What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5051092 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 5051092?

Compensation: breach of quiet enjoym…: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5051092?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5051092?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11438641-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5051092 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 5051092?

Compensation: breach of quiet enjoym…: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5051092?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5051092?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11438641-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5051092 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5051092 — net $777.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: breach of quiet enjoyment	$750.00	breach of quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$777.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$777.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Cara Ferris And Timothy Aughton As Trustees Of Ferris Family Trust And The Aughton Family Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $777.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

The parties attended the hearing on 20 December 2024 (the landlords, by video conference).
I made an order on 22 November 2024 after the first hearing.
I made consent orders on 20 December 2024 after the second hearing.
The purpose of the second hearing was to hear evidence from both parties about the tenant’s application for exemplary damages because of the stress and harassment she has felt from the events with the neighbours and from being given notice to terminate the tenancy. Background
The tenancy premises are a four-bedroom house on a large section in a rural area. The premises include a large garage attached to the house.
The tenanted property is fenced on three sides and includes an orchard area.
There is a detached garage at the back of the tenanted property and the landlords’ own paddocks outside the fenced area. The paddocks are not part of the tenanted property.
The tenancy started on 31 August 2024 and was contracted to be for an initial fixed term until 31 January 2026.
Part way through October 2024, a dispute arose about access to the back garage by neighbours who use the landlords’ paddocks and by some of their behaviour. The tenant called the police.
At around the same time, the tenant told the landlords her financial situation was changing. The landlords issued notices to terminate the tenancy saying they now wished to sell the property. The tenant felt the notices were retaliatory and given because she had complained about the neighbours.
I made a declaration after the first hearing that the landlords’ notices of termination were invalid because a fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by giving notice.
The Tribunal has no power to award exemplary damages for the giving of a retaliatory notice if the notice is invalid for some other reason.
However, the tenant’s concerns about the notices of termination and disturbance from the neighbours using the garage remain. Breach of tenant’s peace, comfort and privacy in her use of the premises
The tenant has applied for exemplary damages because of the stress and harassment she has felt from the events with the neighbours and from being given notice to terminate the tenancy.
Exemplary damages are like a fine or a penalty. They are remedies provided for in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and may be awarded if the Tribunal considers a landlord or tenant has committed a breach which is intentional and where it would be just to do so. See section 109 RTA.
I explained to the parties in the hearing that the Tribunal can only award exemplary damages for a breach of privacy or quiet enjoyment where the Tribunal considers a landlord has “harassed” a tenant. A maximum award of $3,000.00 applies. See section 38(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenant and the landlords have different recollections of whether it was made clear at the start of the tenancy that neighbours would have access to the back garage to control the power for the electric fences. The tenant says interactions between her family and the neighbours caused upset and distress to the point where they called the police. She feels this was not managed well by the landlords.
The landlords say that their only motivation in giving the tenant notice to terminate the tenancy was that they decided they could not afford to keep the property if she could not complete the entire fixed term. The tenant points out that the first notice was sent only about half an hour after the phone conversation during which the tenant had expressed her concerns about the neighbour coming to their back door at night and after being asked not to.
After reviewing all written evidence and the oral evidence at the second hearing, my decisions are:- a. That the landlords did interfere with the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment of the tenancy by giving her notices to terminate the tenancy. They had no legal right to terminate the tenancy because it was for a fixed term. To issue a notice of termination with no legal right to do so is a breach of a tenant’s legitimate right to expect the contract to continue. b. That the landlord’s must have told the neighbour that they were going to issue a notice of termination because the tenant says he taunted them about this. This is a breach of the tenant’s privacy. c. That although the landlord did not manage one of the phone conversations with the tenant well, overall, they did act promptly to change the arrangement with the neighbours so as to protect the tenant’s privacy and that of her family. d. Most of the upset was caused by the neighbours themselves and not by the landlords. The landlords could not control what the neighbours did over the few days when the dispute arose. The neighbours’ actions are not a breach by the landlords. e. The problems with the neighbours and the notices of termination were not a pattern of behaviour orchestrated by the landlords to harass the tenant and her family.
In summary, the landlords have breached the tenant’s quiet enjoyment but have not harassed her.
The events justify an award of compensation to recognise the stress and anxiety caused by the notices of termination. Compensation is different from exemplary damages. I award general damages of $750.00.
The claim for exemplary damages is dismissed as no harassment or intentional breach has been established.
I award the tenant the filing fee and suppress her name, as she has been partly successful in her claims.
The landlords are not entitled to suppression of name and given that a breach has been proven I do not grant this.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5051092 — net $777.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: breach of quiet enjoyment	$750.00	breach of quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$777.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$777.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Cara Ferris And Timothy Aughton As Trustees Of Ferris Family Trust And The Aughton Family Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $777.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

The parties attended the hearing on 20 December 2024 (the landlords, by video conference).
I made an order on 22 November 2024 after the first hearing.
I made consent orders on 20 December 2024 after the second hearing.
The purpose of the second hearing was to hear evidence from both parties about the tenant’s application for exemplary damages because of the stress and harassment she has felt from the events with the neighbours and from being given notice to terminate the tenancy. Background
The tenancy premises are a four-bedroom house on a large section in a rural area. The premises include a large garage attached to the house.
The tenanted property is fenced on three sides and includes an orchard area.
There is a detached garage at the back of the tenanted property and the landlords’ own paddocks outside the fenced area. The paddocks are not part of the tenanted property.
The tenancy started on 31 August 2024 and was contracted to be for an initial fixed term until 31 January 2026.
Part way through October 2024, a dispute arose about access to the back garage by neighbours who use the landlords’ paddocks and by some of their behaviour. The tenant called the police.
At around the same time, the tenant told the landlords her financial situation was changing. The landlords issued notices to terminate the tenancy saying they now wished to sell the property. The tenant felt the notices were retaliatory and given because she had complained about the neighbours.
I made a declaration after the first hearing that the landlords’ notices of termination were invalid because a fixed term tenancy cannot be ended by giving notice.
The Tribunal has no power to award exemplary damages for the giving of a retaliatory notice if the notice is invalid for some other reason.
However, the tenant’s concerns about the notices of termination and disturbance from the neighbours using the garage remain. Breach of tenant’s peace, comfort and privacy in her use of the premises
The tenant has applied for exemplary damages because of the stress and harassment she has felt from the events with the neighbours and from being given notice to terminate the tenancy.
Exemplary damages are like a fine or a penalty. They are remedies provided for in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and may be awarded if the Tribunal considers a landlord or tenant has committed a breach which is intentional and where it would be just to do so. See section 109 RTA.
I explained to the parties in the hearing that the Tribunal can only award exemplary damages for a breach of privacy or quiet enjoyment where the Tribunal considers a landlord has “harassed” a tenant. A maximum award of $3,000.00 applies. See section 38(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenant and the landlords have different recollections of whether it was made clear at the start of the tenancy that neighbours would have access to the back garage to control the power for the electric fences. The tenant says interactions between her family and the neighbours caused upset and distress to the point where they called the police. She feels this was not managed well by the landlords.
The landlords say that their only motivation in giving the tenant notice to terminate the tenancy was that they decided they could not afford to keep the property if she could not complete the entire fixed term. The tenant points out that the first notice was sent only about half an hour after the phone conversation during which the tenant had expressed her concerns about the neighbour coming to their back door at night and after being asked not to.
After reviewing all written evidence and the oral evidence at the second hearing, my decisions are:- a. That the landlords did interfere with the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment of the tenancy by giving her notices to terminate the tenancy. They had no legal right to terminate the tenancy because it was for a fixed term. To issue a notice of termination with no legal right to do so is a breach of a tenant’s legitimate right to expect the contract to continue. b. That the landlord’s must have told the neighbour that they were going to issue a notice of termination because the tenant says he taunted them about this. This is a breach of the tenant’s privacy. c. That although the landlord did not manage one of the phone conversations with the tenant well, overall, they did act promptly to change the arrangement with the neighbours so as to protect the tenant’s privacy and that of her family. d. Most of the upset was caused by the neighbours themselves and not by the landlords. The landlords could not control what the neighbours did over the few days when the dispute arose. The neighbours’ actions are not a breach by the landlords. e. The problems with the neighbours and the notices of termination were not a pattern of behaviour orchestrated by the landlords to harass the tenant and her family.
In summary, the landlords have breached the tenant’s quiet enjoyment but have not harassed her.
The events justify an award of compensation to recognise the stress and anxiety caused by the notices of termination. Compensation is different from exemplary damages. I award general damages of $750.00.
The claim for exemplary damages is dismissed as no harassment or intentional breach has been established.
I award the tenant the filing fee and suppress her name, as she has been partly successful in her claims.
The landlords are not entitled to suppression of name and given that a breach has been proven I do not grant this.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5051092 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5051092 — Tenancy dispute

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