What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5019108 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $819.78 immediately, calculated as per

How much money was awarded in case 5019108?

Property Damage: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,980.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $199.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5019108?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5019108?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11055914-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5019108 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $819.78 immediately, calculated as per

How much money was awarded in case 5019108?

Property Damage: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,980.71 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $199.51 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5019108?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5019108?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11055914-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

5A School Road, Tuakau, Tuakau 2121 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5019108 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5019108 — net $819.78 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 August 2024	$1,980.71		3. The landlord has claimed rent arrears until the 12 September 2024 and water rates arrears of $199.51.
Water rates	$199.51		Water rates
Compensation: Failure to repair/ Dampness		$3,000.00	Failure to repair/ Dampness
Total award	$2,180.22	$3,000.00
Net award		$819.78
Bond		$1,580.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$819.78

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5019108 — net $819.78 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 29 August 2024	$1,980.71		3. The landlord has claimed rent arrears until the 12 September 2024 and water rates arrears of $199.51.
Water rates	$199.51		Water rates
Compensation: Failure to repair/ Dampness		$3,000.00	Failure to repair/ Dampness
Total award	$2,180.22	$3,000.00
Net award		$819.78
Bond		$1,580.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$819.78

Order

[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $819.78 immediately, calculated as per the table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,580.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing held today.
This is a cross application the tenant applied first on the 7 July 2024 and claims: a. That the landlord failed to provide her with a home that meets Healthy Homes Standards. b. That the landlord failed to maintain the home. c. That the house had a damp and mould problem.
The landlord has claimed rent arrears until the 12 September 2024 and water rates arrears of $199.51. Acceptance of water rates claim.
The tenant accepts liability of the water rates that are owed but disputes liability for the whole of the rent arrears. Background
The house is old two-bedroom weatherboard bungalow built in the 1960’s. The tenancy began on the 19 August 2020. The landlord says that the low rent charged is commensurate for the age and condition of the house.
During the tenancy the house was managed by (Property Managers) the tenant says that she complained to all the four property managers that she had that the house was damp and that areas of the carpet were cold and wet.
When the tenant first moved into property, she lived in there with her son, however when her son moved out in 2021, she lived there with different flatmates. Her longest flatmate lived there from 2021 to 2023.
The tenant was still living in the property when she made her application but has since moved out.

Did the landlord fail to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards?

As this tenancy commenced before 1 July 2021, the landlord did not have to comply with the Residential Tenancies Healthy Homes Standards until 2025 1 and therefore there can be no breach of s 45(1)(bb). The tenancy was extended to a periodic tenancy on the 1 August 2021. As the tenancy was extended rather than renewed then the landlord did not have to comply until 2025. The tenant’s claims for failure to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards are therefore struck out.

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Section 45(1)(b) RTA provides that the landlord must: provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes.
It is not disputed that from May 2023 to the end of the tenancy the tenant complained to her property managers that she believed that there was a 1 The Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes) Regulations 2019 take effect in accordance with Subpart 1AA. As this tenancy commenced before 1 July 2021 the obligation to comply with the Standards does not take effect until July 2025 problem with water ingress as her carpet in her bedroom and the other bedroom felt damp during winter and was cold.
The tenant says she complained about the problem verbally at inspections with her property managers from the first winter.
On May 10, 2023, the tenant sent an email to her landlord saying: 14.
The landlord says that it has no records that show that Arean or Tarina knew of the problem and that this email of the 10 May 2023 was the first time that the tenant notified the landlord of the problem.
As a result of the tenant’s email the landlord investigated the problem, they sent two companies to look at the problem. One of those companies went to the property and identified the following work that needed completing: a. Digging and earthworks b. Concrete pouring c. Weatherboard replacement d. Dry wall gib stopping e. Assessment of window framing and replacement of rotten timber due to exposure to moisture f. Carpet repair (installing new carpet area in the wet area) and subfloor replacement due to moisture exposure.
The landlords’ agent says that they sent the quote from the contractor (given August 2023) for $8,832.00 to the owners for authorisation. When the owners finally gave authorisation they could not contact the contractor to come and do the work. The landlord says that by this time it was summer, and the issue resolved itself in summer so nothing further was done.
In February 2024 the tenant complained again about the damp floors and the landlord asked another builder to go and look at the property. There were disagreements between the builder and the tenant about when the builder could have access and the builder refused to go and look at the problem.
In February the landlord also had their handyman remove soil abutting the house to try and reduce moisture and ‘allow air flow under the house’.
Between February 2024 and July 2024, the tenant made numerous complaints about the damp carpet, mould and how cold the house was (which the tenant believed was partially caused by gaps in the windows). The landlord had another company come and quote for the work in July 2024. That company quoted $13,650.50 for remedial work or work that they believed may fix the issues with dampness, these included: a. Repair of the windowsills and jambs/slashes are rotten and need repair. b. Tree trimming and cutting. c. Installation of the ventilation system d. Drainage- installation of another drain at the front of the property. e. Adding insulation to replace worn insulation and adding a ground moisture barrier.
As a result of that quote the landlord cut the trees and installed a ground moisture barrier in July/ August 2024. The landlord repaired the windows after the tenant left.
From the evidence given at the hearing it is clear that neither the landlord or the tenant could identify what was exactly causing the damp problem. A landlord is only responsible for repairing items that it knows what the cause is and taking reasonable steps to identify the cause. A landlord who knows of the problem cannot ‘sit on their hands’ but likewise once the landlord has taken all reasonable steps to identify the problem and cannot locate a source then this will fulfil the obligation.
I am satisfied on the balance of probabilities that the landlord failed to maintain the property and therefore breached s45 (1)(b) because: a. Both the contractor who went to the property in August 2023 and the contractor who went to the property in July 2024 identified problems with rotten windowsills jambs and sashes. The landlord showed photographs of the windowsill at the end of the tenancy. The window is directly above where the carpet was damp. The windowsills are extensively cracked from what appears to be moisture damage and age. There is evidence of rot on both the interior and exterior of the windows. The sills have paint flaking off them. There is a gap in the joinery. The photographs speak for themselves, they show windows that even a lay person would look at and have serious concerns about the condition and intergity of the window. I consider a reasonable landlord would have taken further steps to understand whether the cause of the damp problem was from the window given the condition of the windows and the proximity to the damp carpet. Despite being told in August 2023 that there were rotten windows the landlord took no steps to remedy the problem until after the tenancy ended. b. The tenant, the landlord’s contractor in August 2023 and the landlord’s other contractor in July 2024 identified that water coming in under the house may be the cause of the dampness, but yet the remedy of digging a further drain or even getting a drainage expert in to understand if that would fix the problem was not done. Whilst the landlord did remove some soil in February 2024 from next to the house, it did not create any further drainage. The landlord also knew this work needed doing in August 2023 and di not do it until February 2024.
Landlord’s also have an obligation under s45(1)(c) RTA to comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety under any enactment so far as they apply to the premises. This includes the Home Improvement Regulations 1947, the predecessor to the Healthy Homes Standards. These regulations are still in place and all landlords are obliged to comply with them.
Regulation 15 of the Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 requires that Every house shall be free from dampness.
I consider that the combination of s45(1)(c) and regulation 15 requires a landlord to ensure that the source of any dampness is identified and remedied quickly. If the source of the damp cannot be found, then steps should be taken such as the use of dehumidifier, ventilation and heating and drying to try and mitigate the dampness and the effects of dampness such as mould until the source is found. The landlord says that it ordered a dehumidifier for the tenant earlier this year, but then stopped the order when the tenant said she would not use it because she was concerned about high power costs. The tenant confirmed for me at the hearing that she was reluctant to use anything like a dehumidifying because it was just masking the problem. She wanted the landlord to fix the problem, not come up with workarounds. She was also concerned about the high cost of running a dehumidifier.
The tenant said one of her flatmates had a dehumidifier and ran it in his room.
I am satisfied that there was a significant problem with dampness at this property for at least two winters which was a breach of s45 (1)(c) and regulation 15 Housing Improvement regulations 1947. I say this because: a. The tenant gave evidence that the carpet in her son’s room was wet in the first winter she was at the property, and whilst it was not wet again, it felt damp and cold. b. The carpet in her bedroom under the window was always wet after rain and never really dried out. c. When the carpet was pulled back there was moisture damage and it was wet. d. The property manager confirmed that she had felt the carpet as wet/damp in the tenant’s bedroom directly under the window. She said the carpet in the other bedroom was cold. e. There was obvious mould on the ceilings in the bedrooms, which grew during the tenancy. which the landlord had cleaned. The landlord had said in its submissions that this might have been caused by the tenant not ventilating the property properly. I do not find that this is the case, as the gaps in the windows which would have provided some air flow. I also note that the state of the windows was such that opening and closing the windows was difficult because they would stick. f. I prefer the tenant’s evidence that she told her previous property managers about these problems because that is also recorded in her email of the 10 May 2023.
The issue with dampness was likely caused by the failure to maintain the windows or install drains. The tribunal must only award compensation for one of the breaches not both. In other words, I must award compensation for the failure to maintain causing the dampness and take into account the nature and extent of dampness that was caused.
The tenant has sought compensation of $19,000 being a full refund of rent paid for 4 winters.
I award the tenant $3000.00 for this breach. This takes into account the following: I.The landlord was advised in writing of the issues in May 2023, but took no real steps to remedy the issues until July 2024, even after they were told what steps could be taken in August 2023. This is a period of 60 weeks. II.The tenant gave 14-day notices to remedy the breaches in June and July 2024. The landlord did not comply with those notices. The effect of this was that the tenant felt like the landlord was never going to repair the problem and that her only option was to move. III.The tenant’s first flatmate who was with her from 2021-2023 had to leave the house due to ongoing respiratory problems. It was the flatmates ill health which prompted the email of 10 May 2023. When the flatmate moved out, the tenant found it difficult to find a suitable flatmate, and other flatmates left due to the condition of the property. This put the tenant into financial distress. IV.That despite not finding or remedying the problem the landlord increased the rent in June 2024. V.That the tenant should not be entitled to all of her rent back for ‘winters’ she had the amenity of living in the house. VI.I have calculated the $3000 as 60 weeks at $50 per week. I have used 60 weeks because that is the time from when the tenant first notified the landlord in writing to when the landlord carried out the work. Whilst there was a ‘summer’ in that time, the defect was still known about and should have been remedied. This amount also takes into account that the tenant had to live with the damp before the 10 May 2023. VII.The tenant did not take steps such as using a dehumidifier when one was offered. The landlord’s claim for rent.
The landlord claimed rent until the 12 September 2024 being 28 days from when the tenant told the landlord that she was leaving the property. The tenant says that she told the landlord that she was leaving the property on the 12 July she said, “This is my official notice subject to getting another house.” I do not consider that notice to terminate, as it conditional on the tenant finding another property.
However, the tenant moved out on the 26 August 2024 and the landlord conducted an exit inspection that day. The tenant dropped the keys back to the landlord on the 29 August and surrendered possession. The landlord retook possession of the house that date and had contractors come into the house to start work on the property.
The payment of rent is in lieu of possession. As the landlord retook possession on the 29 August 2024, by allowing their contractors to start work on the house on that date, then the landlord is only entitled to rent until that date.
If the landlord had not retaken possession of the property, then the landlord would have been entitled to rent until the end of the notice period, but as the landlord retook possession then they are only entitled to rent till the 29 August 2024. The filing fee
As both parties have been successful in their applications each will bear the cost of their own filing fee. Name suppression.
Both parties asked for name suppression, as they have both been successful in their applications, I award them both name suppression. I do not consider that the public interest outweighs the interests of the parties in suppressing their names.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5019108 — Property damage at 5A School Road, Tuakau, Tuakau 2121

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5019108 — Property damage at 5A School Road, Tuakau, Tuakau 2121

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards?

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards?

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions