What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5055849 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name.

How much money was awarded in case 5055849?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5055849?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5055849?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12438335-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5055849 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name.

How much money was awarded in case 5055849?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5055849?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5055849?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12438335-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

72 Jeffs Road, Dairy Flat, RD 4, Dairy Flat 0794 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5055849 — Exemplary damages

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name.
The landlord’s application for a rehearing and a rehearing out of time are dismissed.
The stay of proceedings orders on 22 May 2025 is lifted.

Reasons

The hearing took place via video conference on 22 August 2025. The tenant attended the hearing and Mr Zhao, Rental Manager for the landlord, attended the hearing for the landlord. An interpreter attended the hearing.
On 09 May 2025, the Tribunal made Orders that the landlord pay the tenant compensation, exemplary damages and the filing fee.
On 20 May 2025, the landlord applied for a rehearing on the grounds that a substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred or be likely to occur. Specifically, Mr Zhao said the landlord did not attend the hearing because Mr Zhao: a. Had surgery in December 2024 and in April was overseas for medical reasons; b. On the day of the hearing was at another Tribunal hearing at Waitakere District Court; c. Did not receive notification of the hearing; d. The matters complained of by the tenant happened before Mr Zhao joined the landlord and he needed to gather documentation.
At the same time, the landlord also applied for an application for a rehearing out of time. The grounds given for that application were that: a. Since Mr Zhao returned from overseas, he had a large workload; b. The matters the tenants had raised occurred before he joined the landlord and he needed time to contact former employees of the landlord about them.
Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.
Usually, the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.
The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.
At the hearing, Mr Zhao said that he did not receive the Notice of Hearing. Mr Zhao said it was only after a message from the Tribunal was picked up on an answerphone on the day of the hearing that the landlord realised the hearing had taken place. Once this had been established, the landlord found the emails with the Notice of Hearing which had been sent to enquiries@marsrealty.co.nz.
The Tribunal’s records show that Notice of Hearing had been sent to a staff member’s email address [name.surname]@marsrental.co.nz.
Section 13AB provides (1) For the purposes of this Act, an address for service means an address given by the landlord or tenant under this Act as an address at which notices and other documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted by or on behalf of the landlord or tenant, as the case may be. (2) Whenever a party is required to give an address for service, the party— (a) must give an address of a physical place in New Zealand; and (b) may, in addition, specify a Post Office box number or electronic address as one of the party’s addresses for service. (3) In this section, electronic address means an email address, facsimile number, mobile telephone number, or instant messaging account through which information transmitted is readily accessible for subsequent reference.
The Tenancy Agreement provides: ADDITIONAL ADDRESS FOR SERVICE. All information listed below for both the LANDLORD and the TENANT are provided as an additional address for service as per section 13AB of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. ... AGENT ADDITIONAL ADDRESS FOR SERVICE: ... EMAIL: [name.surname@marsrental.co.nz]
Section 136 of the RTA provides: (1) Where any notice or other document is required or authorised by this Act to be given to or served on a landlord or a tenant, it shall be sufficient if it is given or served in any of the following ways: ... (d) it may be transmitted to the electronic address given by the landlord or the tenant as an address for service.
Mr Zhao said that the email address for service in the Tenancy Agreement was the email address of a previous staff member. Mr Zhao said that is why he did not receive the Notice of Hearing in advance of the hearings.
Mr Zhao said he has only ever communicated with the tenant via his email address. However, Mr Zhao did not put forward any evidence that the landlord had given the tenant notice of the change of email address for service as required by section 16 of the RTA.
The Tribunal’s records also show that the Notice of Hearing was sent to enquires@marsrealty.co.nz. Mr Zhao said during the hearing that he was not aware of this email address. During the hearing, the Tribunal referred Mr Zhao to the landlord’s website which states on the rentals page that the contact email address is enquiries@marsrealty.com.
The landlord is a professional rental agency which should have processes in place to ensure that email addresses listed on legal documents as email addresses for service are either regularly checked or that notice of the change in email address for service is given in accordance with the RTA.
I am satisfied that the landlord was served notice of the hearing in accordance with the RTA.
I do not accept the landlord’s other reasons for the application. If a representative of the landlord could not attend the hearing due to attendance being required at another hearing on the same day or some other reason, the landlord should apply to the Tribunal for the hearing to be adjourned to another day.
The landlords has failed to established that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or is likely to occur.
The landlord’s claim for a rehearing and a rehearing out of time are dismissed.
In order to preserve the Order for suppression, which was granted in the Tribunal’s Orders of 09 May 2025, the tenant’s name has been suppressed.

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name.
The landlord’s application for a rehearing and a rehearing out of time are dismissed.
The stay of proceedings orders on 22 May 2025 is lifted.

Reasons

The hearing took place via video conference on 22 August 2025. The tenant attended the hearing and Mr Zhao, Rental Manager for the landlord, attended the hearing for the landlord. An interpreter attended the hearing.
On 09 May 2025, the Tribunal made Orders that the landlord pay the tenant compensation, exemplary damages and the filing fee.
On 20 May 2025, the landlord applied for a rehearing on the grounds that a substantial miscarriage of justice had occurred or be likely to occur. Specifically, Mr Zhao said the landlord did not attend the hearing because Mr Zhao: a. Had surgery in December 2024 and in April was overseas for medical reasons; b. On the day of the hearing was at another Tribunal hearing at Waitakere District Court; c. Did not receive notification of the hearing; d. The matters complained of by the tenant happened before Mr Zhao joined the landlord and he needed to gather documentation.
At the same time, the landlord also applied for an application for a rehearing out of time. The grounds given for that application were that: a. Since Mr Zhao returned from overseas, he had a large workload; b. The matters the tenants had raised occurred before he joined the landlord and he needed time to contact former employees of the landlord about them.
Section 105(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that the Tribunal has the power to order a rehearing where “a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or may have occurred or is likely to occur”.
Usually, the party applying for the rehearing must show that something went wrong with the Tribunal’s procedure, for example, that they did not receive notice of the hearing or they were not able to properly present their case. A rehearing may also be granted where there is new evidence that was not reasonably available at the first hearing, if it could have affected the outcome.
The District Court has held that if the Tribunal was simply wrong in its findings of fact, or its application of the law, this is not sufficient to establish a miscarriage of justice: a rehearing is not an alternative to an appeal. Furthermore, a rehearing will not be granted just because a party is unhappy with the decision, or to give them a second opportunity to present their case.
At the hearing, Mr Zhao said that he did not receive the Notice of Hearing. Mr Zhao said it was only after a message from the Tribunal was picked up on an answerphone on the day of the hearing that the landlord realised the hearing had taken place. Once this had been established, the landlord found the emails with the Notice of Hearing which had been sent to enquiries@marsrealty.co.nz.
The Tribunal’s records show that Notice of Hearing had been sent to a staff member’s email address [name.surname]@marsrental.co.nz.
Section 13AB provides (1) For the purposes of this Act, an address for service means an address given by the landlord or tenant under this Act as an address at which notices and other documents relating to the tenancy will be accepted by or on behalf of the landlord or tenant, as the case may be. (2) Whenever a party is required to give an address for service, the party— (a) must give an address of a physical place in New Zealand; and (b) may, in addition, specify a Post Office box number or electronic address as one of the party’s addresses for service. (3) In this section, electronic address means an email address, facsimile number, mobile telephone number, or instant messaging account through which information transmitted is readily accessible for subsequent reference.
The Tenancy Agreement provides: ADDITIONAL ADDRESS FOR SERVICE. All information listed below for both the LANDLORD and the TENANT are provided as an additional address for service as per section 13AB of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. ... AGENT ADDITIONAL ADDRESS FOR SERVICE: ... EMAIL: [name.surname@marsrental.co.nz]
Section 136 of the RTA provides: (1) Where any notice or other document is required or authorised by this Act to be given to or served on a landlord or a tenant, it shall be sufficient if it is given or served in any of the following ways: ... (d) it may be transmitted to the electronic address given by the landlord or the tenant as an address for service.
Mr Zhao said that the email address for service in the Tenancy Agreement was the email address of a previous staff member. Mr Zhao said that is why he did not receive the Notice of Hearing in advance of the hearings.
Mr Zhao said he has only ever communicated with the tenant via his email address. However, Mr Zhao did not put forward any evidence that the landlord had given the tenant notice of the change of email address for service as required by section 16 of the RTA.
The Tribunal’s records also show that the Notice of Hearing was sent to enquires@marsrealty.co.nz. Mr Zhao said during the hearing that he was not aware of this email address. During the hearing, the Tribunal referred Mr Zhao to the landlord’s website which states on the rentals page that the contact email address is enquiries@marsrealty.com.
The landlord is a professional rental agency which should have processes in place to ensure that email addresses listed on legal documents as email addresses for service are either regularly checked or that notice of the change in email address for service is given in accordance with the RTA.
I am satisfied that the landlord was served notice of the hearing in accordance with the RTA.
I do not accept the landlord’s other reasons for the application. If a representative of the landlord could not attend the hearing due to attendance being required at another hearing on the same day or some other reason, the landlord should apply to the Tribunal for the hearing to be adjourned to another day.
The landlords has failed to established that a substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice has or is likely to occur.
The landlord’s claim for a rehearing and a rehearing out of time are dismissed.
In order to preserve the Order for suppression, which was granted in the Tribunal’s Orders of 09 May 2025, the tenant’s name has been suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5055849 — Exemplary damages at 72 Jeffs Road, Dairy Flat, RD 4, Dairy Flat 0794

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5055849 — Exemplary damages at 72 Jeffs Road, Dairy Flat, RD 4, Dairy Flat 0794

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions