What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5268081 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 5268081?

Property Damage: $780.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5268081?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5268081?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12184658-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5268081 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 5268081?

Property Damage: $780.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5268081?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5268081?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12184658-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat 6/D, 246 Saint George Street, Papatoetoe, 2025, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5268081 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5268081 — net $807.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Section 45	$780.00	Section 45
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$807.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$807.00

Both parties attended the hearing.

The tenant applied for refund of her bond and exemplary damages in relation to the premises not being clean at the beginning of the tenancy, for breach of quiet enjoyment and in relation to her car being towed.

The tenancy commenced on 30 April 2025 and was for a fixed term due to end on 30 April 2026.

When the tenant obtained the keys to move in, she noticed that the premises were not reasonably clean. She took photographs and sent these to the landlord.

Because of the condition of the premises the tenant gave “notice” to end the tenancy and moved out on 21 May 2025. The tenant returned to Whangarei where she has her home.

The landlord arranged for the premises to be cleaned and has produced an invoice for a basic studio clean.

Under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness.

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 landlord has failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. 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.

The tenant has produced photographs showing a large stain in one corner of the room, various carpet stains including significant staining under the fridge, food marks on one wall and a brown mark and toilet paper on the bathroom floor.

Just before the tenant moved out the landlord agreed to accept the tenant’s notice to end the tenancy and the bond was refunded to the tenant. As the tenant has her full bond it is not necessary to consider that claim which is withdrawn.

At the hearing the landlord confirmed that the tenancy before this tenancy lasted from October 2023 and 9 April 2025. The carpet was not cleaned at the end of that tenancy. The carpet was last cleaned in June 2023.

On the evidence I accept that the premises were not reasonably clean at the beginning of the tenancy. The tenant’s main complaint was the carpet stain in the corner of the room which she claims was urine. It is a large stain and if it is urine it would smell.

The landlord was aware that the carpet was not cleaned and the ingoing inspection report shows stains on the carpet (although the worst stain is obscured in the photographs).

The landlord’s breach has had a significant impact on the tenant who had planned to be in Auckland for work and medical treatment.

On the evidence I consider that an award of exemplary damages equivalent to two weeks rent ($780.00) is reasonable.

For the tenant’s claim in relation to the car parking and her car being towed away, there is insufficient evidence that the landlord was at fault. I note that the tenancy agreement signed by the tenant specifically states at clause 51 that there is no off-street parking with this tenancy.

The tenant’s claim in respect of the parking is dismissed.

The tenant claimed exemplary damages for breach of quiet enjoyment in relation to communication issues with the Property Manager. There is insufficient evidence to establish that there was a breach and therefore no exemplary damages are awarded.

Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason the tenant’s name is suppressed as sought.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5268081 — net $807.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Section 45	$780.00	Section 45
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$807.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$807.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Wolfbrook Property Management Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $807.00 immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant applied for refund of her bond and exemplary damages in relation to the premises not being clean at the beginning of the tenancy, for breach of quiet enjoyment and in relation to her car being towed.
The tenancy commenced on 30 April 2025 and was for a fixed term due to end on 30 April 2026.
When the tenant obtained the keys to move in, she noticed that the premises were not reasonably clean. She took photographs and sent these to the landlord.
Because of the condition of the premises the tenant gave “notice” to end the tenancy and moved out on 21 May 2025. The tenant returned to Whangarei where she has her home.
The landlord arranged for the premises to be cleaned and has produced an invoice for a basic studio clean.
Under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness.
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 landlord has failed to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness. 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.
The tenant has produced photographs showing a large stain in one corner of the room, various carpet stains including significant staining under the fridge, food marks on one wall and a brown mark and toilet paper on the bathroom floor.
Just before the tenant moved out the landlord agreed to accept the tenant’s notice to end the tenancy and the bond was refunded to the tenant. As the tenant has her full bond it is not necessary to consider that claim which is withdrawn.
At the hearing the landlord confirmed that the tenancy before this tenancy lasted from October 2023 and 9 April 2025. The carpet was not cleaned at the end of that tenancy. The carpet was last cleaned in June 2023.
On the evidence I accept that the premises were not reasonably clean at the beginning of the tenancy. The tenant’s main complaint was the carpet stain in the corner of the room which she claims was urine. It is a large stain and if it is urine it would smell.
The landlord was aware that the carpet was not cleaned and the ingoing inspection report shows stains on the carpet (although the worst stain is obscured in the photographs).
The landlord’s breach has had a significant impact on the tenant who had planned to be in Auckland for work and medical treatment.
On the evidence I consider that an award of exemplary damages equivalent to two weeks rent ($780.00) is reasonable.
For the tenant’s claim in relation to the car parking and her car being towed away, there is insufficient evidence that the landlord was at fault. I note that the tenancy agreement signed by the tenant specifically states at clause 51 that there is no off-street parking with this tenancy.
The tenant’s claim in respect of the parking is dismissed.
The tenant claimed exemplary damages for breach of quiet enjoyment in relation to communication issues with the Property Manager. There is insufficient evidence to establish that there was a breach and therefore no exemplary damages are awarded.
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee. For the same reason the tenant’s name is suppressed as sought.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5268081 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 6/D, 246 Saint George Street, Papatoetoe, 2025,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5268081 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 6/D, 246 Saint George Street, Papatoetoe, 2025,

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