What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5277579 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5277579?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5277579?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5277579?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12327149-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5277579 about?

The tribunal order states: The application is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5277579?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5277579?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5277579?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12327149-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

64A Grant Road, Opotiki, Opotiki 3122 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5277579 — Mould & damp

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing by phone.
The landlord was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered.
The tenant was assisted with a mandarin interpreter.

SERVICE

The landlord was served with the notice of hearing and application form to the tenancy address to which this dispute relates. The tenant said he understood the landlord rented the premises out herself and then sub-tenanted the property. The tenant said the landlord did not live at the property herself. The tenant only communicated with the landlord by Facebook Messenger, therefore he did not have an email address to provide for service of the application and notice of hearing.
The notice and application appear not to have been served in accordance with the RTA, in that it has not been given to her personally or to an address for service (physical or email) the landlord has provided. The landlord did not provide a tenancy agreement to the tenant which would have included this information.
In the circumstances I consider all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the landlord and pursuant to section 91B of the RTA I direct that the notice of hearing and application be treated as served on the landlord following the documents being posted to the tenancy address.
The landlord has responsibility for the tenancy address as the tenant said she was arranging subtenancies in relation to the property, and I consider documents sent to her at that address are likely to have brought the notice of hearing to her attention. The landlord’s right to a rehearing is available to her if she did not get notice of the tenant’s claim.

HEALTHY HOME STANDARDS

The tenant has applied for compensation in relation to an alleged breach of the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS)
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: a. 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. b. 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. c. 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.”
The RTA requires compliance with the HHS. 1 The HHS provides for a minimum set of requirements for residential tenancies as it relates to heating, insulation, ventilation, draught stopping, and moisture ingress and drainage. Compliance 1 See Section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: All private rentals must comply within 90 days of any new or renewed tenancy after 1 July 2021, with all private rentals complying by 1 July 2025.
The tenant’s evidence: a. The tenant said it was agreed through social media messaging with the landlord that he could stay at the premises and would be given work in the area though the landlord. b. There is no indication that this was intended to be a temporary or transitional arrangement. On arrival to the property the tenant discovered that the landlord did not have any work for the tenant. c. The landlord did not live at the property but arranged for other occupants to live in the premises, many of whom were staying short term. d. The tenant said he stayed in the property for one week and had to sleep in the garage with another person but had full use of the shared areas of the house. e. The tenant said the garage was cold and while there was a heat pump, he was not given the remote. f. The tenant said the property did not meet the HHS in relation to heating and insulation. The tenant said there was a heat pump inside the house. The tenant provided one photograph of the garage, where he slept, in support of the claim.
I consider the tenant has not provided sufficient evidence in support of a breach of the HHS standards in relation to heating and insulation and for this reason the claim must be dismissed.

SUPPRESSION

The tenant sought suppression however as the application has been unsuccessful, I decline to grant name suppression. 2

Order

The application is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing by phone.
The landlord was telephoned on the phone number provided but the phone call went unanswered.
The tenant was assisted with a mandarin interpreter.

SERVICE

The landlord was served with the notice of hearing and application form to the tenancy address to which this dispute relates. The tenant said he understood the landlord rented the premises out herself and then sub-tenanted the property. The tenant said the landlord did not live at the property herself. The tenant only communicated with the landlord by Facebook Messenger, therefore he did not have an email address to provide for service of the application and notice of hearing.
The notice and application appear not to have been served in accordance with the RTA, in that it has not been given to her personally or to an address for service (physical or email) the landlord has provided. The landlord did not provide a tenancy agreement to the tenant which would have included this information.
In the circumstances I consider all reasonable efforts have been made to serve the landlord and pursuant to section 91B of the RTA I direct that the notice of hearing and application be treated as served on the landlord following the documents being posted to the tenancy address.
The landlord has responsibility for the tenancy address as the tenant said she was arranging subtenancies in relation to the property, and I consider documents sent to her at that address are likely to have brought the notice of hearing to her attention. The landlord’s right to a rehearing is available to her if she did not get notice of the tenant’s claim.

HEALTHY HOME STANDARDS

The tenant has applied for compensation in relation to an alleged breach of the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS)
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: a. 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. b. 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. c. 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.”
The RTA requires compliance with the HHS. 1 The HHS provides for a minimum set of requirements for residential tenancies as it relates to heating, insulation, ventilation, draught stopping, and moisture ingress and drainage. Compliance 1 See Section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: All private rentals must comply within 90 days of any new or renewed tenancy after 1 July 2021, with all private rentals complying by 1 July 2025.
The tenant’s evidence: a. The tenant said it was agreed through social media messaging with the landlord that he could stay at the premises and would be given work in the area though the landlord. b. There is no indication that this was intended to be a temporary or transitional arrangement. On arrival to the property the tenant discovered that the landlord did not have any work for the tenant. c. The landlord did not live at the property but arranged for other occupants to live in the premises, many of whom were staying short term. d. The tenant said he stayed in the property for one week and had to sleep in the garage with another person but had full use of the shared areas of the house. e. The tenant said the garage was cold and while there was a heat pump, he was not given the remote. f. The tenant said the property did not meet the HHS in relation to heating and insulation. The tenant said there was a heat pump inside the house. The tenant provided one photograph of the garage, where he slept, in support of the claim.
I consider the tenant has not provided sufficient evidence in support of a breach of the HHS standards in relation to heating and insulation and for this reason the claim must be dismissed.

SUPPRESSION

The tenant sought suppression however as the application has been unsuccessful, I decline to grant name suppression. 2

Tenancy Tribunal case 5277579 — Mould & damp at 64A Grant Road, Opotiki, Opotiki 3122

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5277579 — Mould & damp at 64A Grant Road, Opotiki, Opotiki 3122

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

SERVICE

HEALTHY HOME STANDARDS

SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

SERVICE

HEALTHY HOME STANDARDS

SUPPRESSION

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.