to her taking on the tenancy.
The tenant contacted [The previous property manager/s], who reported the problem to the owner. The issue was not repaired. On 13 June 2022, the tenant emailed [The previous property manager/s] again about the leaking. Every time it rained she said the water would come into the garage.
In July 2022 the tenant emailed again and the owner Mr Soudom contacted the tenant directly and said to put everything on pellets.
Various tradespeople came out to give the landlord quotes for repairs to the garage. According to the tenant, this was very disruptive. There were over seven trades people who came to look at the garage and give quotes she said.
On 17 August 2022 the tenant followed up again because the garage was continuing to leak.
The issue with the garage leaking has never been rectified, according to the tenant. The tenant got tired of chasing it up. The garage still leaks every time there is a big rain.
She produced emails dated 30 January 2023, 1 May 2023 and 13 June 2023, sent to [The previous property manager/s] corroborating the fact she was asking about the garage in 2023. She produced an email dated 28 February 2024 complaining about the garage leaking every time it rains, advising: “You must be very sick of getting emails from me about this.” [The previous property manager/s] has replied to say they send everything to the owner and are doing what they can. They said it was also very frustrating for them.
She produced a pivotal email to [The previous property manager/s] headed “serious concerns”, dated 22 May 2024. This raised a number of issues. One of the issues raised was to do with the garage.
The tenant claims the garage leaking has never been fixed. She is asking for compensation for: a) Her inability to use the garage for its intended purpose. b) Damaged items in the garage including: a. A fridge purchased for $250 five years ago. It no longer works and was flooded with water. b. A car seat purchased for $250 about five years ago was destroyed. c. The tenant’s lifting equipment got rusty. She cannot use it. It was worth $2500 new, but the tenant is only claiming $600.
There was a lack of corroborating information on the file as to the value of these items. [The previous property manager/s] response regarding the garage
[The previous property manager/s] points the finger of blame directly at the owner. Indeed, this was their response to all the tenant’s claims.
They say that whenever the tenant notified them of an issue they would report it to the owner.
Regarding the garage, they obtained a quote, but Mr Soudom’s [relative] who managed the property from time to time, asked for further quotes.
[The previous property manager/s] obtained four quotes in the end. Mr [redacted] Soudom were looking for cheaper quotes.
Eventually a quote from [a company] was accepted and repairs were done in August 2022.
The tenant continued to bring issues of the garage leaking to the attention of [The previous property manager/s]. [The previous property manager/s] would inform Mr [redacted] Soudom.
[The previous property manager/s] say that the decision to take no further action was therefore not made by it but by the owner. It says it passed on all tenant complaints to the owner. At one point it was aware the Soudoms were taking their own steps to address the problem by attempting to drain the water away from the garage. Mr Soudom’s response
Mr Soudom confirms that he and his [relative] asked for quotes to be obtained and confirms that he arranged for some work to be done.
He claims that after January 2023 he communicated direct with the tenant and the tenant only said there were minor puddles.
Mr Soudom says there was no evidence provided.
There are photos showing water in the garage although it was not clear from the photographs when they were taken. The master bedroom / leak in roof
On 29 January 2023, after the Auckland Anniversary weekend downpour, water poured in through the wall from the roof into the master bedroom.
The tenant was told an Insurance Assessor would come out. The Assessor came out and said the roof was in in need of repair. At that stage holes were drilled into the guttering to attempt to improve the drainage of the roof but the tenant claims this repair eventually failed and that the master bedroom felt damp. She said she had the dehumidifier in there constantly on.
She says the leaks progressively became worse, to the point that when she renewed her tenancy in March 2024, she noted with an asterisk, beside the moisture and drainage part of the renewal agreement “has this been rectified”? this document was not produced.
[The tenant/s] sent her “serious concern” email to [The property manager/s] on the 22 nd of May 2024, as noted above. Included in that email was a reference to the roof. She explained that during a heavy rainfall the roof would leak in the master bedroom.
This email was to lead to the termination of the contractual relationship between Mr Soudom and [The previous property manager/s].
At this point [The property manager/s] took over as property manager.
There was then a temporary repair performed in around 30 May 2024. A plumber was sent out by the landlord to inspect the roof and he patched the roof in various places. He told the tenant the best repair would have been replacement of the roof entirely but that that would be very expensive.
Since the patching of the roof the tenant has not noticed water ingress in the bedroom, but the tenant says she has to use a dehumidifier regularly in the room, although accepts that water does not pour down the side of the walls anymore. She says however the ceiling gets regularly mouldy and she has to keep wiping it off.
The tenant paid for [property consulting company], a property consulting company, to insect the roof. They issued a report dated 9 June 2024 and concluded that the repairs that had been performed were not weathertight. They recommended full replacement of the roof. They advised: “Visual inspection of roofing iron from top of garage roof as unable to access house roof due to no edge fall protection and walking on roof may lead to further leaks.I noticed that there has been an attempt to patch hip ridge capping and joints in iron sheeting with a flashing tape which is not suitable as it is not designed to be exposed to UV rays . [The tenant/s] showed me where it has been leaking overnight in the corner of her bedroom with only a light drizzle’ [The tenant/s] was running a dehumidifier and fan heater in an attempt to dry the carpet and surrounding area. I also observed a video taken on the 29/05/2024 showing water running down the bedroom walls and soaking the carpet and flooring. I have advised [ T h e t e n a n t / s ] to get a Healthy homes standards report done as I noticed window and doors not closing properly ,no ventilation in laundry ,,and possibly insufficient insulation in roof cavity. It is my professional assessment that the roofing is not fit for purpose and needs to be replaced as soon as possible especially now we are into the wetter months . The roofing iron is in such bad shape repairing would not be an option .”
The tenant has said, since the first hearing, things have worsened. She has now experienced water coming down the walls whenever it rains. She produced photographs corroborating this.
The tenant also says she found mushrooms growing on the curtains in the bedroom. She removed them and wrote to the landlord about it, producing a copy of the email dated 23 September 2024. The tenant removed the curtains and found them to be covered in black mould. She asked the landlord for replacement curtains and these were provided.
She says the fact there were mushrooms growing on the curtains confirms there is dampness in the room.
The tenant is claiming: a. Compensation for the ongoing mould in bedroom, caused by the water ingress through the roof. b. Compensation for the loss of a TV, which was up against the wall where the water was coming down. The TV does not work anymore. The replacement cost of the TV is $896. The tenant bought the TV 6 years ago. c. The apple TV box was also ruined. The tenant claims this was 6 years old and the replacement cost is $279. d. A touch screen tablet and keyboard were ruined. These cost the tenant $129 3 years ago. [The previous property manager/s] response
[The previous property manager/s] says that all issues to do with the roof were dealt with by the owners direct. Once again, it says it is not responsible.
It points out that following an inspection it noticed damage on the ceiling and notified Mr Soudom. [The property manager/s] and Mr Soudom’s response
[The previous property manager/s] also says it provided all communications to Mr Sodoum
Mr Soudom says he never received the “serious concerns” email but he did get a lengthy text message which raised a number of issues including the issue with the roof.
He then organised the temporary repair in May 2024.
He says there were no complaints after the repairs that were done in early 2023.
The issue with replacing the roof is that the premises managed by a body corporate and there are a number of other unit holders. The premises is one of two premises contained within the one building. Questions such as roof replacement need to be dealt with in conjunction with the other owner.
Regarding replacement of the roof, he got a quote to replace the roof and submitted it at the Body Corporate AGM in September 2023 but it was resolved at that time that it was not a body corporate issue and Mr Soudom was told to discuss it with the owner of the adjoining property.
He was eventually able to discus it with the other owner but they could not afford it. Mr Soudom then obtained a cheaper quote and finally the other owner agreed to contribute to the costs.
So eventually the roof was replaced but only in week of the 30 th of October.
Mr Soudom’s position is that he has done what he could regarding the roof, but was constrained by having to act within the body corporate regime. Draught stopping, windows and the faulty outdoor stairs. The faulty alarm.
Regarding the stairs, these were already rotting when the tenant moved in but began to deteriorate quickly. There was always grime on the stairs, and the tenant had talked to Mr Sodoum direct about fixing the issue as the stairs were slippery when wet. She asked if the stairs could be water blasted.
The tenant believes she first complained to the landlord in about February 2023 regarding the stairs issue.
One day, part of the stairs gave way when the tenant was on them. This was on 21 June 2024. The tenant emailed [The property manager/s] the next day. An anti-slip product was then installed on the stairs.
With the involvement of [The property manager/s], the stairs have now been semi-replaced in that the beams down the side have been replaced but one of the stairs is still rotting and has just been painted over.
The tenant produced recent photographs corroborating the extent of the rot in the corners of the stairs.
The tenant claims there were about six windows at the property where there are gaps between the window and the cold air came in.
Regarding the windows, the landlord had just freshly painted the already rotting windows when the tenant moved in. In the laundry, the owner had in fact painted the window shut.
Over time, the rot and mould has come through and the wood has continued to rot.
The tenant emailed the landlord many times about this. The tenant says that the window became detached from the frame.
She obtained a property report from Property Inspectors dated 10 July 2024 as follows: Just wanted to outline what we have seen at your property at 3/240 Pakuranga Rd today. Stairs - There are major concerns surrounding the rot and other damage to areas of the stringer to the main stairwell to the front door. Visible rot, damage and movement to the stairs are a concern that the stairs could fail and cause a serious injury. It is highly recommended that this is assessed and repaired by a Licensed Building Practitioner prior to this getting any worse or a serious injury occurs. Windows – The large windows to the lounge area have large amounts of moisture damage and rot present. This is causing movement when a small amount of pressure is applied to these windows and there is risk of these failing if someone was to fall or lean onto these. Repairs were noted to some of these areas and already appear to be failing. Again, it is recommended that these are assessed by a Licensed Building Practitioner for repair. Draughts – Multiple windows and the front door either do not operate correctly or do not shut fully. Gaps of up to 15mm were noted. This is allowing draughts into the property and will make it inefficient to heat. This will not be acceptable from a healthy homes standard and should be remediated immediately.
The tenant provided that report to [The property manager/s] and the landlord has (since the application was filed) taken more steps to repair the gaps in the windows and the stairs.
The tenant says the issue with the rotting windows remains. She says that on 19 October 2024, when she was opening a window, the entire glass pane fell out. [The previous property manager/s] response
[The previous property manager/s] obtained a healthy homes report in Jan 2022. It was noted in the report that heating and draft standards failed.
There was a quote to get repairs done. The owner wanted to do the repairs themselves.
[The previous property manager/s] claims they pointed out to the owner that the work was not done properly but the owner refused to do it properly.
[The previous property manager/s] then requested a reassessment of the healthy homes report but the owner declined.
Regarding the window gap, the issue first arose in late 2022, and [The previous property manager/s] says it got a quote for the work to be done but the owner did not want to proceed because they felt it was too high.
[The previous property manager/s] asked if the owners wanted their handyman to quote but there was no response to that.
[The previous property manager/s] says it would always refer the issue to the owner and ask what the owner wanted is to do. Most of the time, Mr Sodoum’s [relative] would attend at the property to do repairs himself. [The property manager/s]’s response
[The property manager/s] considers it addressed the issue with the stairs when the complaint was made. It says this is the first time the tenant has said there is still rot in the staircase.
[The property manager/s] says there is nothing wrong with the stairs currently. It regards these as being functional and safe. It had done work to address this. It sent contractors to work on the stairs and instal anti-slip.
It also considers it has adequately addressed the window issue and the draft stopping.
[The property manager/s] got a fresh Healthy Homes assessment on 8 August 2024 and produced a copy.
This report shows failures in the draft stopping and the ceiling insulation.
[The property manager/s] then arranged for its contractor to perform repairs required to address these issues and produced a copy of an invoice showing the work was done.
It says the property is healthy homes compliant. Mr Soudom
He says the draft stopping issues had been going on from back from 2022 when his [relative] was looking after the property.
He accepts that the draught stopping issues were raised again by the tenant.
When [The property manager/s] came on board he instructed them to sort out the draft stopping and remaining issues. He considers the property is healthy homes compliant.
Regarding the alarm that went off at 4am this was repairs and is a one off. The toilet and leaking shower
On 11 December 2022, the tenant noticed the toilet was leaking.
The owner sent a friend to look at the toilet. The toilet was fixed on that occasion.
On 24 September 2023 the toilet was blocked. The landlord sent [a plumber] from [plumbing company] to assess the toilet and he said the toilet needed to be replaced. He unblocked the toilet.
On 11 May 2024, the toilet blocked again. The [plumber] came back and unblocked it.
Since then, a plumber has come out and advised the toilet needs to be replaced but it has now been replaced.
Regarding the shower, it was leaking into the next room for a long time. Many tradespeople came through to give quotes. Only recently the shower has been replaced, but it has leaked the entire time of the tenancy. The water would leak onto the tiles in the bathroom.
The tenant is claiming compensation for this breach of the landlord’s obligation to repair.
The tenant claims that when the toilet was blocked and could not be used, she had to use the toilet in the shower. She found this undignified.
[The previous property manager/s] says the issue was raised with it on 22 December 2022. It sent an email to the owner. The plumber said the toilet needed to be replaced. [The previous property manager/s] sent this to the owner. The owner said she would do it herself.
[The previous property manager/s] then got further quote and sent it to the owner.
Mr Sodoum said he was contacted direct by the tenant. He said he was not told by his plumber that the toilet needed to be replaced. He did say that the waste pipe needed to be upgraded and that work was done.
Recently there was another blockage. This time, [The previous property manager/s] plumber went out to attend to the second blockage.
[The previous property manager/s] says it sent out all communications to the owner and there was no response.
The owner did not know what caused the blockage. Unlawful entry
The tenant texted [The previous property manager/s] on the 7 th of May 2024 about the fact that one of the smoke alarms was not working. She asked if it was her responsibility. The landlord said she would talk to Mr Soudom about getting it replaced.
Nothing happened. The issue of the smoke alarms was then picked up in the serious concerns email of 22 May 2024.
Mr Soudom and Mr Soudom’s partner got in contact with the tenant about it, they get someone sent out to sort the smoke alarms.
The tenant had made an arrangement with Mr Soudom to drop off a dehumidifier to the property. The tenant then came home to find the smoke alarm replaced, with the old smoke alarm on the bench and the dehumidifier was left in the master bedroom.
She realised Mr Soudom had just entered her house when she was not there and the tenant had not given permission for that.
At no point during the text message exchange was there any discussion about him coming inside for that purpose. There had however been agreement that morning for him to enter the property with the roofer. I deal with this below.
The second time there was an alleged unlawful entry was by the property manager, [The property manager/s].
This was on 14 June 2024. The property manager sent the tenant a text sending a photograph of the carpet pulled back in the bedroom. The tenant had not given her permission to enter the property.
The tenant felt very violated on both occasions. Especially for someone to have entered her bedroom.
Mr Soudom thought he had permission because he had obtained permission to enter the property in the morning to see the roofer. Since he is a qualified electrician he returned to the property and changed the smoke alarms. He took the opportunity to drop the dehumidifier off. He assumed it was ok.
Regarding [The property manager/s], the property manager thought it was an emergency and that is why she entered the property. This is because the tenant texted her that morning to say there had been a heavy rain and the roof was leaking again. The property manager said that she would let the plumber know and ask him to go and have a look. The plumber went to the property. The tenant had left a key out for him.
The plumber then phoned the property manager at about 11am and said could she come immediately and bring the blower. Because it was just before the weekend and there was a lot of rain coming, the property manager thought this warranted her entering into the property with the blower to give to the plumber.
She thought she was actually helping the tenant. She thought she had her tacit approval.
The tenant says she had reported plumbing issues many times and she did not consider why the landlord would see this as an emergency.
The tenant felt uncomfortable with the landlord personally being in the property.
In terms of the compensation sought, the tenant acknowledged that she has had a rent reduction from around September of this year at $50 per week. She tenant was asking for compensation in around $30,000.
She also claims the cost of the two companies she had attend at the property to provide reports, although does not have their invoices. Relevant law relating to breach of the landlord’s obligations of maintenance and repair
Under s 45 of the RTA, 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 must also comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises. 2
The obligation of the landlord to provide premises in a reasonable state of repair is not absolute. A landlord does not have to foresee a latent and unobservable defect before it causes damage (see Barfoot & Thompson v Casey. 3 ) Further, a tenant must notify the landlord as soon as possible after discovery of any damage 2 Section 45 of the RTA 3 DC Auckland CIV 2005 004 1762, at [28] to the premises and the need for repair. 4 The landlord's obligation is to then repair within a reasonable time after knowledge of the need for repair. 5 Analysis
I was provided with a great deal of evidence in this case, including many emails and photograph. With the photographs, it was not always easy to work out when they were taken.
I was provided with conflicting accounts of the facts, which have spanned some two years, with the tenant relying on facts that took place back in 2022. The tribunal is sometimes critical of parties who attempt to bring claims based on matters dating back to the commencement of a lengthy tenancy.
I begin by noting that as with any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not.
This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs may be an important part of discharging this burden. Ultimately however, it is for the party making the application to decide what evidence to put before the Tribunal.
As noted 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.
I consider that many of the tenant’s complaints were addressed during the course of the tenancy but I also consider that she has waited too long for a remedy in most cases.
I find that this is not because of any failing on the part of the property managers, but that the owners have failed to address her concerns in a timely way, instead attempting to find cheaper methods or take no action at all.
Regarding the lack of a functioning toilet, this is unacceptable, even for a short period. This should have been addressed by retaining the services of a 24 hour plumber, to be fixed on the spot. I accept it would have been degrading to use 4 S 40(1)(d) of the RTA, Vu v Hutchings [2016 ] NZTT 4054247, at [13] 5 Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington CIV 2009 085 1431, at [15] the shower to urinate. I find that the condition of the toilet and the leaking show have meant the landlord failed its obligations of repair and maintenance.
I find the front doorway steps to be in an old, but now acceptable condition, but I agree that there remain issues with the rotting window frames, which appear to be perishing due to water ingress. I consider that during a part of the tenancy, the condition of the steps has meant the landlord failed in its obligations of maintenance and repair.
I find that the most serious complaint has been the roof. This has been in an unacceptable condition throughout and has led to water ingress and without a doubt the present of mould and the mushrooms growing in the bedroom. No tenant should have to put up with that. There has been a longstanding breach of the landlord’s obligations of repair.
Concerning the garage, I accept there has been some water ingress during the tenancy. But I am not satisfied it has been to the extent alleged by the tenant. I am not satisfied with the quality of the evidence produced by the tenant, although I accept she did complain about this issue.
I accept the alarm she complained about was faulty, but the landlord has repaired it once they were told about it.
Regarding the draughts, I find this issue to have been a breach of the landlord’s obligations of repair, however given the most recent healthy homes report has now passed the landlord on the standard, there is no ongoing problem. Damages
The tenant sought a sum that is well north of what I would consider a reasonable sum.
It is incumbent on a tenant to bring claims to the tribunal promptly. Not to wait two years and then package all complaints up with a shopping list of details. Failing to bring claims promptly means that a landlord might be unaware of the exposure of any claim. Further, it raises double as to whether the claim is properly motivated.
Although the tenant claimed the cost of damaged items, she provided no corroborating evidence supporting those claims. She did not even produce the two invoices for the building reports she obtained.
I am not prepared to award damages in respect to claimed losses, including losses for broken or damaged items that are not supported by corroborating documents.
I do not intend to conduct a line by line analysis of damages here. I found the state of the evidence frankly hard to follow and all over the place at times. There was a voluminous amount of it and little attempt on the part of all parties to properly organize it. It was not chronologically sequenced and bounced around.
I intend instead to award a global sum for the damages suffered. I have taken into account the foregoing remarks and I consider $7,000 an adequate amount of compensation to be paid to the tenant as a result of the failures that have occurred. I consider this sum to be a reasonable figure in the circumstances.
I find that this sum must be paid by Mr Soudom to the tenant. I accept the submissions and evidence of the two property managers as to their efforts to get the owner to take actions when the tenant complained. I find that their actions have not been wanting. I found them to be clear and straightforward witnesses.
I find that that the balance of the claims for healthy homes non-compliance not to be proven. In any event, given the overlap with breach of section 45 I consider the remedy I have provided does adequate justice between the parties. Relevant law regarding breach of Quiet enjoyment
The tenant claims there were many tradespeople constantly coming to the house.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See s 38(2) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA).
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See se 38(3) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
I find that the entry onto the property by tradespeople, even if there are a large number does not amount to “harassment” under the RTA.
I find that the conduct in this case falls well short of “harassment”, as that phrase is defined above. I have no doubt that the tenant felt her stress was real and that these visits caused her upset but it does not reach the level of harassment required.
I dismiss this aspect of the claim.
I likewise dismiss the claim that the owner and [The previous property manager/s] attend at the property without due notice. I consider that both had reasonable grounds to consider the tenant had given them access on the day in question, and I accept their explanations in this regard.
I refund the filing fee, due to the success of the applicant.
Name suppression is granted with respect to the tenant, [The previous property manager/s] and [The property manager/s].

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902475 — Mould & damp at Unit/Flat 3, 240 Pakuranga Road, Pakuranga Heights,

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902475 — Mould & damp at Unit/Flat 3, 240 Pakuranga Road, Pakuranga Heights,

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions