What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5121470 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 5121470?

Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5121470?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5121470?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11533556-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5121470 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 5121470?

Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5121470?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5121470?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11533556-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

11 Eureka Place, Parahaki, Whangarei 0112 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5121470 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5121470 — net $1,527.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Return of bond money	$1,000.00	Return of bond money
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages: Failure to lodge bond	$500.00	Failure to lodge bond
Net award	$1,527.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,527.00

The tenants attended the hearing by remote teleconference. Two attempts were made to contact the landlord on the telephone number provided. On both occasions the call went straight to voicemail.

The tenancy began in November 2018. The tenants paid a bond of $1000.00 to the landlord which was never lodged with the bond centre. I have sighted evidence of the payment made on 30 October 2018.

The tenants have applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.

Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.

A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord has failed to lodge the bond within the required timeframe. I find they have committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

I am satisfied that the landlord has breached their obligations because the bond was not lodged within 23 working days “after the payment [was] made”. The bond money does not belong to the landlord, there was no right for them to hold it.

I consider exemplary damages should be ordered for these reasons: i. I consider it likely the failure to lodge the bond was intentional. The landlord should have been well aware of their obligations to lodge the bond following the payment being made. ii. The effect for the tenant is that their bond was not secure in the Bond Centre. iii. There is a strong interest for landlords, tenants and the public generally that the bond system be robust, and of course that means landlords lodging tenants bond money as they are required to do. iv. It would be just to make an order.

The maximum level of exemplary damages for failing to lodge the bond is $1500.00.

For similar reasons as set out above, I order one third of the maximum, that is $500.00 exemplary damages to be paid to the tenants.

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.

The tenants applied for non-publication of their names and identifying details. They have substantially succeeded in the proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.

Accordingly, name suppression for the tenants is granted.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5121470 — net $1,527.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Return of bond money	$1,000.00	Return of bond money
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages: Failure to lodge bond	$500.00	Failure to lodge bond
Net award	$1,527.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,527.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant names and identifying details.
Jennifer Andrews must pay [The tenant/s] $1,527.00 immediately, being bond money, exemplary damages and the filing fee as set out below:

Reasons

The tenants attended the hearing by remote teleconference. Two attempts were made to contact the landlord on the telephone number provided. On both occasions the call went straight to voicemail.
The tenancy began in November 2018. The tenants paid a bond of $1000.00 to the landlord which was never lodged with the bond centre. I have sighted evidence of the payment made on 30 October 2018.
The tenants have applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has a claim against the bond but has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord has failed to lodge the bond within the required timeframe. I find they have committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I am satisfied that the landlord has breached their obligations because the bond was not lodged within 23 working days “after the payment [was] made”. The bond money does not belong to the landlord, there was no right for them to hold it.
I consider exemplary damages should be ordered for these reasons: i. I consider it likely the failure to lodge the bond was intentional. The landlord should have been well aware of their obligations to lodge the bond following the payment being made. ii. The effect for the tenant is that their bond was not secure in the Bond Centre. iii. There is a strong interest for landlords, tenants and the public generally that the bond system be robust, and of course that means landlords lodging tenants bond money as they are required to do. iv. It would be just to make an order.
The maximum level of exemplary damages for failing to lodge the bond is $1500.00.
For similar reasons as set out above, I order one third of the maximum, that is $500.00 exemplary damages to be paid to the tenants.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The tenants applied for non-publication of their names and identifying details. They have substantially succeeded in the proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the tenant’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Accordingly, name suppression for the tenants is granted.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5121470 — Exemplary damages at 11 Eureka Place, Parahaki, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5121470 — Exemplary damages at 11 Eureka Place, Parahaki, Whangarei 0112

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions