What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5281979 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 5281979?

Compensation: $2,850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5281979?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5281979?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12748853-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5281979 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 5281979?

Compensation: $2,850.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $27.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $200.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5281979?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5281979?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12748853-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

8B Duncan Road, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5281979 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5281979 — net $3,077.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation failure to provide kitchen extractor fan and ground moisture barrier	$2,850.00	Compensation failure to provide kitchen extractor fan and ground moisture barrier
Compensation failing to repair heat pump in a timely way	$200.00	Compensation failing to repair heat pump in a timely way
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,077.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,077.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5281979 — net $3,077.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation failure to provide kitchen extractor fan and ground moisture barrier	$2,850.00	Compensation failure to provide kitchen extractor fan and ground moisture barrier
Compensation failing to repair heat pump in a timely way	$200.00	Compensation failing to repair heat pump in a timely way
Filing fee reimbursement	$27.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,077.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,077.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenants’ name and identifying details.
Gabriel Jens And Elizabeth Jens As Trustees For The Gm And Er Jens Family Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $3,077.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The landlords must complete work to ensure the ceiling in the tenancy premises is fully covered by insulation that is in at least reasonable condition (at least 120mm thick, not damp, mouldy or displaced) and that there is a suitable air gap between the insulation and roofing underlay. This work must be completed by 5:00pm on Friday 12 December 2025.

Reasons

Both tenants and GJ and RF for the landlords attended the hearing.
This is the tenants’ application. They say the tenancy premises are very mouldy, and this affects their health and that of their young child. They also say the unit does not comply with all the Healthy Homes Standards. The tenants also allege the landlord gave them notice to terminate the tenancy at least partly in retaliation to them raising their concerns. Previous orders
I made orders on 5 August 2025 to:- a. Set aside a notice of termination because it was retaliatory; b. Declare the landlords had failed to comply with the Healthy Homes Standard for ventilation by not providing a kitchen extractor fan by the due date which was 1 January 2022. c. Declare the landlords had failed to provide all required and accurate Healthy Homes Standards compliance information in the tenancy agreement. d. Require the landlord to provide a written recommendation from a qualified person regarding remedying the mould in the unit; e. Require the landlord to provide certain healthy home standards compliance information.
The landlord has supplied all the additional information required.
This order deals with all remaining issues. Background
The tenancy started on 3 October 2021.
The tenants had their first child in December 2023 and agree that being parents has made them more vigilant about their living environment.
They raised concerns about persistent mould in the house in 2023 and 2024.
The landlord arranged maintenance and repairs, but the tenants feel their concerns were not taken seriously until they made this application on 8 June 2025.
They seek compensation of $8,020.00 in the form of a partial refund of rent and because they say some of their belongings have had to be thrown away because they were damaged by mould.

What are the issues?

The issues to be addressed are:- a. Are the premises unacceptably mouldy or damp? b. Did the landlords fail to comply with any of the Healthy Homes Standards? c. Did the landlords fail to take reasonable steps in a timely way to investigate and remedy the mould and damp? d. If the landlords have breached their obligations, should compensation be awarded and how much?

What is the law that applies?

Landlords and tenants have legal obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). The relevant duties in this case are listed below.
A landlord must:- a. provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair; b. comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (this includes insulation) within 90 days of any new, or renewed, tenancy that commences on a date between 1 July 2021 and 27 August 2022 or within 120 days if the tenancy commences after 27 August 2022, c. comply with all laws relating 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 RTA.
All the above obligations apply even if a tenant knows the state of the premises at the time that the tenancy is entered into; see s45(3) RTA.
A tenant must:- a. Keep premises reasonably clean and reasonably tidy; b. Not intentionally or carelessly damage the premises or use, or permit the premises to be used, for any unlawful purpose; c. Notify the landlord, as soon as possible after discovery, of any damage or of the need for any repairs.
Breaching these obligations may result in compensation being awarded to the landlord. Interference with smoke alarms or using premises for an unlawful purpose are unlawful acts and exemplary damages may be awarded; see s40(3A) RTA.
A tenant does not have the right to incur expenses for repairs unless the problem is likely to cause injury or is otherwise serious and urgent and the landlord has been told of the problem first; s45(1)(d) RTA.
A landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy a problem before being held to be in breach of its duty.
Compensation may be awarded to a non-breaching party to recover expenses or loss, or as a lump sum or reduction of rent where the tenancy agreement or the law has been breached. The Tribunal can recognise non-financial loss such as inconvenience and stress, where appropriate.
Exemplary damages are like a fine or a penalty and can only be awarded for an intentional breach of specified “unlawful acts” (which are listed in Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986). The Tribunal must decide whether it is just to award these after considering the breaching party’s intent, the effect of the act, the interests of the innocent party, and the public interest; see s109(3) RTA.
The tenants did not apply for exemplary damages, so I have not considered these. However, I am satisfied the compensation awarded addresses the substantial merits and justice of the case. 1

Are the premises unacceptably mouldy or damp?

Both the tenants and the landlord supplied evidence about mould and damp in the house.
The tenants’ supplied numerous photos, taken on various dates. a. August – October 2024: show large areas of surface mould on walls and ceiling in the master bedroom, toilet, and second bedroom; moisture droplets on a wall in the master bedroom and on toilet ceiling; mould growth on the back of particle board furniture; dark mould growth all over the surface of two pillows; mould growth on a Bluetooth speaker; a photo showing the roof cavity side of the bathroom ceiling with various marks and possibly surface mould. b. 24 June 2025: these photos show extensive mould growth on bathroom walls and window frames and residual mould staining on an area of ceiling; c. July 2025: photos of the bathroom about one month after it had been repainted, showing dark mould regrowing in small patches on the bottom of walls; distinct drops of water on the newly painted bathroom ceiling. 1 Section 85 RTA requires the Tribunal to decide each dispute according to the general principles of the law and the substantial merits and justice of the case. d. Date unclear: extensive mould staining and mould growth on large areas of wall in the master bedroom and appearing to show growth down gib sections with no mould where interior framing might be; cracked and mouldy surfaces on internal window frames; dark mould growth along bottom edge and into the corner of a wall in a bedroom (below windows).
The landlord’s evidence also confirms mould is present. a. A written report from a handyman (WT) confirms he cleaned the bathroom and bedroom ceilings and walls of mould in September 2024. b. A written report from a builder (RB), in accordance with my work order dated 5 August 2025, confirms dampness in bathroom and mould growth in bedrooms on walls around bedding and on ceilings.
I am satisfied the evidence proves there is an unacceptable level of mould and dampness in the bathroom and master bedroom since the winter of 2024.
There is insufficient evidence to prove this before this date.
The fact that there is unacceptable mould and damp in part of the premises, and has been for at least a year, does not necessarily mean the landlords have failed in their duty to keep the premises reasonably well maintained.
To answer this, I will also consider the Healthy Homes Standards obligations and evidence as to what may have caused the mould and damp. Did the landlords fail to comply with any of the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS)?
The HHS are a set of specific rules about heating in the main living area, ceiling and underfloor insulation, ventilation from windows and bathroom and kitchen extractor fans, draught stopping, an efficient drainage system and a moisture prevention barrier under the house. 2
This tenancy started on 3 October 2021. The HHS compliance date is 90 days after that which is 1 January 2022.
This means the landlords had a legal obligation to comply with all HHS by 1 January 2022 (“the HHS due date”).
The tenants allege the premises are mouldy and damp. The HHS are intended to address insulation, heating, ventilation, and drainage as all these factors help prevent mould and damp. This means all the HHS are relevant in this case.
I assess each of the Healthy Homes Standards below. 2 Contained in the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019. a. Ceiling insulation: glass fibre insulation was installed in December 2018, R- value 3.6 3 , reassessed in August 2025. The ceiling insulation complies with the standard required because the R-value is higher than the R2.9 required. However, insulation must also be and remain in at least “reasonable condition” which is determined by its minimum thickness and the extent of any dampness, damage, degradation or displacement. 4 I discuss this further below. b. Ceiling insulation condition: There is a question as to whether the ceiling insulation is in at least reasonable condition. The RB report says: [my underlining] Roof space: new roofing and underlay installed, with R3.6 Earthwool fibreglass ceiling insulation batts fitted. The insulation is in good condition and generally well fitted, however, the batts near the exterior walls appear to have been disturbed (possibly during roof installation) and sufficient air clearance between the insulation and the roofing underlay has not been maintained. The insulation did not appear to be damp or mouldy, however I was unable to fully inspect near the exterior walls due to low roof clearances. Heavy condensation is present on the underside of the roofing underlay. ......... Recommendations: ... Tidy ceiling insulation, ensuring air gap between insulation and roofing underlay. No photographs were supplied by either party. Neither did RB give oral evidence so I could not ask questions such as what he means when he says insulation may have been disturbed near the exterior walls, and whether the heavy condensation has caused the insulation to become damp. My work order 7c dated 5 August 2025 required the landlord to prove the insulation was in reasonable condition. I have decided to accept RB’s written report as evidence that the insulation is in at least reasonable condition. Noting RB’s observation of heavy condensation, I have made a work order requiring the landlord do the work to ensure ceiling insulation is properly in place, not damp, and there is an air gap. 5 I recommend the landlord monitor the ceiling space on a regular basis to ensure the condensation problem has been resolved. c. Underfloor insulation: ‘Expol’ (expanded polystyrene) insulation installed in December 2018. Verified as a thickness of 60 millimetre which has an 3 Resistance value. Measures resistance to heat loss. 4 Regulations 14(1)(c) and 18 of Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019. 5 It is possible this work has already been done but I am not aware of it. assumed R-value of 1.4. 6 The underfloor insulation complies as has an R- value higher than the 1.3 required. d. Qualifying heater in main living area: a heat pump was installed in the main living area in mid-2020 with a verified capacity of 5.35 kilowatts. The heat pump capacity exceeds the required heating capacity for the premises which is calculated as 2.0 kilowatts. The heater complies. e. Maintenance of heater: The evidence proves the heat pump stopped working on 18 September 2024 and was repaired in March 2025. I find this is a maintenance breach as it took too long to repair. I address compensation in the last section. f. Ventilation: all rooms have the required opening windows or doors. A bathroom extractor fan has been present from the start of the tenancy and is certified as compliant as to exterior ducting and size. A kitchen extractor fan was not installed by the HHS due date. This was installed on 2 July 2025 and certified as compliant as to exterior ducting and size. g. Moisture ingress and drainage: The tenants reported that repairs were needed to gutters in mid-2023 and the landlord reports that a repair was needed to the ground soakage system in April 2025. However, without more detail, there is insufficient evidence for me to make a finding that the guttering or drainage system was not working efficiently. This standard also requires enclosed underfloor spaces to have a ground moisture barrier. The premises did not comply with this requirement by the HHS due date. The moisture barrier was installed on 27 August 2025 and certified on 2 September 2025.
All tenancy agreements must include compliance statements which notify the tenant whether the premises comply with all HHS; s13A RTA. This is important so tenants know what they are getting for the rent they are paying.
I decided in my previous order that the landlords failed to do this. Specifically, the heating section is incorrectly filled in (#2 should say “2.0kW”, and #3 should say “heatpump 5.9kW”); the insulation should be regularly inspected and condition verified, thickness and R-value entered; the ventilation standard incorrectly states that all kitchen and bathroom extractor fans were installed and no measurements were included; the statement incorrectly said that there was no enclosed subfloor so no moisture barrier was needed.
In summary:- a. The ceiling and underfloor insulation are compliant. 6 Tenancy Services, Healthy Homes Standards Insulation, July 2025, ISBN 978-1-991092-48-9, pg 5. b. The ceiling insulation needs remedial work and ongoing monitoring to ensure a condensation problem in the ceiling has been fixed. c. The living room heater was not repaired in a timely way which is a maintenance breach. d. The landlords failed to provide a kitchen extractor fan by the HHS due date: this was installed 3 years and 6 months after the due date. e. The landlords failed to install a ground moisture barrier by the HHS due date: this was installed 3 years and 8 months after the due date. f. The HHS compliance statement was incorrect and misleading.
The landlords have committed an unlawful act by failing to comply with the ventilation and moisture ingress Healthy Homes Standards by the due date.
I consider the impact of this and compensation below. Did the landlords fail to take reasonable steps in a timely way to investigate and remedy the mould and damp?
Both the tenants and landlords have supplied evidence about the maintenance history at the unit.
A brief chronology is: Dec 2018New ceiling glasswool R3.6 and polystyrene underfloor insulation May 2019New double-glazed window in lounge installed Aug 2020Heat pump installed in living room Sep 2021Spouting cleaned, window stays installed Oct 2021Tenants move into the unit Mar 2022Inspection with RF. Landlord has no records from this, but tenants say mould was discussed. June 2023GJ meets with tenants at the unit and views and discusses overflowing gutters and the mould problem. Gutters are cleaned and repaired. Silicone is applied to roof flashings and ridge. Seals are replaced around shower. 18 Sep 2024 Tenants report heat pump not heating, leak under kitchen sink and shower door seals, and mould in bathroom and bedrooms is worse since mid-2023. 21 Sep 2024 Handyman work to fix leak under kitchen sink and bathroom tap, replace shower door seals, clean and sanitise mould on ceilings and walls. Dec 2024Roof of premises and downpipe/s replaced. 3 Mar 2025Handyman work to replace shower seals and install correct tap in bathroom, other minor repairs, check bathroom fan. Notes mould has returned. Mar 2025Heat pump repaired. Apr 2025Repairs done to soakage drainage system. May 2025Exterior of premises painted including window frames. Tenants ask if they can paint inside 8 June 2025 Tenants apply to Tenancy Tribunal end June 25 Bathroom repainted 2 July 2025Kitchen extractor fan installed; check done for ground moisture barrier. 4 Aug 2025Tenancy Tribunal hearing 27 Aug 2025 Ground moisture barrier installed.
The tenants’ evidence of communication between themselves and the landlord supports their submission that they raised concerns about mould from mid- 2023. They say they mentioned it earlier, but it was not as serious then.
The landlords’ evidence from tradespeople shows that he did respond to these concerns. He has had significant work done including mould treatment and repainting (2023 and 2024), repairing and replacing gutters, repairing and then replacing the roof, and repairing the soakage system.
Ceiling and underfloor insulation and the living room heat pump and double- glazed window were all in place from before this tenancy starting.
The severe condensation issue discovered by RB in the roof space where insufficient clearance has been left between insulation and the roof edges is not something the landlord can be blamed for. It was not known about until the assessment in August 2025.
RB suggests this may have happened when the roof was replaced. However, this is unknown. Also unknown, is the condition of the roof prior to this or whether there was condensation at that time. If this is a new problem, it does not explain mould present in the house in the winter of 2023 and 2024.
RB’s report is useful. The inspection was on 7 August 2025 and identifies some possible causes of damp and mould in the house, as below:- [My underlining.] a. “ ... the ground surface under the unit is very damp”; b. “Living room: the aluminium window joinery was dirty and showing mould growth. The glass had a heavy grey tinting film installed over it, and the curtains were drawn closed.” c. “Bathroom: ... Dampness was showing on ceiling and walls, potentially caused by dampness in roofspace as discussed below.” d. “Bedrooms: both bedrooms were cluttered, with beds located hard to both exterior walls and floor, restring [sic restricting] air circulation. Mould growth is present on walls around bedding, and on the ceiling near the exterior walls.” e. “Roof space: new roofing and underlay installed, with R3.6 Earthwool fibreglass ceiling insulation batts fitted. The insulation is in good condition and generally well fitted, however, the batts near the exterior walls appear to have been disturbed (possibly during roof installation) and sufficient air clearance between the insulation and the roofing underlay has not been maintained. The insulation did not appear to be damp or mouldy, however I was unable to fully inspect near the exterior walls due to low roof clearances. Heavy condensation is present on the underside of the roofing underlay.”
RB makes several maintenance recommendations for action by the landlord, together with estimates of cost, in order of priority:- a. installation of a ground moisture barrier - $750.00 +gst b. adjusting the ceiling insulation to ensure there is an air gap between it and the roofing underlay - $650.00 +gst c. fitting roof space vents - $650.00 +gst d. removing and replacing mouldy wall and ceiling linings, and installing wall insulation to exterior walls at the same time - $6,000 - $14,000 +gst + painting e. installing a quality heat recovery ventilation system - $5,000 - $8,000 +gst f. installing new insulated window joinery with double glazing $25,000 - $30,000 +gst.
The builder also makes recommendations for the tenants/occupants including:- a. Ensuring the sub-floor vents are not obstructed; b. Placing mattresses off the floor on bed bases and moving them to interior walls; c. Cleaning interior surfaces regularly.
The landlord provided a report from a plumber in accordance with my work order dated 5 August 2025. The inspection was on 13 August 2025 and notes:- a. A new roof and downpipe was installed in 2024; b. Roof and downpipes in good sound condition; c. Soakage pit (for groundwater drainage) in “working order” and “appears of sound construction” and no ground water was visible on inspection.
Several of the landlords’ tradespeople have supplied written reports noting that curtains and windows were closed when they were at the premises. RB notes that beds were sitting up against exterior walls and possibly directly on the floor.
Evidence given by the landlord for the first hearing includes a photo of heavy condensation on a window, observations by handymen of closed windows when visiting, and comparisons with less mould in the similar unit next to this one.
I didn’t hear from any of the tradespeople as witnesses so must take care with their written opinions as they cannot be tested. That said, there are several written statements all making similar observations.
The tenants told me they open windows, use a dehumidifier and frequently try to remove the mould to stop it getting worse. They acknowledge they have learned more about opening windows and condensation since receiving advice from support agencies.
Mould can be a difficult to manage. Some possible historic causes are the landlord’s responsibility such as the lack of a kitchen extractor fan (installed June 2025) and no underfloor moisture barrier (installed 27 August 2025). Poorly functioning groundwater drainage (repaired April 2025) may have been the source of damp under the house but there is little evidence about this. I note the roof was replaced in December 2024.
I highlight the “heavy grey tinting film installed” over the lounge window. 7 The landlord could check whether removing this may help sunlight and warmth into the living area.
My decision is that the mould in the house is probably due to a combination of damp in the ceiling and underfloor (which is the landlord’s responsibility to remedy) and not enough ventilation by the tenants (eg; opening windows and curtains, having gaps under and around beds, using the bathroom fan).
My conclusion is that both the landlord and the tenant are partly responsible for the unacceptable level of mould in the bathroom and bedrooms of these premises.
I repeat the recommendations made by RB that the landlord should consider replacing mould-damaged walls and ceilings (rather than just repainting them). My understanding is that once mould is embedded or if building materials have become damp from leaks or condensation (such as in the ceiling) that mould will always grow back.
I also endorse the recommendations to the tenants. The best way to beat mould is to open windows and curtains as often as possible and use all extraction fans. The window stays mean they can do this securely. Mattresses and bedding should not rest on the ground or against walls. 7 Referred to in RB’s report. If the landlord has breached his obligations, should compensation be awarded and how much?
I do consider compensation to the tenants is justified because of the breaches of the HHS (kitchen extraction fan and underfloor moisture barrier).
The tenants did not have the kitchen ventilation and protection from underfloor damp that they should have had. The fact that the HHS compliance information in the tenancy agreement was incorrect means the lack of a kitchen extractor fan and underfloor moisture barrier are also a breach of contract.
I calculate compensation at $15.00 per week for each week the tenants were without these legally required items. This is 190 weeks (from the HHS due date of 1 January 2022 until the kitchen fan and moisture barrier were installed end of August 2025). This is compensation of $2,850.00.
I make no additional award for discomfort or the effects of mould, or mould damaged belongings, because the evidence indicates the tenants are partly responsible for the problem.
I award compensation of $200.00 for the lack of a working heat pump for about five weeks of colder weather from mid-September 2024 and the inconvenience of having to wait until March 2025 to have it fixed.
I do not award compensation for the retaliatory notice of termination partly because the tenants did not apply for it, and also because I consider the compensation awarded to be sufficient to recognise all detriment suffered by the tenants. Filing fee
The tenants have been partly successful with the claim, so I award the filing fee. The issues did need addressing.
To be consistent with my previous order, I order suppression of the tenants’ names from the published orders but not of the tenancy address. It is important the address is searchable because of the mould problem.
The landlords’ names are published as breaches are proven. I note their full cooperation with the Tribunal process, that they have now fully complied with the Healthy Homes Standards, and that they did take timely steps to reasonably maintain the premises.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5281979 — Property damage at 8B Duncan Road, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5281979 — Property damage at 8B Duncan Road, Saint Andrews, Hamilton 3200

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What are the issues?

What is the law that applies?

Are the premises unacceptably mouldy or damp?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What are the issues?

What is the law that applies?

Are the premises unacceptably mouldy or damp?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions