Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5098793 — Smoke alarms at 31 Gurkha Crescent, Khandallah, Wellington 6035
Decided 17 Jan 2025 · Published 17 Jan 2025 · Application 5098793
- Smoke alarms
Party names are redacted in the official published order.
Order
- An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
- Qian Wang and Xiaodong Song must pay [The tenant/s] $3,852.00 immediately.
- The tenancy will end at the end of the fixed term on 28 February 2025.
- All other claims are dismissed.
Reasons
- Both parties attended the hearing. The Tribunal had the assistance of an interpreter.
- The tenants have asked if their fixed term tenancy can end around 5 weeks early and the landlord does not agree. Since having this discussion the tenants have realised that they did not receive any Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) Information with their tenancy agreement. This concerns them because their two young children have been sick during the tenancy. The issues I need to decide are: • Were there breaches? • Should the tenants get compensation? • Should the fixed term tenancy end sooner than 28 February 2025?
Were there breaches?
- The landlords had 120 days after the start of the tenancy to comply with the HHS. The compliance date was 29 February 2024.
- The landlords breached their obligation to provide HHS information as required with the tenancy agreement. The landlord provided the tenants with a Healthy Homes Standards report at the hearing. This information should have formed part of the tenancy agreement. This is so that tenants can make informed decisions about which property to rent. See section 13A of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
- Under section 45 RTA landlords are required to provide smoke alarms that comply with the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016. The HHS report identified that the only smoke alarm expired, in 2017. The landlord replaced the smoke alarm in December, as soon as they were told.
- The tenants are concerned because the house is not properly insulated. The HHS report identified there is insulation, but it is less than 120mm thick. The Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019 require a rating of R-2.9 for ceiling insulation in Wellington, which equates to 120mm of insulation in a reasonable condition.
- The landlord was aware of the need to provide extractor fans vented to the outside and two were installed on 19 March 2024, four and a half weeks after the compliance date.
- I find there were breaches of the RTA and the HHS.
Should the tenants get compensation?
- The tenants have applied for compensation. They want all the rent refunded because they have been living in an unhealthy home. The tenants are very concerned about the health of their children because one child developed asthma during this tenancy. There is no evidence the house was damp, and there is no evidence the house caused the asthma. I am not persuaded the house is an “unsafe house”, but it is missing some insulation and may not have been protected from fire.
- I find the tenants should get compensation. This is because they were paying for a house they believed met the required standards, but in fact lacked proper insulation and a current smoke alarm. It seems most likely to me the house would have required more energy to heat than a properly insulated house. The lack of information in the tenancy agreement meant the tenants did not get the opportunity to choose the house best suited to their needs. Finally, the landlords were not helpful when the tenants started asking questions about compliance, and they did not share the HHS report with the tenants until the hearing. This was stressful for the tenants.
- I am not inclined to allow compensation because the extractor fans were installed four weeks late. I accept the landlord’s evidence there was a family emergency at the time, and I note that some of the delay was because the tenants did not understand the HHS requirements.
- Taking all this into account I find compensation in the amount of $85 a week to be reasonable. This is allowed from the HHS compliance date to the date of the hearing.
Should the fixed term tenancy end sooner than 28 February 2025?
- The tenants have applied for a reduction of the fixed-term tenancy due to end on 28 February 2025. The Tribunal may reduce a fixed term tenancy where there has been an unforeseen change in the applicant’s circumstances. See section 66(1) RTA.
- The tenants said the lack of HHS compliance was the unforeseen change in circumstances but I am not persuaded by this submission. The smoke alarm was replaced immediately. The tenants do not want the top up insulation to be installed during their tenancy. There is actually no change in circumstances except the tenants now know the landlords breached the RTA, and compensation is the best remedy for this. This claim is dismissed and the tenancy continues until 28 February 2025. Other orders
- The bond is not refunded because the tenancy has not ended.
- Because the tenants have substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
- The tenants’ application for suppression is allowed because they are the most successful party. The landlords’ names are published because there is public interest when landlords have to pay compensation. See section 95A RTA.