Published tribunal order
Tenancy Tribunal case 5284503 — Rent arrears at 6 Wildberry Street, Woolston, Christchurch 8023
Decided 3 Nov 2025 · Published 3 Nov 2025 · Application 5284503
- Rent arrears
- Exemplary damages
Order
ORDER
- The tenancy of [The party] at 6 Wildberry Street, Woolston, Christchurch 8023 is terminated, and possession is granted to Wongeoon Vast Limited at 11.59pm on Wednesday 5 November 2025.
- [The party], Christopher John Robert and [The party] must pay Wongeoon Vast Limited $2,335.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below.
- [The party] must pay Wongeoon Vast Limited $490 by Friday 7 November 2025 and every Friday thereafter until Friday 12 December 2025. If she does so, enforcement of this order is stayed until Wednesday 17 December 2025.
- The Bond Centre must pay the bond in the sum of $1,760 to Wongeoon Vast Limited immediately.
Reasons
- All parties attended the hearing except for Mr Robert. Mr Wongeoon represented the landlord.
- The tenant has applied for work orders, compensation and exemplary damages for breach of the landlord’s obligations relating to the condition of the premises. Her main complaints concern ventilation, drainage and draught stopping.
- The landlord has cross applied for termination of the tenancy, rent arrears and payment of the bond. Rent
- There is no dispute about the rent arrears. To the end of the current rent week on 5 November 2025 the arrears are $6,345. Background and Documents
- The tenancy began on 23 June 2021. It was for a one-year fixed term and then became periodic.
- Compliance dates for the Healthy Homes Standards HHS vary depending on the type of tenancy, the date it began and the date of any renewals.
- For private rentals, where the tenancy commenced before 1 July 2021, and there have been no renewals, the compliance date is 1 July 2025.
- This tenancy began before 1 July 2021, there have been no renewals, and so the compliance date is 1 July 2025. That is three months ago.
- There is an HHS compliance statement with the tenancy agreement. It states that the premises will comply with HHS 90 days after tenancy renewal. Plainly, that does not apply because there has been no renewal.
- The HHS information supplied with the agreement states that: - a. the premises will comply with the ventilation standard by the compliance date, b. the premises are exempt from the moisture and drainage standard, c. the draught stopping standard was not yet is place and the premises would comply by the compliance date, d. the ceiling insulation was compliant, e. under floor insulation was not required due to the exemption.
- The tenant produced an HHS Report based on an assessment of the premises on 28 April 2025. She provided a copy of the report to the landlord shortly before a mediation on 28 July 2025.
- The report states that: - a. the heating is non-compliant seemingly on the basis that the author had not seen evidence that the wood burner in the premises was still certified for use. I note that no evidence was produced to prove that it was not certified, b. there was no extractor fan in the kitchen, c. there were unreasonable gaps causing draughts at the front and back doors, under the bathroom basin, through a hole in bedroom 1, at two windows in bedroom 3 and at the bottom of walls at the front door and in the living area, d. the guttering was blocked and that there were defects with the guttering and downpipes
- Otherwise, the premises were found to be compliant or had exemptions.
- The tenant also provided an updated HHS report that states the premises are compliant or exempt apart from for draught stopping. I note that a new a heat pump was installed in May 2025 which overcame the concerns about the wood burner and a range hood was installed in the kitchen.
- The report named the same areas for draughts as are in the first report.
- The tenant also provided photographs showing the bathroom during work to repair the floor under the bath which had been weakened by water getting into the wooden flooring material. There was substantial water damage to joists in places on both sides of the wall lining. There was a bath with a shower over during most of the tenancy and that was replaced with a shower cubicle.
- The landlord also produced photographs and inspection reports.
- The photographs showed the premises, overall, to be in reasonable condition for their age and character.
- The report from November 2024 refers to the floor damage in the bathroom, gutter and soffits not in good condition (part of gutter sagging) and trees needing trimming.
- The report from July 2025 refers to two holes, gaps in the floor and a gap at the join with skirting, a hole under the bathroom sink and some rot at a window frame. Law
- Under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the Act), a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises, comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety and comply with HHS Regulations.
- Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00.
- 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 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.
- It is important to note that premises may comply with the HHS, or the standards may not apply, but that does not mean, necessarily, that they will comply with the requirement that the landlord must maintain them in a reasonable state of repair.
- Generally, the landlord must be aware of the need for maintenance before they come under an obligation to maintain. That will often depend on the tenant notifying the landlord of the defect. Once the landlord is aware of a defect, they will have a reasonable time to rectify it. Discussion and Decision
- The premises consist of a rough cast bungalow built in the early 1900s. Such houses will not usually be up to the standard of modern houses in some respects. Their age and character mean that the Tribunal will not expect them to be up to the standard of modern houses and it will be more tolerant of flaws that would not be permissible in a modern house.
- The named landlord is the property manager but in practice it was the owner who arranged and managed any maintenance to the premises. That is not an ideal arrangement in my experience. What tends to happen, and I believe what has happened in this case, is that the property manager has left maintenance to the landlord without monitoring whether maintenance has been performed promptly, well or at all.
- The tenant said that in terms of required HHS work, only the heat pump was installed before 1 July 2025. The range hood was installed in August. Mr Wongeoon said that he believed that all the required work was completed by 1 July. As I have said, he would not necessarily know that. He said that the first electrician said it would be hard to install the range hood, but a second electrician was able to install it. There was no supporting evidence of difficulty installing the rangehood.
- The tenant said that water would run down the wall by the driveway and the wall was soft and moveable there. There were gaps between the roof and the gutter. There was a lot of damp in the house and her daughter’s bedroom wall was soft.
- The tenant referred to holes under the lino and water going doing down the walls in the bathroom for the last year. I note that a shower over the bath arrangement with only shower curtains to contain the water is not an ideal situation in terms of avoiding excessive dampness in the bathroom.
- I find that the evidence proves that there have been some breaches by the landlord of both HHS and of the landlord’s overriding obligation to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
- Specifically: - a. The rangehood was not installed before the compliance date. b. There were still unreasonable gaps after the compliance date. c. Some gaps, such as the hole under the bathroom basin and gaps between walls and floors were in breach of the landlord’s general maintenance obligations. d. The bathroom was damp and the floor soft for a year before the bath was replaced with a shower. A shower is not required but the damage from the shower over the bath was unavoidable and the only practical solution was to install a shower. e. Guttering was not kept clear and caused water to overflow and make the wall damp.
- I don’t find any breach in relation to the wood burner. The evidence did not prove that it was non-compliant.
- The tenant said that she suffered a lot of chest infections in the last two years and her grandson has been unwell also. There was no medical evidence provided.
- She said that she had heating on all the time and had two dehumidifiers running constantly.
- I need to keep in mind that there was no ground vapour barrier and no insulation under the house. The house was old, single glazed and so it was always going to be more difficult to keep warm and dry. That said, I find that the breaches I have found contributed to the difficulty and made the premises less comfortable and healthy to live in. I also accept that it likely adversely affected the health of those living there.
- I find that an award of exemplary damages is required for the failure to comply with the HHS. The breach was short but there was no reasonable excuse for not complying by the long stop date. An award of $500 is adequate.
- An award of exemplary damages is also warranted for the breach of the landlord’s general maintenance obligation. There was an intentional failure to keep the premises in a reasonable state of repair in respect of guttering, the bathroom and gaps. These defects were or should have been obvious when the premises were inspected. An award of $750 is appropriate.
- I also award compensation in the sum of $1,000 for the tenant’s discomfort, loss of amenity and the effect on her and her family’s health.
- The total award is therefore $2,250. That must be set of against the rent arrears leaving $4,095 due.
- There was some discussion of a conditional order but in the end the tenant accepted that the tenancy should be terminated. The landlord agreed to allow the tenant six weeks to vacate provided she paid the rent and $50 per week off the arrears. That is reasonable and the tenant confirmed that she can pay the additional $50 per week. Filing Fees and Name Suppression
- There is justification for an award of filing fees or name suppression. Outcome
- I have made an order to give effect to my decision. The bond will be paid to the landlord and the balance due must be paid by the tenant and the guarantors. The order is for possession by the end of the day on Wednesday 5 November but as long the tenant pays the landlord the rent and $50 towards the arears by the end of each week, beginning with this week, she may stay in the premises until Wednesday 17 December. If she fails to make any of those payments, the order will become immediately enforceable.
- I have calculated the net award to the landlord to 5 November 2025. Any payments that the tenant now makes above the rent payments must be credited against the amount that the tenant and the guarantors are liable to pay.