What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5212931?

The tribunal order states: Checkmate Investments Limited must pay Andrew George and Brendan Smith

How much money was awarded in case 5212931?

Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss o…: $1,988.57 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212931?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212931?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11788006-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 5212931?

The tribunal order states: Checkmate Investments Limited must pay Andrew George and Brendan Smith

How much money was awarded in case 5212931?

Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss o…: $1,988.57 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5212931?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5212931?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11788006-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

46 Chequers Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5212931 — Tenancy dispute

Tenantcheck Insights

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

Loading insights…

Pulling tribunal records

46 Chequers Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5212931 — Tenancy dispute | TenantCheck

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5212931 — net $1,988.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet		$1,988.57	S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet
Filing fee reimbursement		$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$27.00	$2,015.57
Net award		$1,988.57
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,988.57

Claims and awards for application 5212931 — net $1,988.57 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet

Amount: $1,988.57
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Total award

Landlord $27.00 · Tenant $2,015.57

Net award

Tenant $1,988.57

Total payable by Landlord to Tenant

Tenant $1,988.57

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Compensation Filing Fee

Order

Checkmate Investments Limited must pay Andrew George and Brendan Smith $1,988.57 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The parties have agreed by consent to the following terms and conditions, in relation to the ongoing sales and marketing of the property: a. Weekly open homes/viewing will take place as follows: i. Saturdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 3pm; ii. Tuesdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 4pm; b. Access for pre- purchase building inspections, or the like, between Saturday to Tuesday from 1:30pm onwards and by the landlord having given no less than 48 hours written notice to both of the tenants’.
The landlord must give the tenants a rent reduction of $80.00 per week from 3 May 2025 to the date all the sales and marketing related processes have come to an end.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants have applied for compensation and exemplary damages and reimbursement of the filing fee, following issues that arose because of the landlord placing the property on the market to sell part way through their 12- month fixed term tenancy. The tenant is due to end on 15 August 2025. The landlord commenced the sales and marketing process around 9 November 2024, not quite 3 months into the tenancy.
The landlord applied for orders in relation to access to the premise for sales and marketing related purposes such as open homes, viewings, and pre-purchase inspections by builders and the like. Background
The premise is a two-story house. The top level of the house and the downstairs laundry, toilet and garage are rented by the tenants and the self- contained downstairs area is rented by another tenant under a separate tenancy agreement.
The landlord’s employment situation changed not long after the fixed term tenancy commenced. This led to the bank putting pressure on him to sell the rental premise.
The landlord came to an agreement with all the tenants that he would only sell the house on the condition it came with the current tenants and that their fixed term tenancies would need to be preserved. This had limited the pool of persons that could be interested in purchasing the property, as the new owners would not be able to have vacant possession of the house on settlement date. In addition, the housing market in Auckland is experiencing a slump due to a number of political and economic factors. These factors have led to a longer period of the house being on the market than usual.
The tenants evidence shows the sales and marketing process has caused significant disruption to their lives and has impacted their quiet enjoyment of the property.
The landlord’s evidence shows he has had trouble co-ordinating dates and times for staging, open homes/viewings and builders undertaking pre-purchase inspections. This is largely because there are two separate households occupying the rental property, each with their owns needs in terms of a desire to be at home when these third parties want to access the property but having different schedules. Some of the tenants work during the day and can only be available in the evenings or weekends. One tenant is engaged in university studies and has a need to have quiet time at home to study and he also attend lectures at various times during the day.
The landlord has become frustrated at not being able to get easy access to the property for sales and marketing activities and says this has cost him at least one buyer.
The tenants want to be left alone to have the privacy and quiet enjoyment they pay rent to enjoy and want compensation for the loss of their quiet enjoyment and the loss of amenity, inconvenience, and stress they have suffered.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). Proving claims in the Tribunal
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

Access for sales and marketing purposes

The landlord and tenants agreed days and times for open homes/viewings, via a mediator’s order dated 27 March 2025. The parties confirmed the days and times agreed were for the initial 4-week marketing campaign.
The property is still for sale and the landlord sought agreement on times and days for his real estate agents to be able to access the property for sales and marketing purposes and some agreed conditions around access for pre- purchase inspections and the like.
The parties agreed to the following terms and conditions in relation to the ongoing sales and marketing of the property: a. Weekly open homes/viewing will take place as follows: i. Saturdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 3pm; ii. Tuesdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 4pm; b. Access for pre- purchase building inspections, or the like, between Saturday to Tuesday from 1:30pm onwards and by the landlord having given no less than 48 hours written notice to both of the tenants.

TENANTS CLAIMS

Breach of privacy and quiet enjoyment

Andrew George and Brendan Smith claims the landlord has breached their privacy and quiet enjoyment and they feel harrassed.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
General damages or compensation may also be awarded for any stress, inconvenience or loss of amenity suffered by the tenants.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenants provided evidence that proves they have suffered a significant amount of stress, inconvenience and loss of amenity of a premise they pay rent to have uninterrupted use of. Particularly given they signed up to a fix term period of 12 months, during which their tenancy is protected.
The tenants have described how the partial staging of the premise, the having to move and store some of their belongings in the downstairs garage, being contacted by the landlord, real estate agents and other parties wanting access to the premise for sales and marketing or pre-purchase inspection purposes, has led to the loss of their privacy, negatively impacted their quiet enjoyment of the property and led to the loss of amenity of areas of the house where they have had to pack up and move their belongings. There is also the stress and inconvenience of trying to keep the premise clean, tidy, and free from clutter so as to assist with the sales and marketing process.
Further, one of the tenants has become very stressed as he has had his exam time and study time impacted by the landlord and his contractors demands for access to the property at inconvenient times for him at the end of 2024. One of the other tenant’s also described the inconvenience of having to store items in the garage that he wanted to enjoy using over the Christmas New Year holidays and then having to make time to move them all back up into the house after the staging process when he knew that bringing them back into the house would make the house look less spacious and less attractive to buyers.
There has also been a lack of communication between the parties about when photographers, stagers, real estate agents and the like are coming or these persons contacting one or the other of the tenants out of the blue. In addition, the WhatsApp groups set up by the landlord to try and ease the communication issues, have led to stress, and inconvenience to one of the tenants who says he feels bombarded with communications while he is at work and that this is distracting and stressful.
The stagers also moved the tenants’ belongings around during the staging process and did not reposition these items after the staging was completed. The tenants were put to the stress and inconvenience of having to replace their belongings and furnishings back to where they were before the staging. The tenants were also stressed by the staging of their bedrooms, when they had been under a reasonable belief the partial staging, they agreed to would be of shared areas only.
There was no evidence that the landlord had passed on the tenants contact details with the consent of knowledge of at least one tenant. There was some evidence that there was some miscommunication between the parties that led to one or the other tenant’s being under the mistaken belief that consent had not been given
I am satisfied that the landlord’s sales and marketing processes has led to a significant disruption of the tenants privacy and quiet enjoyment of the property. While this disruption to their lives has not been intentional, it has caused the tenants to suffer a loss of amenity of the premise they are paying rent to enjoy without interference and disruption by the landlord. It has also caused the tenants significant stress and inconvenience, which is still ongoing and will continue until the house is sold or withdrawn from the market.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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 do not find that the landlord’s breach of the tenants’ privacy and quiet enjoyment has been intentional. It has been a by-product of the sales and marketing process that he had been forced to engage in due to pressure for his Bank.
However, I find that the landlord has breached the tenants’ privacy and quiet enjoyment and as a result they have suffered significant loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience the for a period of 24 weeks and 6 days, from 9 November 2024 to 2 May 2025. I award the tenants compensation of $80.00 per week for this loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience suffered. This is a total rent rebate of $1988.57 ($80 x 24 weeks= $1,920.00 plus $80.00 divided by 7 and multiplied by 6= $68.57).
The landlord must also give the tenants a rent reduction of $80.00 per week from 3 May 2025 to the date all the sales and marketing related processes have come to an end to compensate them for the continuing loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience they are suffering. Reimbursement of filing fees
Because both the tenants’ and the landlord have substantially succeeded with their claims, I have reimbursed both parties filing fees.

Claims & awards

What this tenancy cost at tribunal — claim, category, amount, and party awarded, with reconciled net total.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5212931 — net $1,988.57 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet		$1,988.57	S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet
Filing fee reimbursement		$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$27.00	$2,015.57
Net award		$1,988.57
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$1,988.57

Claims and awards for application 5212931 — net $1,988.57 NZD. Verify on MoJ.

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Landlord
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Compensation: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet

Amount: $1,988.57
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: S38 of the RTA- loss of privacy and quiet

Filing fee reimbursement

Amount: $27.00
Awarded to: Tenant
Reason: Filing fee reimbursement

Total award

Landlord $27.00 · Tenant $2,015.57

Net award

Tenant $1,988.57

Total payable by Landlord to Tenant

Tenant $1,988.57

Claim types — money lines allowed on this order

Compensation Filing Fee

Order

Checkmate Investments Limited must pay Andrew George and Brendan Smith $1,988.57 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The parties have agreed by consent to the following terms and conditions, in relation to the ongoing sales and marketing of the property: a. Weekly open homes/viewing will take place as follows: i. Saturdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 3pm; ii. Tuesdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 4pm; b. Access for pre- purchase building inspections, or the like, between Saturday to Tuesday from 1:30pm onwards and by the landlord having given no less than 48 hours written notice to both of the tenants’.
The landlord must give the tenants a rent reduction of $80.00 per week from 3 May 2025 to the date all the sales and marketing related processes have come to an end.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants have applied for compensation and exemplary damages and reimbursement of the filing fee, following issues that arose because of the landlord placing the property on the market to sell part way through their 12- month fixed term tenancy. The tenant is due to end on 15 August 2025. The landlord commenced the sales and marketing process around 9 November 2024, not quite 3 months into the tenancy.
The landlord applied for orders in relation to access to the premise for sales and marketing related purposes such as open homes, viewings, and pre-purchase inspections by builders and the like. Background
The premise is a two-story house. The top level of the house and the downstairs laundry, toilet and garage are rented by the tenants and the self- contained downstairs area is rented by another tenant under a separate tenancy agreement.
The landlord’s employment situation changed not long after the fixed term tenancy commenced. This led to the bank putting pressure on him to sell the rental premise.
The landlord came to an agreement with all the tenants that he would only sell the house on the condition it came with the current tenants and that their fixed term tenancies would need to be preserved. This had limited the pool of persons that could be interested in purchasing the property, as the new owners would not be able to have vacant possession of the house on settlement date. In addition, the housing market in Auckland is experiencing a slump due to a number of political and economic factors. These factors have led to a longer period of the house being on the market than usual.
The tenants evidence shows the sales and marketing process has caused significant disruption to their lives and has impacted their quiet enjoyment of the property.
The landlord’s evidence shows he has had trouble co-ordinating dates and times for staging, open homes/viewings and builders undertaking pre-purchase inspections. This is largely because there are two separate households occupying the rental property, each with their owns needs in terms of a desire to be at home when these third parties want to access the property but having different schedules. Some of the tenants work during the day and can only be available in the evenings or weekends. One tenant is engaged in university studies and has a need to have quiet time at home to study and he also attend lectures at various times during the day.
The landlord has become frustrated at not being able to get easy access to the property for sales and marketing activities and says this has cost him at least one buyer.
The tenants want to be left alone to have the privacy and quiet enjoyment they pay rent to enjoy and want compensation for the loss of their quiet enjoyment and the loss of amenity, inconvenience, and stress they have suffered.

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”). Proving claims in the Tribunal
With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That means that it is for the party bringing the application to establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities”. That means that they must establish that what they are claiming is more likely than not. This is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.
As noted by the District Court in Kaipo v Clarke & McCarthy (DC) TT233/02, in practical terms this means that: ... [L]ike anyone who brings an application before a Tribunal or Court, it is incumbent upon the applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove the case. If the applicant fails to do that, then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not because it is up to the applicant to provide the necessary evidence. It is not up to the other parties, and it is certainly not up to the Tribunal to extract evidence.
I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any particular claim, I must consider all the evidence presented (including oral evidence during the hearing). I must weigh this evidence to decide what is more likely.

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

Access for sales and marketing purposes

The landlord and tenants agreed days and times for open homes/viewings, via a mediator’s order dated 27 March 2025. The parties confirmed the days and times agreed were for the initial 4-week marketing campaign.
The property is still for sale and the landlord sought agreement on times and days for his real estate agents to be able to access the property for sales and marketing purposes and some agreed conditions around access for pre- purchase inspections and the like.
The parties agreed to the following terms and conditions in relation to the ongoing sales and marketing of the property: a. Weekly open homes/viewing will take place as follows: i. Saturdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 3pm; ii. Tuesdays for no more than a total of 30 minutes, to be held between 2pm and 4pm; b. Access for pre- purchase building inspections, or the like, between Saturday to Tuesday from 1:30pm onwards and by the landlord having given no less than 48 hours written notice to both of the tenants.

TENANTS CLAIMS

Breach of privacy and quiet enjoyment

Andrew George and Brendan Smith claims the landlord has breached their privacy and quiet enjoyment and they feel harrassed.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
General damages or compensation may also be awarded for any stress, inconvenience or loss of amenity suffered by the tenants.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenants provided evidence that proves they have suffered a significant amount of stress, inconvenience and loss of amenity of a premise they pay rent to have uninterrupted use of. Particularly given they signed up to a fix term period of 12 months, during which their tenancy is protected.
The tenants have described how the partial staging of the premise, the having to move and store some of their belongings in the downstairs garage, being contacted by the landlord, real estate agents and other parties wanting access to the premise for sales and marketing or pre-purchase inspection purposes, has led to the loss of their privacy, negatively impacted their quiet enjoyment of the property and led to the loss of amenity of areas of the house where they have had to pack up and move their belongings. There is also the stress and inconvenience of trying to keep the premise clean, tidy, and free from clutter so as to assist with the sales and marketing process.
Further, one of the tenants has become very stressed as he has had his exam time and study time impacted by the landlord and his contractors demands for access to the property at inconvenient times for him at the end of 2024. One of the other tenant’s also described the inconvenience of having to store items in the garage that he wanted to enjoy using over the Christmas New Year holidays and then having to make time to move them all back up into the house after the staging process when he knew that bringing them back into the house would make the house look less spacious and less attractive to buyers.
There has also been a lack of communication between the parties about when photographers, stagers, real estate agents and the like are coming or these persons contacting one or the other of the tenants out of the blue. In addition, the WhatsApp groups set up by the landlord to try and ease the communication issues, have led to stress, and inconvenience to one of the tenants who says he feels bombarded with communications while he is at work and that this is distracting and stressful.
The stagers also moved the tenants’ belongings around during the staging process and did not reposition these items after the staging was completed. The tenants were put to the stress and inconvenience of having to replace their belongings and furnishings back to where they were before the staging. The tenants were also stressed by the staging of their bedrooms, when they had been under a reasonable belief the partial staging, they agreed to would be of shared areas only.
There was no evidence that the landlord had passed on the tenants contact details with the consent of knowledge of at least one tenant. There was some evidence that there was some miscommunication between the parties that led to one or the other tenant’s being under the mistaken belief that consent had not been given
I am satisfied that the landlord’s sales and marketing processes has led to a significant disruption of the tenants privacy and quiet enjoyment of the property. While this disruption to their lives has not been intentional, it has caused the tenants to suffer a loss of amenity of the premise they are paying rent to enjoy without interference and disruption by the landlord. It has also caused the tenants significant stress and inconvenience, which is still ongoing and will continue until the house is sold or withdrawn from the market.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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 do not find that the landlord’s breach of the tenants’ privacy and quiet enjoyment has been intentional. It has been a by-product of the sales and marketing process that he had been forced to engage in due to pressure for his Bank.
However, I find that the landlord has breached the tenants’ privacy and quiet enjoyment and as a result they have suffered significant loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience the for a period of 24 weeks and 6 days, from 9 November 2024 to 2 May 2025. I award the tenants compensation of $80.00 per week for this loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience suffered. This is a total rent rebate of $1988.57 ($80 x 24 weeks= $1,920.00 plus $80.00 divided by 7 and multiplied by 6= $68.57).
The landlord must also give the tenants a rent reduction of $80.00 per week from 3 May 2025 to the date all the sales and marketing related processes have come to an end to compensate them for the continuing loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience they are suffering. Reimbursement of filing fees
Because both the tenants’ and the landlord have substantially succeeded with their claims, I have reimbursed both parties filing fees.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212931 — Tenancy dispute at 46 Chequers Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5212931 — Tenancy dispute at 46 Chequers Avenue, Glenfield, Auckland 0629

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

TENANTS CLAIMS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

LANDLORDS CLAIMS

TENANTS CLAIMS

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions