What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902634 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4902634?

Linkpeople Limited: $2,370.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902634?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: State of repair, Exemplary damages, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902634?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10732844-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4902634 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 4902634?

Linkpeople Limited: $2,370.44 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4902634?

The primary dispute was 14-day notice. Related themes: State of repair, Exemplary damages, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4902634?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10732844-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

26B Don Street, Papakura, Papakura 2110 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4902634 — 14-day notice

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902634. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Linkpeople Limited	$2,370.44		Linkpeople Limited

The tenant’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

The landlord must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by Monday 2 September 2024: a. Repair the sliding door so that it opens and closes properly and is lockable. b. Repair the windows in bedrooms 1 and 2, the lounge, and kitchen so that they open and close properly. All windows with safety stays must be repaired with safety stays given some of the windows are on an upper floor. c. Repair or replace all cracked or broken windows, including the lounge, kitchen, and bedroom 1 windows. d. Cover all exposed nails in the carpet to make all flooring safe. e. Remove any scaffolding from the premises.

As an alternative to compliance with Order 2, the landlord must pay the tenant $2,000.00 immediately.

If the landlord fails to comply with either Order 2 or 3 above, then the tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord the costs of this work up to $2,000.00. These costs may be set off against rent payable.

Premium Rental Property Management Limited - as Agent for Wei Zhou must pay Linkpeople Limited $2,370.44 immediately for thermal curtains and the filing fee.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 14 August 2024.

On 5 June 2024 the tenant applied for work orders and compensation for replacement curtains ($2,350.00). The application was subsequently amended to include a request for reduction of the fixed-term tenancy, due to end on 23 May 2026. At the hearing, I permitted the tenant to further amend the application to include termination for breach by the landlord (section 56 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act)). Background

Both parties are commercial landlords. They have entered into a residential tenancy agreement and expressly contracted back into the Act. The tenant is a social housing provider who sub-lets the premises to its social housing clients (the sub-tenant). There is no issue with this or with the Tribunal’s jurisdiction.

The tenancy is for a fixed term from 24 May 2023 to 23 May 2026 at a weekly rent of $670.00 and a bond of $2,680.00.

There have been issues with leaks at the premises: • On or about December 2023 there was a leak in the water main behind the water meter. The landlord says the tenant advised them to send a plumber and the leak was repaired urgently. • A new leak was detected over the Christmas period in 2023. The leak was located near the driveway in January 2024 and initial works were performed. New above-ground water pipes were laid on 1 February 2024. The landlord described these as emergency repairs. The tenant said they received a call from the sub-tenant who was distressed that the water had been turned off without notice. • On or about 7 July 2024 there was a burst pipe which the landlord repaired on 8 July 2024. The landlord says they contacted the tenant to obtain access to the premises. • On or about 4 August 2024 the landlord’s contractors attended site to repair a drainage pipe in the kitchen subfloor and unblock the kitchen wastepipe.

There have also been issues with maintenance at the premises: • The tenant served a notice to remedy on 23 February 2024 raising issues with doors and windows not closing properly, the stove needed fastening due to an uneven floor, and there was a crack in the lounge window. • The tenant served a further notice to remedy on 16 May 2024 complaining that these matters had not been addressed. The notice also stated that the owner had breached quiet enjoyment by arriving unannounced on multiple occasions.

The tenant complains that the owner let himself into the house without permission on Friday 12 July 2024 and was knocking on the sliding door in the sunroom. The visitor told the sub-tenant that he was there to check what needed doing for a quote. The tenant served a breach notice relating to this incident dated 17 July 2024.

The landlord says the tenant is confusing this with a visit by the landlord’s contractor on Tuesday 9 July 2024, which was notified. The contractor knocked on the sliding door in the sunroom for 15 minutes before the sub-tenant answered the door. The landlord said that none of their or the owner’s tradespeople attended the property on 12 July 2024. Work Orders / Maintenance

Under section 45 of the Act the landlord has an obligation to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. The landlord must also comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment which applies to the premises.

The landlord accepts they have not addressed all the issues identified in the notices dated 23 February and 16 May 2024. I direct that the landlord carries out the work necessary to address them. There is also an issue with exposed nails protruding through the carpet. The landlord’s representative said he thought this issue had been addressed. I require the landlord to investigate whether there is a safety issue with exposed nails and to remedy it.

The tenant says scaffolding has been left behind by the landlord’s contractors and this is a hazard for their client’s children. The landlord says the scaffolding has been removed but the tenant provided a photograph of the scaffolding dated 5 August 2024. I require the landlord to remove the scaffolding which I accept is potentially hazardous.

I have made monetary orders as an alternative to compliance with the work orders, based on quotes provided by the tenant. The tenant may undertake the work and charge the landlord for the cost of doing so up to the monetary limit imposed if the landlord does not comply. Quiet Enjoyment

The tenant claims that the landlord or its agents entered the premises without consent or notice. A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance (section 48 of the Act).

A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (section 38(2) of the Act).

It seems quite likely that the incident the sub-tenant said occurred on 12 July 2024 was in fact the visit of the landlord’s tradesperson on 9 July 2024 to obtain a quote. The emails at the time indicate that the tradesperson came into the premises and knocked at the internal door between the sunroom and the rest of the house. This was also something mentioned by the sub-tenant in their written description of the event.

The landlord stated in an email dated 18 July 2024 that the tradesperson had contacted the tenant beforehand to arrange the visit for quotation purposes. The Tribunal is not able to determine whether such prior notice was given or not. I find it has not been established that the tradesperson entered the premises without giving the required notice.

It is also unclear whether appropriate notice was given in respect of other maintenance visits, including the problems with the mains water and drains. Some of this work likely was urgent, and the landlord said they were notified of the need to attend by the tenant.

In my view, the landlord is only obligated to give notice to the tenant to perform maintenance. The landlord does not have to give notice to the sub-tenant although, in practice, I understand the landlord tried to give notice to either the tenant or the sub-tenant. Strictly speaking, the landlord must give notice to enter the premises to the tenant, who must give notice to the sub-tenant.

It is not necessary for the landlord to arrange entry for times when the tenant can also be on site. The tenant sub-lets to people requiring social housing. The tenant’s desire to attend and help manage the landlord’s visits is understandable, and the landlord might be expected to work with the tenant and sub-tenants to achieve this. However, it is not a requirement of tenancy law, and the tenant does not appear to have included a clause to this effect in the tenancy agreement. I would have been inclined to uphold clauses in the tenancy agreement specifying how inspections and maintenance visits should be notified and conducted in the context of subletting for social housing. Termination / Reduction of Fixed Term

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate (section 56(1) of the Act).

Where the breach is capable of remedy the relevant party must first serve a notice on the other party requiring them to remedy the breach within at least 14 days and establish that they have failed to do so.

I am satisfied that the landlord is in breach of their duty to maintain the premises in reasonable condition. They have not attended to all the repairs set out in the notices to remedy. The tenant says they have been complaining about these issues since the start of the tenancy in May 2023. The tenant complains that failure to address doors and windows not closing properly has made the property very cold for the sub-tenant to live in and contributed to health issues.

The tenant may be correct that the issues have not been addressed since May 2023, but the correspondence provided does not establish that. The first formal steps to have the maintenance issues attended to were taken by serving a notice to remedy dated 23 February 2024.

The tenant says the maintenance failures have badly affected the sub-tenant but on the face of it the issues are relatively minor and should not be difficult or expensive to fix.

There have also been leaks at the premises, but I am unable to establish that these problems have been caused by a failure to maintain by the landlord, who appears to have addressed the problem each time it has arisen.

I am not currently satisfied that the landlord’s breach means that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy pursuant to section 56 of the Act. However, that may change if the work orders are not complied with.

The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy pursuant to section 66 of the Act where: • There has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances; and • There would be severe hardship to the applicant if the term is not reduced; and • The applicant’s hardship would be greater than the hardship to the other party if the term is reduced.

I am not satisfied that this test is met. The landlord’s failure to address maintenance issues is not an unforeseen circumstance. In the Tribunal’s experience such failures are relatively common and might have been anticipated.

Nor am I satisfied that there will be severe hardship to the tenant if the fixed term is not reduced. I have made work orders so that the maintenance issues giving rise to the application are addressed. Failure to comply with those work orders may result in an application for enforcement of the work orders and/or an award of exemplary damages and/or termination of the tenancy (see section 108 of the Act). Curtains

The tenant asked the landlord to replace the existing curtains. The tenant says they removed the old curtains and installed thermal curtains at the premises to provide some extra warmth, because the sub-tenant’s children were constantly getting sick. The tenant says the windows were not properly sealed, and referred to photographs of a cracked window in the lounge and bedroom windows not closing properly. The landlord said a previous manager working for the tenant said the tenant would replace the curtains for no charge.

I could not locate a photograph of the original curtains in the file. If they were provided as a chattel by the landlord, then the landlord would have a duty to replace them when they wore out. The available evidence does not enable the Tribunal to determine whether the curtains needed replacement.

However, the cost of replacement curtains can also be seen as a loss flowing from the landlord’s failure to repair the windows and doors which has allowed draughts into the property. No compensation was specifically claimed for breach of the landlord’s maintenance obligations, but I award the cost of thermal curtains on this ground. Filing Fee and Name Suppression

The tenant’s application has been partly successful. I award the filing fee.

The landlord requested suppression. The landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful in defending the application (section 95A of the Act). I decline to grant suppression.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4902634. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Linkpeople Limited	$2,370.44		Linkpeople Limited

The tenant’s application for termination of the tenancy is dismissed.

As an alternative to compliance with Order 2, the landlord must pay the tenant $2,000.00 immediately.

Premium Rental Property Management Limited - as Agent for Wei Zhou must pay Linkpeople Limited $2,370.44 immediately for thermal curtains and the filing fee.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 14 August 2024.

The tenancy is for a fixed term from 24 May 2023 to 23 May 2026 at a weekly rent of $670.00 and a bond of $2,680.00.

A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (section 38(2) of the Act).

The Tribunal may terminate a tenancy for breach where due to the nature or extent of the breach, it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate (section 56(1) of the Act).

The tenant says the maintenance failures have badly affected the sub-tenant but on the face of it the issues are relatively minor and should not be difficult or expensive to fix.

The tenant’s application has been partly successful. I award the filing fee.

The landlord requested suppression. The landlord has not been wholly or substantially successful in defending the application (section 95A of the Act). I decline to grant suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902634 — 14-day notice at 26B Don Street, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4902634 — 14-day notice at 26B Don Street, Papakura, Papakura 2110

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions