What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5006300 about?

The tribunal order states: Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney must pay [The tenant/s]

How much money was awarded in case 5006300?

Property Damage: $1,760.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5006300?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5006300?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11065398-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5006300 about?

The tribunal order states: Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney must pay [The tenant/s]

How much money was awarded in case 5006300?

Property Damage: $1,760.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5006300?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5006300?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11065398-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

96 Becroft Drive, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5006300 — Healthy homes

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5006300 — net $1,787.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: HHS ventilation	$1,760.00	HHS ventilation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,787.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,787.00

Order

Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney must pay [The tenant/s] $1,787.00 immediately.
All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy began on 2 March 2024 and is for a fixed term due to end on 2 March 2025. There are four tenants, and this tenant represents all the tenants.
The tenant applied for a claim in respect of the Healthy Homes standards, to end the fixed term tenancy and for compensation. Healthy Homes claim
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). [The tenant/s] considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS ventilation standard.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy; or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The ventilation standard sets out minimum expectations around windows and doors, and in particular the area of doors and windows that are openable. The standard also requires that each kitchen and bathroom have extractor fans installed with a minimum defined extraction capacity.
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that the landlord has not complied with the ventilation standard of the Healthy Homes standards.
I find Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interest of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
The compliance date for this rental is 30 June 2024 being 120 days after the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord had incorrectly recorded the compliance date on the tenancy agreement as being 6 July 2024.
The landlord had a Healthy Homes report completed on 20 January 2020. That report recorded that the premises did not comply with the ventilation and draught stopping standards of the Healthy Homes standards. The issue with the ventilation was the absence of mechanical ventilation in the two bathrooms. The issue with the draught stopping was a gap under the front door. The tenancy agreement recorded that both issues would be addressed before 6 July 2024.
There was no evidence in relation to when the gap under the front door was fixed but it was not raised as an issue by the tenant. In relation to the ventilation in the bathroom the landlord confirmed that they were installed on 18 September 2024.
The landlord acknowledged that it was late in compliance for ventilation and the reasons given were in relation to delays with contractors. The landlord said that the work order was sent in June 2024.
I note that the landlord waited four years to address an issue that it was aware of, an issue that has impacted on the tenant’s enjoyment of these premises. That delay has contributed to the landlord’s failure to comply with the Regulations within the generous timeframe of 120 days from the beginning of the tenancy.
The lack of ventilation and the issue with the bathroom window has likely contributed to significant black mould growth in the ensuite and the adjoining master bedroom. While some repairs were carried out to the roof in early 2024 it is not clear that the mould issue has been resolved or that the landlord has carried out sufficient enquiries to determine the cause of the mould given that the tenant reports that some mould has returned.
I suggest that the landlord carry out investigations in relation to the cause of the mould and repair the bathroom window. This may go a long way to ensuring that the tenant’s stay at the premises is more comfortable and prevent deterioration of the home if there is some water ingress that has not been identified.
Considering those factors, I have determined that the landlord has breached section 45(1)(bb) of the Act. The black mould is significant, and it was clearly present at the inspection on 9 July 2004 but was not addressed by the landlord until late August/early September 2024. I note that the landlord had initially advised the tenant to clean the mould from the ceiling but given the height of the ceiling it is more of a maintenance issue that should be addressed by the landlord.
The tenant reports that there is less condensation on the windows and door since the mechanical ventilation was installed. It may go some way to slow the regrowth of the mould but as I mentioned above, investigation should be carried out to attempt to identify the cause of the mould.
Two of the tenants had slept for some time in the lounge due to the growth of mould in the bedroom and adjoining ensuite bathroom. They reported that their health had suffered due to the presence of the mould although no independent evidence was produced to support this.
There were 80 days from the date of compliance until the date when the ventilation was installed. I consider that the tenant should be awarded exemplary damages for this breach and a reasonable amount is $1,760.00, being two weeks rent or $22.00 per day. End fixed term tenancy
The tenant applied to end the fixed term tenancy. The application did not identify an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances as required by section 66 of the Act. While this tenant has lost her job there was no evidence that the remaining three tenants would suffer severe hardship if the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant’s claim to end the fixed term tenancy early is dismissed. Compensation
The tenant also applied for compensation and referred to one of the tenants suffering from bronchitis. An invoice from a doctor was produced but it did not contain any evidence as to what the medical condition was or any possible cause.
There is insufficient evidence to support a claim for compensation, however I have taken account of the effect of the mould on the tenant when awarding the exemplary damages. The claim for compensation is dismissed. Filing fee and suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason the tenant’s name is suppressed as sought.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5006300 — net $1,787.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: HHS ventilation	$1,760.00	HHS ventilation
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,787.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,787.00

Order

Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney must pay [The tenant/s] $1,787.00 immediately.
All remaining claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy began on 2 March 2024 and is for a fixed term due to end on 2 March 2025. There are four tenants, and this tenant represents all the tenants.
The tenant applied for a claim in respect of the Healthy Homes standards, to end the fixed term tenancy and for compensation. Healthy Homes claim
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). [The tenant/s] considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS ventilation standard.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy; or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The ventilation standard sets out minimum expectations around windows and doors, and in particular the area of doors and windows that are openable. The standard also requires that each kitchen and bathroom have extractor fans installed with a minimum defined extraction capacity.
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that the landlord has not complied with the ventilation standard of the Healthy Homes standards.
I find Chase Property Management Limited Stacy Mooney committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interest of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
The compliance date for this rental is 30 June 2024 being 120 days after the commencement of the tenancy. The landlord had incorrectly recorded the compliance date on the tenancy agreement as being 6 July 2024.
The landlord had a Healthy Homes report completed on 20 January 2020. That report recorded that the premises did not comply with the ventilation and draught stopping standards of the Healthy Homes standards. The issue with the ventilation was the absence of mechanical ventilation in the two bathrooms. The issue with the draught stopping was a gap under the front door. The tenancy agreement recorded that both issues would be addressed before 6 July 2024.
There was no evidence in relation to when the gap under the front door was fixed but it was not raised as an issue by the tenant. In relation to the ventilation in the bathroom the landlord confirmed that they were installed on 18 September 2024.
The landlord acknowledged that it was late in compliance for ventilation and the reasons given were in relation to delays with contractors. The landlord said that the work order was sent in June 2024.
I note that the landlord waited four years to address an issue that it was aware of, an issue that has impacted on the tenant’s enjoyment of these premises. That delay has contributed to the landlord’s failure to comply with the Regulations within the generous timeframe of 120 days from the beginning of the tenancy.
The lack of ventilation and the issue with the bathroom window has likely contributed to significant black mould growth in the ensuite and the adjoining master bedroom. While some repairs were carried out to the roof in early 2024 it is not clear that the mould issue has been resolved or that the landlord has carried out sufficient enquiries to determine the cause of the mould given that the tenant reports that some mould has returned.
I suggest that the landlord carry out investigations in relation to the cause of the mould and repair the bathroom window. This may go a long way to ensuring that the tenant’s stay at the premises is more comfortable and prevent deterioration of the home if there is some water ingress that has not been identified.
Considering those factors, I have determined that the landlord has breached section 45(1)(bb) of the Act. The black mould is significant, and it was clearly present at the inspection on 9 July 2004 but was not addressed by the landlord until late August/early September 2024. I note that the landlord had initially advised the tenant to clean the mould from the ceiling but given the height of the ceiling it is more of a maintenance issue that should be addressed by the landlord.
The tenant reports that there is less condensation on the windows and door since the mechanical ventilation was installed. It may go some way to slow the regrowth of the mould but as I mentioned above, investigation should be carried out to attempt to identify the cause of the mould.
Two of the tenants had slept for some time in the lounge due to the growth of mould in the bedroom and adjoining ensuite bathroom. They reported that their health had suffered due to the presence of the mould although no independent evidence was produced to support this.
There were 80 days from the date of compliance until the date when the ventilation was installed. I consider that the tenant should be awarded exemplary damages for this breach and a reasonable amount is $1,760.00, being two weeks rent or $22.00 per day. End fixed term tenancy
The tenant applied to end the fixed term tenancy. The application did not identify an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances as required by section 66 of the Act. While this tenant has lost her job there was no evidence that the remaining three tenants would suffer severe hardship if the tenancy were not reduced. The tenant’s claim to end the fixed term tenancy early is dismissed. Compensation
The tenant also applied for compensation and referred to one of the tenants suffering from bronchitis. An invoice from a doctor was produced but it did not contain any evidence as to what the medical condition was or any possible cause.
There is insufficient evidence to support a claim for compensation, however I have taken account of the effect of the mould on the tenant when awarding the exemplary damages. The claim for compensation is dismissed. Filing fee and suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason the tenant’s name is suppressed as sought.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5006300 — Healthy homes at 96 Becroft Drive, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5006300 — Healthy homes at 96 Becroft Drive, Forrest Hill, Auckland 0620

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions