What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4944015 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant has filed two applications relating to the tenancy and this order

How much money was awarded in case 4944015?

Filing Fee: $54.00 awarded to tenant; For 6 Weeks: $300.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4944015?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4944015?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10797446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4944015 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant has filed two applications relating to the tenancy and this order

How much money was awarded in case 4944015?

Filing Fee: $54.00 awarded to tenant; For 6 Weeks: $300.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4944015?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4944015?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10797446-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

2 Grovedale Square, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt 5014 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4944015 — Tenancy dispute

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4944015 — net $2,354.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond money paid and not lodged	$1,500.00	Bond money paid and not lodged
Compensation: bond not lodged	$500.00	bond not lodged
for 6 weeks	$300.00	for 6 weeks
Filing fee reimbursement x 2	$54.00	Filing fee reimbursement x 2
Net award	$2,354.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,354.00

The tenant attended the hearing.

The landlord was served with both applications using the same email address he used to email the tenant yesterday. When contacted by the registry last week the landlord advised that he is in India. He was advised the hearing would proceed by telephone. I tried both numbers provided by the tenant and the calls were not answered.

I note the landlord has known about the applications since 18 July, which is plenty of time for him to make enquiries about the hearing date and advise Tenancy Services that he was travelling out of the country. The bond

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The tenant is not sure if $3000 was paid at the start or $2996 was paid, which is the amount on the tenancy agreement. The landlord did not lodge the bond. It is a requirement of the RTA that bonds are lodged within 23 working days. See section 19 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).

The parties agreed the tenancy would end on 12 July 2024. The tenant provided me with a copies of messages between the tenant and the landlord. These confirm that $1,500 has already been paid to the tenant as a part refund of the bond. The messages sent on 17 June 2024 confirm an agreement that another $1,500 would be paid in a lump sum at the end of the tenancy.

The landlord has since told the tenant that he wants to claim some money from the bond, but he has not filed an application with Tenancy Services. Section 22B(2) RTA provides that where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim.

Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the agreed remaining bond of $1,500 is refunded in full to the tenant.

The tenant also wants $1,000 compensation because the bond was not lodged. Compensation can be ordered where there has been a loss. The tenant said she was stressed when she called the Bond Centre and realised the bond was never lodged. The landlord told her he used the money to make mortgage payments, which caused more stress. She had to borrow money to pay the bond at her new home. She has no idea when the landlord will return her money. I find there has been an ongoing loss and compensation should be paid. I allow $500, which seems reasonable to me. I have been guided by the amount I would have awarded had the tenant applied for exemplary damages. Breach of quiet enjoyment

The tenant claims the landlord has harassed her and her five children by turning up at the house two or three times each week. She said this started in February 2024. He would not come inside, but would often knock on the door to have a chat about non tenancy matters. Sometimes he parked the car in the driveway and visited the neighbour. I have a copy of the email sent on 20 May where the tenant told the landlord to stop the frequent visits. She took a photo of the landlord on the front lawn two days after the email. She said the visits slowed to once or twice a week after the email and eventually stopped before the end of the tenancy.

The law provides that a landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) RTA. The tenant has claimed $1,500 as compensation for the breach.

I am persuaded by the tenant’s evidence that there was a breach of quiet enjoyment. I have no supporting evidence this started before 20 May, so I have only considered compensation from that date. I allow six weeks of compensation at $50 a week. This seems a fair amount to me given the weekly rent of $750. Other orders

Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the two filing fees.

The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because the tenant is the most successful party. See section 95A RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4944015 — net $2,354.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond money paid and not lodged	$1,500.00	Bond money paid and not lodged
Compensation: bond not lodged	$500.00	bond not lodged
for 6 weeks	$300.00	for 6 weeks
Filing fee reimbursement x 2	$54.00	Filing fee reimbursement x 2
Net award	$2,354.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,354.00

Order

The tenant has filed two applications relating to the tenancy and this order decides both 4944015 and 4943833.
Harpreet Singh must pay [The tenant/s] $2,354.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing.
The landlord was served with both applications using the same email address he used to email the tenant yesterday. When contacted by the registry last week the landlord advised that he is in India. He was advised the hearing would proceed by telephone. I tried both numbers provided by the tenant and the calls were not answered.
I note the landlord has known about the applications since 18 July, which is plenty of time for him to make enquiries about the hearing date and advise Tenancy Services that he was travelling out of the country. The bond
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The tenant is not sure if $3000 was paid at the start or $2996 was paid, which is the amount on the tenancy agreement. The landlord did not lodge the bond. It is a requirement of the RTA that bonds are lodged within 23 working days. See section 19 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
The parties agreed the tenancy would end on 12 July 2024. The tenant provided me with a copies of messages between the tenant and the landlord. These confirm that $1,500 has already been paid to the tenant as a part refund of the bond. The messages sent on 17 June 2024 confirm an agreement that another $1,500 would be paid in a lump sum at the end of the tenancy.
The landlord has since told the tenant that he wants to claim some money from the bond, but he has not filed an application with Tenancy Services. Section 22B(2) RTA provides that where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim.
Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the agreed remaining bond of $1,500 is refunded in full to the tenant.
The tenant also wants $1,000 compensation because the bond was not lodged. Compensation can be ordered where there has been a loss. The tenant said she was stressed when she called the Bond Centre and realised the bond was never lodged. The landlord told her he used the money to make mortgage payments, which caused more stress. She had to borrow money to pay the bond at her new home. She has no idea when the landlord will return her money. I find there has been an ongoing loss and compensation should be paid. I allow $500, which seems reasonable to me. I have been guided by the amount I would have awarded had the tenant applied for exemplary damages. Breach of quiet enjoyment
The tenant claims the landlord has harassed her and her five children by turning up at the house two or three times each week. She said this started in February 2024. He would not come inside, but would often knock on the door to have a chat about non tenancy matters. Sometimes he parked the car in the driveway and visited the neighbour. I have a copy of the email sent on 20 May where the tenant told the landlord to stop the frequent visits. She took a photo of the landlord on the front lawn two days after the email. She said the visits slowed to once or twice a week after the email and eventually stopped before the end of the tenancy.
The law provides that a landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) RTA. The tenant has claimed $1,500 as compensation for the breach.
I am persuaded by the tenant’s evidence that there was a breach of quiet enjoyment. I have no supporting evidence this started before 20 May, so I have only considered compensation from that date. I allow six weeks of compensation at $50 a week. This seems a fair amount to me given the weekly rent of $750. Other orders
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the two filing fees.
The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed because the tenant is the most successful party. See section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4944015 — Tenancy dispute at 2 Grovedale Square, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt 5014

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 4944015 — Tenancy dispute at 2 Grovedale Square, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt 5014

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