How much money was awarded in case 4983589?

Compensation: loss of enjoyment due…: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $74.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4983589?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4983589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10973964-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 4983589?

Compensation: loss of enjoyment due…: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $800.00 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $149.50 awarded to landlord; Property Damage: $74.75 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $1,000.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4983589?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Rent arrears.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4983589?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/10973964-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

22 Pound Road, Leeston, Selwyn 7632 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4983589 — Property damage

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 4983589 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case and the Tribunal

Tenantcheck Insights

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4983589 — net $1,424.25 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 August 2024 (consent	$1,000.00		Rent arrears to 22 August 2024 (consent
Carpet replacement - insurance excess	$800.00		Carpet replacement - insurance excess
Repairs to toilet lock and toilet roll holder	$149.50		Repairs to toilet lock and toilet roll holder
Repair garden edging	$74.75		Repair garden edging
Exemplary damages: late lodgement of bond		$300.00	late lodgement of bond
Compensation: loss of enjoyment due to leaks		$300.00	loss of enjoyment due to leaks
Total award	$2,024.25	$600.00
Net award	$1,424.25
Bond	$1,500.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,424.25

An application for suppression has been made in this case and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

[The tenant/s] to pay Jonathan Delgado Bahamondes $1,424.25 from the bond, calculated as shown in table below.

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,500.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Jonathan Delgado Bahamondes: $1,424.25 [The tenant/s]: $75.75

The landlord’s application for compensation for additional repairs (windowsill, fence, garage door lock, grass) is dismissed.

The tenant’s application for compensation and/or exemplary damages for a breach of privacy is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.

The landlord has applied for rent arrears, compensation, refund of the bond, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.

The tenant has applied for compensation for her loss of enjoyment of the tenancy due to leaking problems, compensation for the loss of clothing and chattels due to mould and rodent soiling, the landlord’s alleged failure to maintain the premises, and exemplary damages for the late lodgement of the bond and for a breach of her privacy.

Both parties gave oral evidence. Each provided documentary evidence. The tenant produced video evidence which she has undertaken to keep pending the appeal period.

I have considered all the evidence provided to the Tribunal even if I do not specifically refer to it. Background

The tenancy started on12 November 2022 and ended on 22 August 2024.

After the tenancy ended, the landlord made his claim for rent arrears and compensation for repairs. The tenant then cross applied.

During the tenancy there were issues with leaking pipes apparently due to rats biting through the pipe work and leaking from solar panels on the roof.

The tenant also says that one element on the stove did not work, the landlord failed to trim bushes near the conservatory so she did that work, that the fencing was in a poor state of repair, that the deck was dangerous, resulting in her daughter getting a large splinter in her foot, and that due to dampness from the leaks, her daughter became unwell and has developed asthma. She also alleges that the landlord breached her privacy by taking a photo during an inspection that showed her bra.

The landlord states that he responded to all matter raised, had plumbers attend the premises on more than one occasion, dealt with the rat problem by providing baits, and trimmed the shrubs. He denies breaching the tenant’s privacy. Issues

The Tribunal must decide these issues: •Has the landlord proved claims for rent arrears and repairs? •Has the tenant proved breaches by the landlord? •Should the Tribunal award the tenant compensation and/or exemplary damages? Relevant legal considerations – 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 (clothing and chattels) and for the loss of use of enjoyment of the tenancy.

In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust [2020] NZDC 17667 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.

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 has committed a defined unlawful act. 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: •The intention of the person; •The effect of the unlawful act; •The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and •The public interest. Damage to premises

A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.

Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA. Landlord responsibilities

A landlord must lodge any bond received within 23 working days after receiving it – see section 19(1)(b) 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 – see section 45(1)(b) RTA. Analysis

First, I will address the landlord’s application.

The landlord has proved, and the tenant accepts liability for, rent arrears of $1,000.00 to the end date of the tenancy, 22 August 2024. I have made a rent arrears order by consent.

The landlord has proved claims for damage to the carpet due to burns, the repair of a toilet lock and the repair of the toilet roll holder, and the repair of garden edging.

The tenant thought that compensation of $400.00 for the carpet damage was reasonable. I find she is liable for the excess amount of $800.00. The replacement cost of the carpet was much higher, but the landlord can only claim the excess amount.

The photos produced in evidence show that the garden edging was not left in a reasonable state of repair. The tenant said the edging was rotten. But the photos show damage, not just rotten edging.

The tenant accepted the claims for the toilet lock and the toilet roll holder.

I do not find proved the landlord’s claims for damage to a windowsill. In a tenancy where there are 3 children that would be considered fair wear and tear. The fences generally are old and in a questionable state of repair. I do not find that the tenant caused any careless or intentional damage to the fences. Nor do I find proved a claim for careless or intentional damage to the garage door lock.

While there is some damage to the lawn, the landlord said that no repairs had yet been undertaken. It is probable that the lawn will simply regrow over time.

I have therefore awarded the landlord limited compensation. The quote for the work (not yet done) includes travel and materials, but the materials are not specified so I cannot determine what amounts relate to the claims I have allowed.

Now I will address the tenant’s claims.

The landlord admitted that he did not lodge the bond until the tenant queried that. The tenant paid the bond in November 2022 and the landlord sent it to the Bond Centre in January 2024.

The bond belongs to the tenant. A failure to lodge the bond within time is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal can award exemplary damages up to $1,500.00.

The landlord said he did not know he had to lodge the bond. Ignorance of the law is no defence. When he became a landlord, he had a responsibility to be aware of his statutory responsibilities.

The failure to lodge the bond within time had an effect on the tenant, was against the tenant’s interests, and is against the public interest.

Had the landlord never lodged the bond, I would have awarded the tenant a higher award of exemplary damages. Because he did lodge the bond (eventually) I have awarded exemplary damages of $300.00.

The tenant alleges that the landlord failed to maintain the premises. The landlord’s documentary evidence shows that he had plumbers attend the premises to investigate and repair leaks, under the kitchen bench and from the solar panels on the roof.

The tenant said the landlord told her to turn off the water at night and when she was not home to reduce water use while there was leaking. The chat messages do not really support that; it was more a suggestion than a demand.

However, I accept that the tenant suffered some loss of enjoyment due to leaking issues on several occasions.

The tenant said she moved to her mother’s place on 3 separate weekends due to the water issues. The evidence does not establish that there was no water available requiring her to move. But I accept that she was inconvenienced.

The landlord in response offered to pay the water rates bill.

I do not find that the landlord failed to maintain the premises in the manner described by the tenant. He took prompt and reasonable steps. The issue is not that leaks occurred but rather what the landlord’s response was.

Remembering that compensation is not punitive, I award the tenant compensation of $300.00 for periods when she experienced a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy due to repair issues such as the leaking.

I do not find any compensable loss for the tenant trimming shrubs around the conservatory. Nor do I find that the landlord breached her privacy by taking a photo during an inspection that showed her bra.

The photo produced in evidence was taken to show damage to the windowsill; it was only provided to the tenant; and the item (the bra) is not readily identifiable as such.

Rodent infestation is not generally a landlord breach. Most homeowners will encounter mice and sometimes rats, especially over the winter months. I find that the landlord took appropriate action. The chat messages produced in evidence show the discussion between the parties and the actions taken.

The tenant has not proved a loss that the Tribunal could compensate for a loss of clothing or chattels due to rodent soiling or dampness and mould. Nor has she proved that her daughter became ill (and now has asthma) as a direct result of living in these premises.

My objective assessment of the tenant’s claim is that she has thrown everything she could at the landlord in response to his application for rent arrears and damage. Had the issues been as significant as she portrayed at the hearing, the Tribunal would have expected an application during the tenancy, rather than in response to the landlord’s application.

As I have noted, the chat messages between the parties were generally cordial and co-operative. Near the end of the tenancy, and after, the tone from the tenant changed. Result

The tenant will pay the landlord $1,000.00 for rent arrears and $1,024.25 for the repair of damage, a total of $2,024.25. The landlord will pay the tenant compensation of $300.00 for her loss of enjoyment of the tenancy due to the leaking issues and exemplary damages of $300.00 for the late lodgement of the bond, a total of $600.00.

The bond will therefore be split between the parties - $1,424.25 to the landlord and $75.75 to the tenant.

I make no order for reimbursement of the filing fees. Each party has succeeded to an extent. An award to one would be cancelled by an award to the other. Name suppression

The landlord did not seek an order for name suppression.

The tenant sought and is entitled to an order for name suppression as her application is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 4983589 — net $1,424.25 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 22 August 2024 (consent	$1,000.00		Rent arrears to 22 August 2024 (consent
Carpet replacement - insurance excess	$800.00		Carpet replacement - insurance excess
Repairs to toilet lock and toilet roll holder	$149.50		Repairs to toilet lock and toilet roll holder
Repair garden edging	$74.75		Repair garden edging
Exemplary damages: late lodgement of bond		$300.00	late lodgement of bond
Compensation: loss of enjoyment due to leaks		$300.00	loss of enjoyment due to leaks
Total award	$2,024.25	$600.00
Net award	$1,424.25
Bond	$1,500.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$1,424.25