What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5279529 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 5279529?

Compensation: HHS Information: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Smoke Alarms: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5279529?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5279529?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12905788-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5279529 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 5279529?

Compensation: HHS Information: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $3,000.00 awarded to tenant; Smoke Alarms: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5279529?

The primary dispute was Property damage. Related themes: Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5279529?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12905788-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5279529 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5279529 — net $5,277.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: repairs/maintenance	$3,000.00	repairs/maintenance
Compensation: HHS information	$250.00	HHS information
Exemplary damages: HHS, smoke alarms	$2,000.00	HHS, smoke alarms
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,277.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$5,277.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5279529 — net $5,277.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: repairs/maintenance	$3,000.00	repairs/maintenance
Compensation: HHS information	$250.00	HHS information
Exemplary damages: HHS, smoke alarms	$2,000.00	HHS, smoke alarms
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$5,277.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$5,277.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $100.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
The Rent House Limited, Tej Pal must pay [The tenant/s] $5,277.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.

Reasons

The hearing was attended by both tenants, and Ms Cavanagh and Ms Miller representing Rent House Limited (Rent House). There was no appearance by the owner/landlord, Mr Tej Pal.
This tenancy began on 12 May 2022 and ended on 25 May 2025. The rent is $775.00 per week and a bond of $3,000.00 was paid. The current landlord is Rent House, which took over the property management of the premises from December 2023. Prior to this date, the owner, Mr Pal, managed the tenancy.
The tenants have filed an application seeking the return of their bond and claiming breaches of landlord obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA). Compensation and exemplary damages are sought. Following a case conference, the tenants’ claims were identified as follows:
Bond: since filing the application, the tenants have received most of their bond, with $2,900.00 being returned, and the balance of $100.00 being retained at the Bond Centre.
Water: the tenants dispute the water charges claimed by the landlord, stating there was a water leak. The parties have agreed to work together, in the hope of resolving this issue prior to the hearing.
Repairs and maintenance: the tenants claim the landlord has failed to attend to repairs in a timely way, noting the following issues: • Skylight • Electrical issues • Ensuite bathroom leak • Downstairs room and laundry floor flooding • Cupboard doors • Front door handle
Smoke Alarms: no smoke alarm upstairs, where the bedrooms are located.
Healthy Homes Standards (HHS): a. HHS information b. Ventilation: no extractor fans in the downstairs bathroom and upstairs ensuite bathroom c. Moisture barrier d. Heat pump: not working when they moved in e. Insulation: no underfloor or ceiling insulation until May 2024. f. Draughts: doors, ranch slider.
The tenants have obtained their own HHS report, completed by [Healthy homes assessor 1], dated 14 June 2024.
The landlord’s HHS reports, completed by [Healthy homes assessor 2], are dated 12 December 2023 and 10 July 2024.
Both parties have provided oral, documentary and photographic evidence, together with oral and written submissions. The tenants also provided a detailed timeline of events. General legal principles
In this jurisdiction, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim to the required civil standard of proof, which is on the balance of probabilities. This means they must establish, with evidence, that their claim is “more likely than not.”
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. In general, 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.
Exemplary damages are penalties and can only be awarded for an unlawful act, as set out in various sections of the RTA and as listed in Schedule 1A of the Act. As explained by the Court of Appeal in Auckland City Council v Blundell [1986] NZLR 732, they are different from compensation, and are designed to punish and deter, more like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion. Where one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act, before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 of the RTA. The bond
The parties have reached agreement that the tenants are to receive the balance of their bond of $100.00. This is awarded above. Repairs and Maintenance
There are five main issues arising during the tenancy, which are detailed below. Ensuite bathroom leak and flooding of the downstairs room and laundry floor
This occurred on 3 October 2023. The tenants state they discovered water running down the wall in the downstairs area and they messaged the owner, Mr Pal, immediately. It was later found that the leak came from the ensuite bathroom supply stack. The plumber attended. Due to the nature of the leak, the owner decided to repair the pipes. There were delays in the repairs being completed, and they had to follow up multiple times. The tenants were without use of the ensuite bathroom for four months, with the final repair being completed on 26 January 2024. They state there was another bathroom in the house, this being a three bedroom 2 bathroom property. However, they found it difficult because they had a 7 month old baby.
The tenants state the downstairs room and laundry floor were completely flooded. This meant they had to remove the home gym equipment and store it in one of the other bedrooms. One piece of equipment was too heavy to move. This equipment was purchased new, in January 2023 and was approximately $5000.00. Due to water damage, there was surface rust on it. The tenants consider that, due to water damage, it had lost 10% of its value. There were also gym mats on the floor that had to be thrown out due to the extent of damage. The tenants state that during the repairs, the tradespeople removed all materials from the laundry and stacked it in the downstairs gym room, rendering it unusable.
The tenants consider $500.00 to $600.00 to be reasonable compensation for the damage to the gym equipment. Dehumidifiers were running during this time, but the tenants were compensated by the owner/landlord for the additional power usage.
In response, Rent House states that this issue arose before they managed the property and was claimed through the owner’s insurance. Rent House’s email dated 7 August 2025 explains the work that was undertaken by the owner/landlord. The pipes were found to be faulty and had to be removed. The property then had to be dried out, walls were re-gibbed, plastered and painted. Rent House accepted that the timeframe was too long, and were advised by the owner/landlord that the tenants were helpful during this period, but never raised the issue of a rent reduction. Skylight
The tenants state that on 13 February 2023, the skylight in the ensuite bathroom ripped off the roof during a storm. They immediately notified the owner, who attended the following day, and a tradesperson repaired it. However, the repair was unsatisfactory and remained loose during the tenancy. They had to keep the ensuite bathroom door closed every night to prevent the wind slamming the door shut.
Rent House notes this issue first arose before they managed the premises, and was not raised with them while they were managing the property. Electrical problems
The tenants claim there were significant electrical issues from the start of the tenancy, with the lights flickering and then blowing. One of the tenants received an electric shock from the light switch in the lounge. The owner/landlord was notified on 13 December 2022. He attended, looked at the power board, but did nothing about the light switch. They had to keep a plaster over the light switch so their child would not touch it. The owner/landlord was reminded on 2 April 2023. The tenants then issued a 14 day notice dated 16 June 2024. This was sent to both the owner/landlord and Rent House. This issue was not resolved by the end of the tenancy.
Rent House states they were not aware of this issue, or of it being fixed. Kitchen cupboard doors
The tenants state the pantry doors in the kitchen came off the hinge. They notified the owner/landlord. A handyman (arranged via Rent House) eventually came and looked at it, and advised that a cabinet maker needed to be contacted to replace the pantry door. They stored the door in the downstairs area. This issue was not resolved by the end of the tenancy.
Rent House states they arranged a builder to look at the kitchen pantry doors, and were advised a new door was required. Front door handle
The tenants claim the handle to the front door was not functioning properly, so they were not able to properly secure the front door. They reminded the owner/landlord when he came to the house in March 2025 and notified him in the 14 day notice. A handyman eventually came to repair it on 4 March 2025. In their evidence at the hearing, the tenants state that sometimes, the front door would open by itself. Fortunately, they had a neighbour who alerted them when he noticed that the front door was open.
Rent House states they do not recall the door handle being a problem, and apologise for missing it. Legal framework
The landlord’s obligations are set out under section 45 of the RTA. This includes the requirement that the landlord provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, having regard to the age and character of the premises. 1 The landlord is also required to comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health, and safety.
The extent of the landlord’s obligation to repair was considered in the decision of Barfoot & Thompson v Casey. 2 The Court noted that the obligation of the landlord, under section.45, is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe that is reasonable in the circumstances. Analysis
Having considered the evidence and submissions of both parties, I find that the tenants have established, with sufficient evidence, that the delays in completing the repair work were unreasonable. As a result, they are to be compensated for the inconvenience and loss of amenity resulting from the bathroom leak and flooding, and for the other issues identified.
In terms of the effect of the bathroom leak and flooding, there was a loss of amenity arising from the loss of use of the ensuite bathroom and the spare bedroom where the gym equipment had to be stored. This was a challenging period for the tenants who had a nine month old toddler at the time. There was disruption from the repairs. The tenant’s evidence, which I accept, is that the ensuite was unusable for 16 weeks from the time of the leak on 3 October 2023, to the final repair on 26 January 2024. They are to be compensated on the basis of 10% of the rent ($750.00 per week at the time) for 16 weeks (10% x $750.00 x 16) which totals $1,200.00.
In terms of the loss of use of the second room, I consider a sum of $1,000.00 to be reasonable compensation for the loss of use of this room.
The tenants are to also be compensated for the damage to their gym equipment and I consider $500.00 to be reasonable compensation for the damage from flooding.
Therefore, the total compensation for the impact of the leak and flooding is $2,700.00.
In terms of the effect of the other repair issues, the tenants are to be compensated $300.00. Therefore, the total compensation payable by the landlord to the tenants 1 Section 45(1)(b) 2 CIV-2005-004-001762, 7 November 2007 for all the repair and maintenance issues during this tenancy is $3,000.00. This amount is awarded above. Healthy Homes Standards
There are two main aspects to the tenants’ claims under the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS). One concerns the HHS statement in the tenancy agreement. The tenants claim the HHS information is incorrect. The second relates to failures to comply with the HHS.
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.
In terms of the HHS, the issues are listed below: • Ventilation: no extractor fans in the downstairs bathroom and upstairs ensuite bathroom • Moisture barrier • Heat pump: not working when they moved in • Insulation: no underfloor or ceiling insulation until May 2024. • Draughts: doors, ranch slider.
As noted above, the parties have obtained their own HHS reports, and this evidence is important in the context of the issues to be determined, since the reports were completed following inspections conducted at the premises. Legal framework and analysis: HHS information
The RTA sets out the landlord’s disclosure obligations to tenants regarding the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS). Under s 13A(1CA) of the RTA, landlords must include in the tenancy agreement a signed statement that, on and after the commencement of the tenancy, the landlord will comply with the HHS as required and including the information (if any) prescribed by regulations.
Section 13A(1F) of the RTA provides that a landlord commits an unlawful act if they fail to include a healthy homes statement in the tenancy agreement or if the statement includes anything that the landlord knows to be false or misleading. The Tribunal may award exemplary damages for such failures.
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 s 109(3) RTA).
The tenancy started on 12 May 2022, so the compliance date is 90 days from this date, being 10 August 2022.
In this case, the statements in the tenancy agreement concerning compliance with the HHS are incomplete. The tenants have given evidence about their communication with the owner/landlord regarding this information. The tenants have raised this issue with him and did not receive a satisfactory response. I find the landlord/owner has been in breach of obligations concerning the HHS information.
The evidence regarding intent, at the time the statement was completed, is unclear, since there has been no direct evidence from the owner/landlord. I note the submissions of Rent House that the owner had relied on the previous property management company. However, there is a requirement that the landlord ensure that the information is complete, and in this case, it was not. Therefore, the tenants are to be compensated for the lack of HHS information, in the amount of $250.00. Legal framework: Healthy Homes Standards
The ventilation standard sets out minimum expectations around windows and doors, and in particular, the area of doors and windows that are openable. The standard also requires that each kitchen and bathroom have extractor fans installed with a minimum defined extraction capacity. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard requires that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains. The standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
The heating standard requires landlords to provide one or more ‘qualifying heaters’, with a capacity to heat the room to a required level. The heating standard defines what a qualifying heater would be and confirms that certain types of heaters are unacceptable heaters for the purpose of the HHS. The heating standard requires that heaters in the particular tenancy have a minimum heating capacity. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
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.
The landlord has obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA Residential Tenancies Act 1986 to insulate the premises in accordance with the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
From 1 July 2019, all residential premises must be insulated to a minimum standard. Where the premises were insulated before 1 July 2016, the ceiling insulation must have an R-value of at least 1.9 (or 1.5 for houses of a brick or concrete block construction). The underfloor insulation must have an R-value of at least 0.9. The insulation must be in reasonable condition. Where insulation is installed after 1 July 2016, the minimum R-value for ceiling insulation is 2.9 in Zones 1 and 2, and 3.3 for Zone 3 (Zone 3 covers the South Island and central North Island). The minimum R-value for underfloor insulation is 1.3.
There are exceptions to these requirements, for example, where it is not reasonably practicable, or where there is a habitable space above or below the ceiling or floor that would otherwise have to be insulated.
Between 1 July 2021 and 1 July 2024, Part 2 of the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulation 2016 will cease to apply and are replaced by the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019. The HHS require that the higher standards of R-2.9 and R-3.3 for ceiling insulation, and R-1.9 for underfloor insulation, apply to all rented premises.
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 (1)(A) and Schedule 1A of the RTA.
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 s 109(3) RTA). Analysis: Healthy Homes Standards
The report by [Healthy homes assessor 2] dated December 2023 states that at the time of the assessment, the HHS were met in terms of heating and ventilation. The report states that, in terms of the ventilation requirements, the kitchen rangehood had an extractor fan which was ducted, and the bathroom extractor fans were working and vented outside. It was also found that the heating requirements were met. The report states that there was a qualifying heat pump in the main living room which met the required heating capacity. However, this report also identified that the HHS was not met in terms of the insulation, moisture ingress and drainage and the draught stopping standards.
Therefore, it is clear that the earliest report has identified that the house did not meet the HHS standards by the compliance date. I note the explanation given on behalf of the landlord/owner that he had relied on the insulation certificate issued following an assessment on 25 January 2021. However, while it is acknowledged that the insulation was in place in 2021 and was found to comply, the landlord has an obligation to ensure the HHS standards are met by the compliance date. As noted above, the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019 replaced the earlier regulations that covered the insulation requirements. The HHS require that the higher standards of R-2.9 and R-3.3 for ceiling insulation, and R-1.9 for underfloor insulation, apply to all rented premises.
The report completed by [Healthy homes assessor 1] identified that the HHS was met in terms of heating and ventilation. While the roof drainage and guttering complied, the ground moisture barrier was not compliant. Most areas complied with the draught-stopping standards, except bedroom 3. The underfloor insulation and ceiling insulation were not compliant. The August 2025 email from Rent House explains the steps taken to address the areas found not to comply, noting there was communication with the owner to get him to understand that the house had to be made and kept HHS compliant.
In terms of the findings in the two HHS reports, there is consensus that the heating and ventilation standards were met at the time of assessment, although the tenant’s evidence at the hearing raises questions about whether the heat pump was working properly at the start of the tenancy. The tenants’ evidence regarding the extractor fans in the bathroom suggests that these were installed later. Other work appears to have been done in November 2022 (installation of fans and some draught stopping work). Regardless, it is clear that by the compliance date, the house did not comply with the Healthy Homes Standards.
Following additional work, a further report was completed by [Healthy homes assessor 2] on 10 July 2024. This report found that, at the time of the assessment, the insulation was compliant, with the ceiling insulation and the underfloor insulation meeting the HHS. The assessor was also satisfied that the property met the draught stopping standards. Smoke alarms
Section 45(1)(ba) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 requires that landlords comply with all requirements in relation to smoke alarms made under section 138A. The relevant regulations are the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016, which require landlords to have qualifying smoke alarms installed and operational.
Smoke alarms must be installed in every sleeping space, or within 3 metres of the entrance to the sleeping space, and in each level of a multi-level dwelling. Similar obligations apply to boarding rooms.
All new smoke alarms must: be photoelectric, have a battery life of at least eight years or be hard-wired, be installed according to the manufacturer’s instructions, meet international standards, be in full working order, and have their expiry date displayed. Existing smoke alarms do not need to be replaced if they are in full working order and have not passed their expiry date.
Breaching the obligation in s 45(1)(ba) is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00 (see s 45(1A) and Schedule 1A RTA).
The tenant’s evidence, which I accept, is that there were no smoke alarms upstairs, where the bedrooms were located. They notified the owner/landlord on 23 May 2022. Therefore, the tenancy agreement incorrectly records that there was at least one alarm per storey/level.
The August 2025 email from Rent House has explained that they relied on the tenancy agreement, which incorrectly recorded there were 2 smoke alarms. When informed by the tenants on 17 May 2024, they rectified it immediately. Exemplary damages
In view of the landlord failing to meet obligations under section 45(1A), in terms of the HHS and smoke alarms, the question arises as to whether exemplary damages ought to be awarded. The RTA states that the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally. In considering an award of exemplary damages the Tribunal must be 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. 3
I am satisfied, after considering the criteria set out in section 109 of the RTA, that an award of exemplary damages is appropriate for the landlord/owner’s breach of the HHS and smoke alarm requirements. While there has been no direct evidence from the landlord/owner, I consider there to be sufficient evidence that 3 See section 109(3) of the RTA the landlord/owner was made aware of the obligations. In view of the nature of the breaches, it is just to award exemplary damages in this case. There is a high degree of public interest in ensuring compliance with the smoke alarm requirements, and the HHS.
In determining the amount of exemplary damages, I have taken into account some of the mitigating factors, noting that the landlord/owner did eventually undertake the necessary work, although the delays in completion are considered unacceptable. Regarding the smoke alarm requirements, I note there was one smoke alarm installed at the premises. Taking all these factors into account, I award exemplary damages of $2,000.00 for the landlord’s breach of the HHS and smoke alarm requirements. Filing fee and name suppression
Because the tenants have been substantially successful, the landlord is to pay the tenants’ filing fee.
Both parties seek name suppression. The tenants are entitled to name suppression, as they have been successful. In terms of the landlord’s request, the Tribunal, having had regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, and noting the landlord is the unsuccessful party, declines this request.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5279529 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5279529 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions