What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5141708 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5141708?

Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5141708?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5141708?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11713560-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5141708 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5141708?

Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5141708?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5141708?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11713560-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

531 Mangawhio Road, Wharepuhunga, Rd4, Te Awamutu Tenancy Tribunal Case 5141708 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5141708 — net $2,027.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages/unlawful termination	$2,000.00	Exemplary damages/unlawful termination
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,027.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,027.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5141708 — net $2,027.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages/unlawful termination	$2,000.00	Exemplary damages/unlawful termination
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,027.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,027.00

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Matthew Ferguson must pay [The tenant/s] $2,027.00 immediately as calculated in the table below.
All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The tenant appeared with a support person and a witness. The landlord, Mr Ferguson, appeared as a trustee of the M and G Family trust.
The tenant has claimed that the landlord terminated her tenancy unlawfully and entered the premises without giving notice.
The landlord had filed a cross application, but it was incomplete and therefore not scheduled to be heard at the same time as the tenant’s application.
The landlord confirmed that they have chosen not to go any further with their claims and he was not seeking to have them addressed. The documents that accompanied the landlord’s application were copied and provided to the parties as they contained the tenancy agreement and copies of communication between the parties.
During the hearing the landlord and tenant emailed further evidence to the Tribunal which was also provided as a hard copy to them and uploaded to the file.
The tenancy began on 27 July 2024 and ended on 15 February 2025. Correspondence provided indicated that the tenancy came with an option to work because premises were located on a working farm.
Both parties agreed that there was a conversation where the landlord said the tenant would be able to do some work on the farm. The landlord said there was leeway with this as he did not mind if the tenant worked. He did require work or the payment of rent for the premises because by living in the house the tenant was taking up accommodation that a farm worker could have used.
A letter provided dated 8 July 2024 stating that the tenant was to be employed as a ‘calf rearer/farm assistant’ and further stated that not included in the farm job is a four-bedroom home. This home was available to rent to the tenant.
The landlord provided a copy of the tenancy agreement signed by the parties on 12 August 2024 with a start date of 26 July 2024 for a fixed term ending on 31 May 2025.The landlord said that this was because this was the latest date the tenant could be in the premises before it was needed for an employee.
The landlord confirmed that this was not a service tenancy, and that they had decided to have a residential tenancy agreement only. This was not disputed by the tenant.
I find that this is a residential tenancy and not a service tenancy a distinction that is important as the termination of each type of tenancy is subject to different legal requirements under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord is employed by the farm owners to run a dry stock farm. He rented the premises to the tenant and was the first port of call for any issues or concerns and collected the rent.
The owners have a property manager Ms Sandra Bolger who conducts the house inspections for all the properties on the farm. The tenant said that she had not been told about her until an inspection was held. The landlord disputed this.
The relationship between the parties deteriorated after an inspection occurred resulting in the owners and property manager being unhappy with the condition of the premises. They advised Mr Ferguson to end the tenancy because the premises were deteriorating.
The landlord said that he had issued a 90 day notice to terminate the tenancy and written it on a piece of paper and delivered to the tenant on 22 October 2024.This was intended to end the tenancy on 22 January 2025.The tenant said that she did not receive this and the landlord did not have a copy of it
A second a notice was issued when Cardon Dispute Resolution took over the communications relating to the end of the tenancy and issued a notice on 28 January 2025 terminating the tenancy on 12 February 2025 on the basis that the tenant had ‘’abandoned your employment’’. Termination of the tenancy
[The applicant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 60AA.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986, RTA.
The landlord was unable to provide evidence supporting his claim that he delivered a handwritten 90-day notice to the tenant on 22 October 2024.But even if he had, I would not have found that this would have terminated the tenancy because the tenancy agreement was for a fixed term. This is important because a fixed term tenancy cannot be terminated by giving notice to the tenant.
The landlord said that he was advised to end the tenancy by the owners and property manager Sandra Bolger, who the landlord said had been in this role for many years. It is reasonable to expect that Ms Bolger would know the legal requirements for terminating tenancies as specified by the RTA.
The landlord then engaged the services of Cardon Dispute Resolution, mediation and advocacy who emailed a termination notice to the tenant on 28 January 2025. It appears that they have based the notice on the tenancy being classed as a service tenancy. ‘As per section 53 of the Residential Tenancy Act 1986 the last date of your tenancy will be 12 February 2025 no later than 5:00 PM. Clause four of your tenancy agreement states: Tenancy subject to availability for work. As you abandoned your employment with the M & G family trust last year and have were issued a 90 day eviction notice on 22 October 2024, M& G family trust had been more than lenient with accommodation they required to house their employee’s. Failure to adhere to this eviction notice will result in an urgent application to the tenancy tribunal for a possession order.’
There was no evidence or claim by the landlord or tenant that this was a service tenancy. The tenancy agreement provided and relied upon by the landlord was for a fixed term residential tenancy.
I find that the landlord breached section 60AA because a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy knowing they are not entitled to do so. The landlord knew that this was not a service tenancy yet both they and their agent served a notice on this basis.
The tenant moved out of the premises on 15 February based on this letter.
I find that the landlord has committed and 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.
Ignorance of the law, as demonstrated by most of the parties in their attempts to terminate this tenancy no excuse. A landlord must comply with the requirements of the RTA. The consequences for the tenant of having to move out earlier than the agreed fixed term was that for some time she had to live with family member while struggling to find a new home. Landlords have a legal duty not to terminate tenancies on invalid grounds. I find it just to award exemplary damages in the sum of $2000.00. See section 109(3) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Unlawful entry.
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant claims that the landlord failed to give notice for inspection on two dates and a tradesman appeared without correct notice being given.
The tenant said that she believed that the landlord entered the premises on or about 22 October 2024.
The tenant was unable to confirm the date in October that she was claiming the incident occurred. The landlord said that there was a scheduled property inspection in October, but he did not enter the premises.
The tenant claimed that the landlord entered the property on 22 January 2025.
The landlord said that on this date the property manager and owners entered the premises based on the belief that the tenant had been given notice and the tenancy had ended.
A copy of a text from the landlord dated 12 December 2024 was provided, asking how the tenant was getting on for 22 January as ‘that’s 90 days from your notice’, and ‘just making sure that your sorted as have new staff needing the house asap.’
On 14 January 2025 another text from the landlord said, ‘the property lady and I are coming around tomorrow to go over the checklist for your leaving.’
The tenant replied that she was not leaving and said that the landlord was to ‘stay out of my house’ to which the landlord replied that he had not been in the property only the property manager who had given notice.
The landlord said that there was also a phone call with the tenant on 16 January 2025, when she was staying at a relative.
This was confirmed by the tenant’s witness Ms Te Kanawa, who said that after this call she acted as the tenant’s advocate and asked for all information, a copy of the tenancy agreement and calls to be directed to her to help the tenant with the stress she was under.
Landlord said from this point they did not contact the tenant. He had used voice mail exchanges to talk to her and the tenant played a recording with the landlords’ consent.
I do not find that this demonstrated that the landlord was bullying or stressing the tenant. He offered help and assistance more than is required by the RTA.
The tenant believed that a tradesman and the landlord had been in the premises but was unable to give dates or evidence of this claim.
The landlord provided a text where he said a Sparky is on his was to your house to carry on work. This was undated.
Without the tenant being specify when or if this text related to the incident, I am unable to find a breach.
I have considered the evidence given and provided by the parties and find that the tenant did not provide enough evidence to establish this claim and it is dismissed. Fuse box.
The tenant said that the fuse box at the end of the driveway was tampered with by a neighbour at the end of the tenancy. There is no claim made by the tenant in the application for the landlord interfering with the tenants’ services, section 45(2), RTA, so this is not addressed in this order.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
Section 95A RTA states regarding suppression orders that 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.
Further, the Tribunal may, on the application of any party to proceedings or on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that all or part of the evidence given or the name or any identifying particulars of any witness or party not be published.
The tenant said that she had struggled to find accommodation after the tenancy ended and the landlord did not pursue the cross application. I have found that the tenant has been substantially successful, and I do not think that it is in the public interest to publish her identifying particulars. I award name suppression of the tenants’ details on my own initiative.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5141708 — Exemplary damages at 531 Mangawhio Road, Wharepuhunga, Rd4, Te Awamutu

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5141708 — Exemplary damages at 531 Mangawhio Road, Wharepuhunga, Rd4, Te Awamutu

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