What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5276239 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 5276239?

Compensation: $370.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5276239?

The primary dispute was State of repair.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5276239?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12702259-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5276239 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 5276239?

Compensation: $370.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5276239?

The primary dispute was State of repair.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5276239?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12702259-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 1311, 72 Nelson Street, Auckland Central, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5276239 — State of repair

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5276239 — net $398.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for failure to maintain	$370.00	Compensation for failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$398.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$398.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Tbt Property Management Limited as agent for Divya Ahuja must pay [The tenant/s] $398.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Only the tenant attended the hearing. He appeared with a support person.
There was no appearance by the landlord. I delayed the start of the hearing by 15 minutes in case the landlord was running late.
I am satisfied that the landlord has been served with the tenant’s application in accordance with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and has been notified of the hearing, and so the hearing commenced at 9.45am in the landlord’s absence.
This tenancy of a Central Auckland apartment began on 9 December 2024 and was for a fixed term of one year.
The tenant filed a claim in the Tribunal seeking a reduction of the fixed term and compensation for the landlord’s failure to maintain.
At the hearing the tenant advised that the tenancy had ended on 7 November 2025.
As the tenancy has now ended the only matter for determination today is the tenant’s application for compensation.

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Section 45(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that a landlord must provide and maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair.
It is expected that all properties will require ongoing maintenance and that from time-to-time repairs will be required. Landlords are only in breach of their obligations if they have notice of a maintenance or repair issue and fail to take appropriate steps in a reasonable time frame.
The tenant explained that that when the tenancy started the dishwasher did not work and there were multiple leaves missing from the vertical blinds. Then as time went on the shower door started to leak.
The tenant said that he raised the dishwasher and blinds with the property manager in person at an inspection that took place on 6 March 2025. The property manager then sent an email the same day stating that he had forwarded the requests for the dishwasher and blinds to the owner and was awaiting a response.
The tenant responded on 11 March 2025 advising that the shower door was also in poor condition, didn’t stay closed properly and that water would flow outside the shower cubicle when showering. The property manager then responded on 13 March 2025 against stating that he had forwarded the request to the owners.
When nothing happened the tenant followed up with an email on 21 April 2025 stating that the following issues remained unresolved:
The landlord responded on 28 April 2025 assuring the tenant that their concerns were being taken seriously and that they were working to address the issues. They noted as follows:
The landlord arranged for a tradesperson to attend the same day (28 April 2025) to repair the shower door.
The tenant then wrote to the landlord again on 2 May 2025 asking when the other issues would be attended to.
The landlord responded on 5 May 2025 stating that the dishwasher had been ordered and was expected to arrive within 7 – 10 business days. The tenant advised that the new dishwasher was installed on 14 May 2025.
The landlord’s response made no mention of the blinds but the tenant advised that they were repaired/replaced on 21 September 2025.
On the basis of the evidence above I find that: a. The tenant advised the landlord that the dishwasher was not working on 6 March 2025. A new dishwasher was installed on 14 May 2025. b. The tenant advised the landlord that the shower was leaking on 11 March 2025. The shower was repaired on 28 April 2025. c. The tenant advised the landlord that the blinds were broken on 6 March 2025. The blinds were repaired/replaced on 21 September 2025.
In my view the maintenance/repairs all took longer than they should have. The tenant was without a dishwasher for over two months from the date that he advised the landlord. The shower was clearly a quick repair but it took nearly six weeks for the landlord to arrange despite being a potential slipping hazard. The blinds were not prioritised and took over six months.
The landlord has an obligation to maintain the property regardless of the owner’s ability or willingness to pay for repairs.
The tenant was paying $370 per week for this property. There has been a loss of amenity as the shower, dishwasher and blinds were not fixed in a timely manner.
Taking into account the overall amenity value of the property and the inconvenience that these issues caused the tenant I consider an appropriate award of compensation to be one weeks’ rent. Filing fee and name suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant is also entitled to an order for name suppression pursuant to section 95A RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5276239 — net $398.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for failure to maintain	$370.00	Compensation for failure to maintain
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$398.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$398.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant’s name and identifying details.
Tbt Property Management Limited as agent for Divya Ahuja must pay [The tenant/s] $398.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Only the tenant attended the hearing. He appeared with a support person.
There was no appearance by the landlord. I delayed the start of the hearing by 15 minutes in case the landlord was running late.
I am satisfied that the landlord has been served with the tenant’s application in accordance with the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 and has been notified of the hearing, and so the hearing commenced at 9.45am in the landlord’s absence.
This tenancy of a Central Auckland apartment began on 9 December 2024 and was for a fixed term of one year.
The tenant filed a claim in the Tribunal seeking a reduction of the fixed term and compensation for the landlord’s failure to maintain.
At the hearing the tenant advised that the tenancy had ended on 7 November 2025.
As the tenancy has now ended the only matter for determination today is the tenant’s application for compensation.

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Section 45(1)(a) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that a landlord must provide and maintain the property in a reasonable state of repair.
It is expected that all properties will require ongoing maintenance and that from time-to-time repairs will be required. Landlords are only in breach of their obligations if they have notice of a maintenance or repair issue and fail to take appropriate steps in a reasonable time frame.
The tenant explained that that when the tenancy started the dishwasher did not work and there were multiple leaves missing from the vertical blinds. Then as time went on the shower door started to leak.
The tenant said that he raised the dishwasher and blinds with the property manager in person at an inspection that took place on 6 March 2025. The property manager then sent an email the same day stating that he had forwarded the requests for the dishwasher and blinds to the owner and was awaiting a response.
The tenant responded on 11 March 2025 advising that the shower door was also in poor condition, didn’t stay closed properly and that water would flow outside the shower cubicle when showering. The property manager then responded on 13 March 2025 against stating that he had forwarded the request to the owners.
When nothing happened the tenant followed up with an email on 21 April 2025 stating that the following issues remained unresolved:
The landlord responded on 28 April 2025 assuring the tenant that their concerns were being taken seriously and that they were working to address the issues. They noted as follows:
The landlord arranged for a tradesperson to attend the same day (28 April 2025) to repair the shower door.
The tenant then wrote to the landlord again on 2 May 2025 asking when the other issues would be attended to.
The landlord responded on 5 May 2025 stating that the dishwasher had been ordered and was expected to arrive within 7 – 10 business days. The tenant advised that the new dishwasher was installed on 14 May 2025.
The landlord’s response made no mention of the blinds but the tenant advised that they were repaired/replaced on 21 September 2025.
On the basis of the evidence above I find that: a. The tenant advised the landlord that the dishwasher was not working on 6 March 2025. A new dishwasher was installed on 14 May 2025. b. The tenant advised the landlord that the shower was leaking on 11 March 2025. The shower was repaired on 28 April 2025. c. The tenant advised the landlord that the blinds were broken on 6 March 2025. The blinds were repaired/replaced on 21 September 2025.
In my view the maintenance/repairs all took longer than they should have. The tenant was without a dishwasher for over two months from the date that he advised the landlord. The shower was clearly a quick repair but it took nearly six weeks for the landlord to arrange despite being a potential slipping hazard. The blinds were not prioritised and took over six months.
The landlord has an obligation to maintain the property regardless of the owner’s ability or willingness to pay for repairs.
The tenant was paying $370 per week for this property. There has been a loss of amenity as the shower, dishwasher and blinds were not fixed in a timely manner.
Taking into account the overall amenity value of the property and the inconvenience that these issues caused the tenant I consider an appropriate award of compensation to be one weeks’ rent. Filing fee and name suppression
Because [The applicant/s] has substantially succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant is also entitled to an order for name suppression pursuant to section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5276239 — State of repair at Unit/Flat Flat 1311, 72 Nelson Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5276239 — State of repair at Unit/Flat Flat 1311, 72 Nelson Street, Auckland Central,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to maintain the property?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions