What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5002273 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 5002273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5002273?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5002273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11177206-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5002273 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 5002273?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5002273?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5002273?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11177206-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

4 Vennell Street, Brooklyn, Wellington 6021 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5002273 — Mould & damp

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord is a social housing provider.

The background to this claim is that I made orders in August 2024 for exemplary damages against the landlord for failing to maintain and draught stopping breaches. I also made a number of work orders and reduced the rent by $100 if the work orders were not completed. This current application is also for exemplary damages for breach of the duty to maintain and for breach of the moisture ingress standard. As I explained in the hearing, I can only consider breaches that have happened since the decision I made in August. The questions I have to decide include: • Should the tenant get compensation? • Was there a breach of the duty to repair and maintain? • Was there a breach of the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS)? • Did the landlord have a duty to find a new home for the tenant?

Should the tenant get compensation?

The tenant also made a claim for $5000 for losses during the tenancy. I do not need to consider this claim because the landlord paid the tenant $5000 in September in an effort to resolve matters between them. They signed a deed of settlement on 10 September and the landlord paid the money as part of that settlement. I find the claim for compensation does not need to be considered by me.

Was there a breach of the duty to repair and maintain?

The tenant claims that the landlord has breached its obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.

The tenant was correct in her assessment the house is sinking. An independent property inspection report by C and S House Inspection Company dated 27 August 2024 states the house needed Acro props under the lounge extension to be habitable. This was done as a temporary measure and the tenant moved out yesterday. The landlord submitted that it complied with the work orders made in August and made the house safe. It made the decision to find replacement tenancy premises, but it did not have any suitable housing stock it could offer the tenant, her family, and their dog.

I have considered the submissions and the property inspection report. It seems most likely to me the house was safer after the orders made in August. I have seen invoices and I accept the wiring and the roof were checked and a blocked drain was cleared. The mildew was cleaned off the ceilings in two rooms. I am not persuaded the landlord breached its obligations under section 45 RTA since the work orders were made in August. This claim is dismissed. Was there a breach of the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS)?

The tenant has claimed that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS moisture ingress and drainage standard. See section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019. The moisture ingress and drainage standard requires that residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains.

The property inspection report states the roof, gutters and downpipes are all in a “generally good” condition. There is a problem with surface water control because the land slopes towards the house and lots of water runs onto the section, which is making the ground soft and the posts holding the lounge extension to sink. The report writer did not give evidence at the hearing which means I can only rely on what is written in the report. It is not clear to me if the “drainage system” is inadequate or if there are other systemic problems with the section. The tenant has not proved there is a breach of the HHS and this claim is dismissed.

Did the landlord have a duty to find a new home for the tenant?

The tenant submitted that she has struggled to get answers from the landlord especially around finding her a new tenancy. She has found the process slow. I find there was no breach of the RTA here. There is no requirement under the RTA to find new tenancy premises for a tenant, even when the house has been deemed uninhabitable. This claim is dismissed. Suppression

Both parties made applications for suppression. The Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, order that the name of a party not be published, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest. See section 95A RTA.

The landlord has successfully defended the claims. However, I note that the landlord’s name was published in August, so there is public interest in this social housing provider meeting its obligations under the RTA and the work orders. The name will be published.

The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed. This is because there has been no breach of the RTA. She found herself in the very difficult position of renting a house with structural safety issues. Even though this application has been dismissed, it was a reasonable application in the circumstances.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord is a social housing provider.

Should the tenant get compensation?

Was there a breach of the duty to repair and maintain?

Did the landlord have a duty to find a new home for the tenant?

Tenancy Tribunal case 5002273 — Mould & damp at 4 Vennell Street, Brooklyn, Wellington 6021

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5002273 — Mould & damp at 4 Vennell Street, Brooklyn, Wellington 6021

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenant get compensation?

Was there a breach of the duty to repair and maintain?

Did the landlord have a duty to find a new home for the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Should the tenant get compensation?

Was there a breach of the duty to repair and maintain?

Did the landlord have a duty to find a new home for the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions