What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5255942 about?

The tribunal order states: Lemuge Chi and Yongga A have applied for suppression of their names and

How much money was awarded in case 5255942?

Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5255942?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5255942?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12788835-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5255942 about?

The tribunal order states: Lemuge Chi and Yongga A have applied for suppression of their names and

How much money was awarded in case 5255942?

Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5255942?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5255942?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12788835-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 3, 15 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay, Auckland 1071 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5255942 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5255942 — net $1,277.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages s 48 RTA	$500.00	Exemplary damages s 48 RTA
Exemplary damages s38 RTA	$750.00	Exemplary damages s38 RTA
Net award	$1,277.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,277.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5255942 — net $1,277.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages s 48 RTA	$500.00	Exemplary damages s 48 RTA
Exemplary damages s38 RTA	$750.00	Exemplary damages s38 RTA
Net award	$1,277.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,277.00

Order

Lemuge Chi and Yongga A have applied for suppression of their names and identifying details. As they have been successful, I am granting suppression of their names and details.
Wei Chen is to pay Lemuge Chi and Yongga A the sum of $1277.00 immediately for reimbursement of the filing fee and exemplary damages as calculated and set out below: DescriptionTenant Filing fee reimbursement $27.00 Exemplary damages s 48 RTA $500.00 Exemplary damages s38 RTA $750.00 Total award $1277.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $1277.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
This is a tenant’s application, and they claim the following: -That the landlord failed to maintain the property. -That the landlord breached the tenant’s privacy and harassed them. -That there was no tenancy agreement in writing. -The tenants seek compensation for the “unfair” payment to end the tenancy early. -The tenant claim that they were required to pay all water bills including the fixed wastewater component. -That the landlord unlawful entered the property to do repairs without providing notice.
This was a tenancy that commenced on 29 September 2024 and was a fixed 12- month tenancy. The landlord provided a “flat sharing agreement” for the tenants to sign at the start of the tenancy.
The tenants were new residents of New Zealand and were not familiar with tenancy laws and obligations.
The primary issue for this hearing is whether this was a residential tenancy or a flat sharing agreement.

A residential tenancy is defined under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”) as follows: A) A tenancy means the right to occupy the premises in consideration for rent. B) A residential premises means any premises used or intended for occupation by any person as a place of residence. C) A tenancy agreement means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any person a tenancy of the premises.
In summary a residential tenancy is an arrangement where a landlord grants a tenant the right to occupy a residential premises in exchange for rent under an agreement (written or verbal) that is covered by the RTA, unless specially excluded. 1
A flat sharing agreement is not specially defined in the RTA. A flat sharing is an agreement where a person rents a room or part of a premises from a landlord who also lives there. If the landlord or their family continues to use the premises as their main residence, the RTA generally does not apply, and the agreement is not considered a residential tenancy under the RTA.

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction in this matter?

1 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 s2

The Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) is an act that sets out the rights and obligations of landlords and tenants of residential properties.

What is a landlord and tenant under s2 the RTA?

A Landlord, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, means the grantor of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement; and, where appropriate, includes a) a prospective landlord; and b) a former landlord; and c) a lawful successor in title of a landlord to the premises; and d) the personal representative of a deceased landlord; and e) an agent of a landlord
A Tenant, in relation to any residential premises that are the subject of a tenancy agreement, means the grantee of a tenancy of the premises under the agreement; and where appropriate, includes a) A prospective tenant, and b) A former tenant; and c) A lawful successor in title of a tenant to the premises; and d) The personal representative of a deceased tenant; and e) An agent of a tenant

What is a tenancy?

A tenancy in relation to any residential premises, means the right to occupy the premises (whether exclusively or otherwise) in consideration for rent; and includes any tenancy of residential premises implied or created by any enactment; and, where appropriate, also included a former tenancy.
Tenancy agreement, in relation to any residential premises, means any express or implied agreement under which any person, for rent, grants or agrees to grant to any person a tenancy of the premises; and where appropriate, included a former tenancy agreement and any variation of a tenancy agreement. Jurisdiction
The landlord says that the RTA does not apply as the tenants were “flatmates” and rely on the following evidence to support his view: -The landlord provided the tenants with a flat sharing agreement, which the tenants signed at the start of the tenancy. -Each party had their own exclusive use of their bedroom and shared living room, kitchen, bathroom and balcony. -All the service accounts were in the landlord’s name. -The neighbour provided a letter confirming that the landlord lived at the premises with the other tenants.
The tenants say they were tenants and not a flatmate and relies on the following evidence to support their view: -The house only has two bedrooms, and they have themselves and their child to accommodate. -The tenants paid rent and a bond to the landlord. -The tenants paid the market rent for a whole property and not a shared of the market rental. -The tenants paid all the bills for power, gas, water and broadband. -WeChat logs provided proof that the landlord did not live with them. -Emails provided to the Tribunal prior to the start of the tenancy confirm that the landlord asked the tenants if they were looking to flat share or rent the whole house. The reply from the tenants was that they required the whole house. -At the start of the tenancy there was only one queen sized bed in the house, which they used until they had purchased another bed.
I find this was a tenancy and not a flat mate arrangement. I find the RTA applies to this tenancy and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear this matter. 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 party bringing the claim (the applicant), establish their claims “on the balance of probabilities.” The balance of probabilities means more likely than unlikely, 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.
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.
In summary, I do not need to be completely certain, but I need to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding any 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. If any claim is not established to the balance of probability, it must be dismissed.
The Tribunal has reviewed and considered all evidence, though not all is specifically referenced in this decision. General legal principles in relation to the award of compensation or exemplary Damages
The Tribunal can award compensation where a party has been in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) or has been in breach of the tenancy agreement, and the other party has suffered a loss because of that breach. Awards of compensation in the Tribunal are generally modest. When awarding compensation, the accepted principle is that the injured party should be put in the same position as they would have been but for the breach, since there is liability for losses flowing from the breach. Factors such as the loss of amenity, stress and inconvenience suffered by the party that has proven the breach are considered when deciding the quantum of any compensation awarded.
Exemplary damages can also be awarded for breaches listed in Schedule 1A of the RTA, provided the Tribunal is satisfied that the breach was intentional.
Exemplary damages are a penalty designed to deter parties from intentionally engaging in the kind of behavioural conduct provided for in Schedule 1A of the RTA. Failure to maintain
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Under section 45, a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.
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 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant says the landlord has breached his obligations under the RTA in the following ways: -The roof leaked. -The was a gap under the front door, causing a draft. -There was a gap in the garage door leading to potential rodents coming in. -The rear stairs had no handrail.
The tenants have provided photos of the gap under the front door and garage door, the roof and stairs at rear of property.
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1) (bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). [The tenant/s] considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS draught stopping standard.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy: or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The draught stopping standard requires that residential premises be free from unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise.
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).
In this case I have determined that the property did have gaps under the garage and front doors. The tenant mentioned in casual emails and chat messages that there was a gap in the door and issues with the roof. The landlord did try to fix the door repairs but there was very little evidence from either party regarding repairs and requests for repairs to the property.
I cannot determine whether there was a failure to maintain the property as there is very little evidence either way.
For a landlord to be held in breach of a failure to maintain there must be proof of the landlord being properly advised and taking no steps to remedy the repairs.
I am not satisfied that the tenant has proven their claims that the landlord failed to maintain the property.
Similarly, the tenants complain of the landlord carrying out painting on the interior and exterior of the property after the tenancy began. Their complaint is the work created harmful odours and breached their quiet enjoyment.
There has been no evidence provided to the Tribunal to support these claims and I dismiss them. Unlawful entry by the landlord
[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 tenants complain that the landlord turned up without the required 24 hours’ notice to do the interior and exterior painting and repair work on the doors and windows during the tenancy.
It was clear that the landlord was not living at the property during the time this maintenance and repairs were being carried out. Therefore, he should have known that he was required to notify the tenants when he was coming to the property to do work.
I find the landlord has 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.
The tenant should have the right to be advised of when a landlord is coming to the property and carrying out work. This is the tenant’s home, and the landlord should be aware of their obligations to give appropriate notice to a tenant when they need to enter the property.
I consider that an award of $500.00 in exemplary damages is appropriate for the landlord breach of his obligations under the RTA.

Harassment/ breach of privacy?

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has harassed them.
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.
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 stated that the landlord has installed CCTV in the kitchen ceiling without any signage or consent. The tenants also claim the landlord has used intimidating tactics and threats of reports to the NZ Immigration Service. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
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.
The tenants say the surveillance of them in their home was very distressing and a gross breach of their privacy. Threats of contacting the immigration service were deliberate and designed to cause fear and concern to the tenants as new residents to New Zealand.
Actions such as these interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort and privacy of the tenants.
I consider it is appropriate that the tenants be awarded exemplary damages of $750.00 for the landlord’s breach of his obligations towards the tenants under the RTA.
It is outside my jurisdiction to require the landlord to make a formal apology to the tenants.

Failure to provide a tenancy agreement?

[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not ensured the tenancy agreement is in writing and/or did not sign the tenancy agreement and provide a copy to the tenant.
A landlord must ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. See section 13 Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord claims to have been relying on the flat sharing agreement and provided this at the start of the tenancy.
While there is no dispute that there was no tenancy agreement, I must find once I have determined this was a tenancy, that the landlord has committed an unlawful act. 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 has committed this breach intentionally and I say this because of the flat sharing agreement which he provided. Therefore, I am not considering exemplary damages for breaching the RTA and not providing a written tenancy agreement. Failure to lodge the Bond:
[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 did not lodge the bond with the bond centre. 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 not considering where to impose exemplary damage for the landlord’s failure to lodge the bond. The reason for this decision is the landlord’s stated belief that this was a flat sharing agreement and outside the jurisdiction of the RTA. Refund of the early termination fee paid:
This was a fixed term tenancy. There are specific rules and provisions that apply to the termination of a fixed term tenancy. The tenants did not apply to the Tribunal to reduce the fixed term. The landlord has consented to the reduction of the fixed term on the agreement that he receive compensation for the early termination of the fixed term tenancy. The parties agreed to the refund of the bond to the landlord and an additional payment of $2000.00. I do not intend to infer with the arrangement that the parties reached to end the tenancy.
It is normal practice that the landlord would seek and receive compensation for the early termination. Other claims:
The tenants seek to claim a refund of damages they were charged for the glass, fridge and cleaning, fixed wastewater fees and paying excessive water bills.
The tenants claimed the unlawful termination of the Broadband supplied to the property. Again, the tenants have not provided any proof on the landlords’ obligation to provide broadband.
The tenants have not provided any evidence to support these claims and so I must dismiss them for lack of proof. Filing fee and Suppression:
Because the tenants have been partially successful, I am reimbursing their filing fee.
The tenants have also sought suppression of their name and details. I am granting suppression as they have been partially successful with their claims.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5255942 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 3, 15 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay, Auckland 1071

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5255942 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 3, 15 Nihill Crescent, Mission Bay, Auckland 1071

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction in this matter?

What is a landlord and tenant under s2 the RTA?

What is a tenancy?

Harassment/ breach of privacy?

Failure to provide a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction in this matter?

What is a landlord and tenant under s2 the RTA?

What is a tenancy?

Harassment/ breach of privacy?

Failure to provide a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is a residential tenancy and a flat sharing arrangement?

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction in this matter?

What is a landlord and tenant under s2 the RTA?

What is a tenancy?

Harassment/ breach of privacy?

Failure to provide a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What is a residential tenancy and a flat sharing arrangement?

Does the Tenancy Tribunal have jurisdiction in this matter?

What is a landlord and tenant under s2 the RTA?

What is a tenancy?

Harassment/ breach of privacy?

Failure to provide a tenancy agreement?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions