What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5117428 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 5117428?

Compensation: Breach of Drainage & M…: $1,100.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Failure To Maintain: $450.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5117428?

The primary dispute was State of repair.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5117428?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11395317-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5117428 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 5117428?

Compensation: Breach of Drainage & M…: $1,100.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Failure To Maintain: $450.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5117428?

The primary dispute was State of repair.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5117428?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11395317-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

63A Tannadyce Street, Strathmore Park, Wellington 6022 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5117428 — State of repair

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5117428 — net $1,577.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Breach of Drainage & Moisture Ingress standards	$1,100.00	Breach of Drainage & Moisture Ingress standards
Compensation: Failure to maintain	$450.00	Failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,577.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,577.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5117428 — net $1,577.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Breach of Drainage & Moisture Ingress standards	$1,100.00	Breach of Drainage & Moisture Ingress standards
Compensation: Failure to maintain	$450.00	Failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,577.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,577.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Cara Mansfield and Dave Mansfield must pay [The tenant/s] $2,877.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenancy started on 2 May 2023 for a fixed term due to expire on 6 April 2024. However, the parties agreed to end the tenancy early on 30 January 2024.
The tenant seeks compensation and/or exemplary damages in relation to the following alleged breaches by the landlords: a. Failure to provide a tenancy agreement and failure to provide accurate information about compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019 (HHS) in the tenancy agreement; b. Failure to comply with the HHS regarding drainage and moisture ingress; c. Failure to maintain the property in relation to leaking windows; broken curtain rail and broken light. Exemplary damages remedy
While reviewing the proceedings after the hearing, it has come to my attention that the tenant’s application for various exemplary damages awards against the landlord have not been brought within the required time limit.
Section 109(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that either party may apply to the Tribunal for an exemplary damages order where the other party has committed a defined unlawful act in the RTA. However s109(2)(b) provides that (except in relation to unlawful acts regarding bonds under s19(2) or s30(2)) no party may apply for exemplary damages later than 12 months after the date of commission of the unlawful act.
The tenant lodged this application with Tenancy Services on 24 December 2024, which is more than 12 months after some of the unlawful act claims made in her application. Therefore, I cannot consider exemplary damages for those matters. Has the landlord breached their duty to provide a signed copy of the tenancy agreement and an accurate HHS compliance statement in the tenancy agreement?
The tenancy agreement named a property manager as the agent acting for the owners/landlords. However, early in the tenancy, the owner/landlords terminated the agency and took over management of the tenancy.
The tenant says that the landlords did not provide a new/amended tenancy agreement after the property manager’s agency was terminated.
Section 13 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) requires a landlord to ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing; to sign the tenancy agreement and to provide a copy to the tenant before the tenancy commences. Failure to do so is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to $750.
However, it is not necessary for a new tenancy agreement to be completed when one party’s interest passes to a successor and the tenancy agreement signed by the parties remains in force. This fits in with s15 RTA which provides that: where, during the term of any tenancy, the landlord’s or tenant’s interest passes to some other person, that other person shall, within 10 working days thereafter, cause the other party to the tenancy to be notified of—the full name and contact address of that person and an address for service including a contact mobile telephone number (if any) and an email address (if any). A party who fails to comply with this section commits an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to $750.
The tenant did not bring a specific application alleging a breach of s15. However, there was evidence that she was notified of the change by the property manager and the landlords contacted her shortly after by text. Regular communications were also conducted at the new email address and cell phone number for the landlords. I find there is insufficient evidence to establish a breach of section 15. Even if I’m wrong, I consider that the circumstances would not justify an award of exemplary damages and the tenant has not applied for exemplary damages within the time limit.
In relation to the allegation that the HHS compliance statement included in the tenancy agreement was not accurate and breaches the requirements of section 13A(1CA) RTA, I note that this claim was already addressed in a previous Tribunal hearing under applications 4661193 and 4664171 (the previous proceedings). The Tribunal found that there had not been enough of a breach to justify a penalty against the landlord. As the matter has already been determined, I cannot revisit the claim in these proceedings.
In summary, the tenant’s claims regarding the tenancy agreement are dismissed.

Has the landlord breached HHS?

[The tenant/s] claims that the landlords have breached their obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA which requires compliance with the HHS. In the previous proceedings, the Tribunal made various orders on 13 September 2023 including a work order requiring the landlords to have an independent business complete a Healthy Homes Standards assessment of the premises and give a copy to the tenant. A report was completed by Healthy Homes Wellington dated 14 September 2023 (the HHS report) which identified non-compliance with the HHS regarding drainage and moisture ingress. The tenant says the work required to comply with HHS was not completed before the tenancy ended and she seeks compensation and exemplary damages for the breaches.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy. The compliance date for this tenancy was within 120 days of the commencement date, which means that the last date for compliance was 29 August 2023.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard require that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains. The Standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space.
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) and Schedule 1A RTA.
In this case, there is no dispute that the HHS report identified a broken downpipe requiring repair and the need to install a ground moisture barrier. The report writer also expressed concerns about there being no drainage behind the house where the concrete pad is situated. However, there was no evidence of ponding during their visit. I have determined that the broken downpipe and absence of a ground moisture barrier are both breaches of HHS. Whether there is a further drainage problem around the concrete pad area is uncertain and not proved on the balance of probabilities. The landlord says that the ponding which had been present stopped after a neighbour’s retaining wall causing run off was removed during the tenancy.
The landlords did not repair the downpipe nor install a moisture barrier until after the tenancy ended on 30 January 2024. I accept that they did arrange for a contractor to install the moisture barrier on 11 January 2024, but the tenant did not allow the work to proceed because the landlords gave just under the required 24 hours’ notice. The landlords acknowledged “dropping the ball’ on this work but noted that they were focussed on other maintenance work. One of their contractors who they prefer to use had also fallen ill which delayed the downpipe repair. However, the works to ensure HHS compliance should have been done by 29 August 2023. So, the landlords were already in breach of their obligations before obtaining the HHS report.
The landlords were unable to advise what, if any, steps they took to have the premises checked for HHS compliance prior to the tenancy starting. They suggested that by engaging a property manager, they were reliant on the property manager for any advice in that regard. They said the property manager prepared the tenancy agreement including the HHS compliance statement. However, I find that the statement must have been completed based on information supplied by the landlords. The statement about a ground moisture barrier has been filled out as follows: “Does the property have any enclosed subfloor spaces: Yes Does the ground moisture barrier meet the standard: No Ground Moisture Barrier: It’s a dry space underneath.”
The landlords explained that they mistakenly believed that because there was underfloor insulation and the ground underneath was dry, they assumed that they did not need to install a ground moisture barrier. They say they were relying on their property manager to advise otherwise.
In section 2 RTA, the definition of landlord includes an agent of the landlord. In the ordinary law of agency, the landlord is responsible for the acts of their agent. If there is some dispute between owner and agent as to their liability to a tenant, then that is for them to have determined and is outside the jurisdiction of this forum.
I find Cara Mansfield and Dave Mansfield committed an unlawful act in failing to comply with the drainage and moisture barrier standards. However, the date of the commission of the unlawful act is the day after the last possible compliance date of 29 August 2023. The tenant applied for exemplary damages in respect of this unlawful act on 24 December 2024, more than 12 months after it was committed. Therefore, as explained above I cannot consider exemplary damages. I only consider whether and to what extent the tenant may be entitled to compensation.
The purpose of compensation is to, as far as money can do it, put the injured party in the same position as they would have been in but for the breach. Liability exists for foreseeable losses flowing from the breach. However, there was little evidence of any actual loss the tenant suffered as a result of the breach, other than her general concern and stress that the premises did not meet HHS and the inconvenience and stress caused to her from having to chase the landlords up about HHS.. For example, there was no evidence that the absence of a moisture barrier here caused moisture to evaporate into the floor above (rising damp) or visible mould or dampness in the house.
Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine. They are different to compensation. It is unfortunate that I cannot consider an exemplary damages award, as they would be the more appropriate remedy in this case.
However, I consider an award of some nominal compensation is justified to reflect that the house was not fully compliant with HHS which caused the tenant a great deal of inconvenience in having to chase the landlord about compliance and general concern and distress about HHS compliance issues. I award the tenant $1,100. To give some guidance as to how I have reached this figure, it equates to an award of approximately $50 per week for the 22 weeks between 29 August 2023 and 30 January 2024 that the HHS compliance work was outstanding. I take into account that the landlord tried to install the moisture barrier on 11 January 2024 but consider that the global award is justified.

Has the landlord breached maintenance obligations?

Under section 45(1)(b) RTA, a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A RTA.
It is well settled that, the landlord’s obligation under s45 is to investigate and repair a defect brought to their attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances, and as to what that time is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be. Furthermore, a tenant has a statutory duty to advise of any defects under section 40(1)(d) of the Act. Therefore, a tenant should promptly notify a landlord of any defects and a landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy the defect before being liable for any failure to do so.
Following an inspection conducted by the landlord on 23 September 2023, some minor maintenance items were noted as follows: The curtain rail in bedroom 2 had fallen down and needed to be reattached to the wall; A light fitting was hanging down above the sink. These items were not repaired before the tenancy ended. The landlords note that their preferred contractor was ill, which delayed matters. Also, as all the downlights were old, they decided that to replace all of them rather than just repair the light hanging down. This was done after the tenancy ended but the landlords say the work was minor and would not have greatly impacted the tenant.
On 14 October 2023, the tenant advised the landlord that the front lounge windows were leaking after some considerable rain. She noted that there was not a lot of water—but a leak all the same. She also says that it recurred in heavy rain but not regularly. The landlords took no steps to investigate, and the leak was not repaired until after the tenancy ended.
The landlords had the lounge window resealed in July 2023. They assumed that the leak reported by the tenant on 14 October 2023 was a “one-off” because the rain that particular weekend was an extreme weather event. They were waiting to see of it happened again before taking steps, as the window is high off the ground and any repairs would require scaffolding. Therefore, they wanted to be certain it was not a “one-off” before taking steps. They confirmed at the hearing that the lounge window did need to be repaired (by painting) after the tenancy ended.
On 12 December 2023, the tenant advised of water ingress through the right side of the French doors to the deck. This was also during exceptionally heavy rain.
The landlords say that this was a “one-off” event and they have not had to repair the French doors since the tenancy ended.
I am satisfied on the evidence that the landlord did not address the above maintenance matters in a reasonable period and should have taken steps to investigate and carry out the repairs sooner. The tenant is entitled to some compensation for the failure to repair those items during the tenancy. However, when awarding compensation I take into account that the lounge leaks were intermittent; the French door leak did not recur, and the curtain rail and light repairs were also minor. Having regard to all relevant factors I award $450 compensation to the tenant for the breaches.
The landlords’ breaches of their maintenance obligations are unlawful acts. The commission date of these unlawful acts is not a fixed date because it depends on when the failure to maintain became unreasonable.
However, I consider it is not necessary for me to determine whether the unlawful acts were committed within the 12-month period before the tenant’s application for exemplary damages. That is because I do not consider that an award of exemplary damages would be justified given the overall nature of the defects and the impact on the tenant. I consider that the compensation already awarded is adequate overall recompense to the tenant. Other orders
The tenant’s claim for a refund of overpaid rent is withdrawn.
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claims, I have reimbursed the filing fee and suppressed the tenant’s name and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5117428 — State of repair at 63A Tannadyce Street, Strathmore Park, Wellington 6022

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5117428 — State of repair at 63A Tannadyce Street, Strathmore Park, Wellington 6022

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the landlord breached HHS?

Has the landlord breached maintenance obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Has the landlord breached HHS?

Has the landlord breached maintenance obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions