What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5159071 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 5159071?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5159071?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5159071?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12071730-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5159071 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 5159071?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5159071?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5159071?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12071730-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Room 204, 57 Wakefield Street, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5159071 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5159071 — net $1,297.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Refund of bond held by landlord	$520.00	Refund of bond held by landlord
Exemplary damages – bond not lodged	$750.00	Exemplary damages – bond not lodged
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,297.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,297.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Jay Zhao must pay [The tenant/s] $1,297.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The balance of the tenant’s claims are withdrawn.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing by phone call with the assistance of an interpreter.
The landlord was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered. I am satisfied the landlord was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in his absence.
The tenant has applied for refund of her bond, exemplary damages, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations.
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
The tenant provided documentary evidence that was in mandarin. The tenant elected for this matter to be determined on the evidence provided in english only rather than adjourn for the evidence in mandarin to be translated by a professional translator. Bond refund
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has retained part of the bond. The landlord has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.
The bond was $1,420 and the tenant advised that she has been refunded $900 of the bond since filing her application.
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 balance of the bond held by the landlord ($520) is refunded in full to the tenant. Bond not lodged
The tenant claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time. The tenant seeks exemplary damages.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. 1 1 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. 2
The Bond Centre has confirmed that the bond for this tenancy was not lodged. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine. In Auckland City Council v Blundell 3 the Court of Appeal said: Exemplary and punitive [damages] are different words for the same thing. The damages are exemplary because they are meant to teach an example to the guilty officer and others. They are punitive because they are meant to punish. They are like a fine, though they go to the citizen who has been the victim of conduct.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. Before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, the Tribunal must take into account the following factors: a.the intent of the person in committing the unlawful act, b.the effect of the unlawful act, c.the interests of the landlord or the tenant against whom the unlawful act was committed, d.the public interest, e.whether it is just to make the award. 4
Landlords are required to know the law. The requirement to lodge the Bond with the Bond Centre is recorded in the tenancy agreement and is so fundamental that I find the landlord has acted intentionally.
The bond belongs to the tenant. It is vital that the bond money is protected by the Bond Centre so that it can be released in accordance with an agreement between the parties or Tribunal order at the end of the tenancy. The effect on the tenant of the unlawful act has been stress and worry. It is in the tenant’s interest to receive exemplary damages.
There is a public interest in bonds being lodged.
The Tribunal’s usual approach to exemplary damages is to award one third of the maximum unless there are aggravating or mitigating factors in play. 5 The situation has been aggravated by the landlord retaining part of the bond and not attending the hearing. 2 See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 3 Auckland City Council v Blundell [1986] NZLR 732(Cooke P) 4 Section 109 of the RTA. 5 Wellington Property Management Ltd v Hardie [2022] NZTT 4399281 4374781.
In having regard to these factors, I make an order of $750 exemplary damages for the landlord’s failure to lodge the bond. Compensation
The tenant’s claims for compensation were withdrawn at the hearing. Filing fee
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $27. Name suppression
The tenant sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5159071 — net $1,297.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Refund of bond held by landlord	$520.00	Refund of bond held by landlord
Exemplary damages – bond not lodged	$750.00	Exemplary damages – bond not lodged
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,297.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,297.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Jay Zhao must pay [The tenant/s] $1,297.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The balance of the tenant’s claims are withdrawn.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing by phone call with the assistance of an interpreter.
The landlord was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered. I am satisfied the landlord was properly served with notice of the hearing. The hearing proceeded in his absence.
The tenant has applied for refund of her bond, exemplary damages, compensation and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy. Relevant legal considerations.
The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
The tenant provided documentary evidence that was in mandarin. The tenant elected for this matter to be determined on the evidence provided in english only rather than adjourn for the evidence in mandarin to be translated by a professional translator. Bond refund
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord has retained part of the bond. The landlord has not filed a counterclaim with Tenancy Services.
The bond was $1,420 and the tenant advised that she has been refunded $900 of the bond since filing her application.
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 balance of the bond held by the landlord ($520) is refunded in full to the tenant. Bond not lodged
The tenant claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time. The tenant seeks exemplary damages.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. 1 1 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. 2
The Bond Centre has confirmed that the bond for this tenancy was not lodged. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
Exemplary damages are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine. In Auckland City Council v Blundell 3 the Court of Appeal said: Exemplary and punitive [damages] are different words for the same thing. The damages are exemplary because they are meant to teach an example to the guilty officer and others. They are punitive because they are meant to punish. They are like a fine, though they go to the citizen who has been the victim of conduct.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. Before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, the Tribunal must take into account the following factors: a.the intent of the person in committing the unlawful act, b.the effect of the unlawful act, c.the interests of the landlord or the tenant against whom the unlawful act was committed, d.the public interest, e.whether it is just to make the award. 4
Landlords are required to know the law. The requirement to lodge the Bond with the Bond Centre is recorded in the tenancy agreement and is so fundamental that I find the landlord has acted intentionally.
The bond belongs to the tenant. It is vital that the bond money is protected by the Bond Centre so that it can be released in accordance with an agreement between the parties or Tribunal order at the end of the tenancy. The effect on the tenant of the unlawful act has been stress and worry. It is in the tenant’s interest to receive exemplary damages.
There is a public interest in bonds being lodged.
The Tribunal’s usual approach to exemplary damages is to award one third of the maximum unless there are aggravating or mitigating factors in play. 5 The situation has been aggravated by the landlord retaining part of the bond and not attending the hearing. 2 See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 3 Auckland City Council v Blundell [1986] NZLR 732(Cooke P) 4 Section 109 of the RTA. 5 Wellington Property Management Ltd v Hardie [2022] NZTT 4399281 4374781.
In having regard to these factors, I make an order of $750 exemplary damages for the landlord’s failure to lodge the bond. Compensation
The tenant’s claims for compensation were withdrawn at the hearing. Filing fee
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $27. Name suppression
The tenant sought suppression and as the application is successful, I have made an order accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5159071 — Exemplary damages at Room 204, 57 Wakefield Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5159071 — Exemplary damages at Room 204, 57 Wakefield Street, Auckland Central,

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