What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5299661 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5299661?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5299661?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5299661?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12190993-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5299661 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5299661?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5299661?

The primary dispute was Harassment. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5299661?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12190993-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5299661 — Harassment

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties’ names and identifying details.
The landlord’s application is dismissed.
The tenant’s application is dismissed.
The landlord is to have access to the garage on the property in order to retrieve some of her possessions between 1 pm and 2 pm this Friday 1 August 2025.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video.
The landlord’s application was for an order reducing the fixed term tenancy. See section 66 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The tenant’s application was for: a. Exemplary damages for the landlord giving notice of termination knowing that she was not entitled to do so. See section 60AA RTA. b. Compensation and exemplary damages for the landlord’s breach of her quiet enjoyment. See section 38(2) RTA. Standard of proof and evidence
In considering the parties’ claims, the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. In other words, each party must establish with evidence that their claim is more likely than not. Each of the claims has been considered bearing in mind the standard of proof required.
The Tribunal does not need to be completely certain, but it needs to be more certain than uncertain. In deciding each claim, all the evidence presented, including oral testimony, has been considered and weighed to decide what is more likely.
While this decision has not referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing or filed with the Tribunal, the parties can be assured that it has all been considered. In the interests of conciseness, only the most relevant or important evidence has been referred to in this Order.
It is for an applicant to provide the evidence necessary to prove their claims. If the applicant fails to do so then their application will be dismissed whether it has merit or not, because it is for the applicant to provide the required evidence. It is not the Tribunal’s responsibility to extract evidence.
Section 85(2) RTA requires the Tribunal to determine each dispute according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. The Tribunal has determined the parties’ applications with this requirement in mind. Background
The parties entered into a fixed term tenancy starting on 2 May 2025 and ending on 1 May 2026.
The landlord gave evidence as follows: a. She moved to Australia in late March 2025 to support a family member. b. On 13 May 2025 she was “assaulted in the context of a domestic violence incident and I no longer felt safe. I could not continue my employment due to suffering PTSD symptoms from the assault and I decided that I had to return to my home in Nelson to heal from this incident.” c. The assault has caused post traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”) which has been exacerbated by her having autism. d. In order to heal properly, she requires the familiar and safe environment of her home which she had renovated to limit sensory stimulation and meet her special needs. e. She works most of the time from home in a stressful occupation and requires the safety and comfort of her home to do so. f. Her present accommodation with a family friend is temporary and unsatisfactory for both her and her cat.
The tenant gave evidence as follows: a. Having just moved into their new home, they were advised by the Property Manager (“PM”) on 16 May 2025 that they needed to meet for a “sensitive discussion”. b. At a meeting on 18 or 19 May 2025, the PM advised them that the landlord wished to return to her home and break the fixed term tenancy agreement. The tenants did not agree to break their agreement. c. On 1 June 2025 the landlord visited the property by arrangement to collect some of her possessions that are stored in the garage on the property. d. On 13 June 2025 the PM emailed a letter from the landlord setting out the reasons for her request to break the fixed term tenancy and offering the tenant compensation. This offer was declined. e. On 2 July 2025 the PM requested the tenant’s consent to the landlord visiting the property on 4 July 2025 to retrieve further items from the garage. This visit did not take place. Reduction of the fixed term tenancy
The usual legal position with a fixed-term contract is that the term of the contract will be applied strictly and it is only in limited circumstances that a court or tribunal will interfere with it. For residential tenancies, one of those circumstances is found in section 66 RTA, which allows for the reduction of fixed term tenancy agreements.
There is a high threshold to be met before the Tribunal will reduce the term. The Tribunal will not lightly set aside a fixed term tenancy entered into by mutual agreement between the parties. The burden of proof is on the applicant to establish that the fixed term should be reduced by the Tribunal.
The applicant will need to establish that: a. There has been a change in their circumstances. b. The change was unforeseen. c. The unforeseen change will result in severe hardship to the applicant if the tenancy is not reduced. d. The severe hardship the applicant will suffer if the term is not reduced exceeds the hardship the other party will suffer if the term is reduced.
The weighing of relative hardship is a question of fact to be assessed objectively in each case.
The Tribunal accepts on the evidence before it that there has been a change in the landlord’s circumstances and that the change was unforeseen.
The landlord claimed that she will suffer severe hardship which exceeds the hardship which the tenant will suffer if the term is reduced. The landlord provided evidence and written submissions as follows: a. A letter from a senior case manager from Sexual Abuse Support and Healing Inc stating that the landlord “was referred to our agency following a highly distressing and abusive family harm incident. This has resulted in Post Traumatic Stress symptoms and generalized anxiety which has left [her] feeling unsafe and easily triggered. At times, these triggers cause intense feelings of panic. It is essential that [she] be able to move back into her home environment where she feels safe and secure. [She] is desperate to be in her own surroundings where she can begin to relax and recover from the traumatic incident.” b. A letter from an autism coach stating that the assault “has resulted in high distress levels for [the landlord], which in turn have increased her sensory sensitivities. Her temporary living arrangements... are adding to this distress as she is not able to use the sensory strategies that are so helpful to her. These include having baths and having heat from a fireplace. Her current living arrangement only gives her access toa shower (which is very difficult for her sensory sensitivities) and a heatpump pumping out hot air also adds to the distress. The additional worries about it being a short term temporary living arrangement are also having a negative impact on her.” c. “There is only one place that I call home and that feels safe and familiar. It is my sanctuary and I am desperate to move back in so that I can start to move forward with my life.” d. “I work mainly from home... My work is very stressful and emotionally demanding and therefore I rely on the serenity of my home to enable me to carry out my role.” e. “I feel desperate about my situation, and it is causing me a lot of distress on a daily basis. I feel unable to settle back in [city] as I feel my life is in limbo. I haven’t re-engaged with many of my support people back in [city] as this situation is really negatively affecting my mental, physical and emotional state. I am losing weight and struggling to sleep.” f. “If the lease were to continue to full term it would cause me severe hardship – particularly in relation to my physical and mental health and therefore my ability to work and make a living to support myself.” g. Her present accommodation is not satisfactory and may prove to be temporary. h. In summary, there is only one place where she believes she will be able to recover from her trauma and lead her life in a safe and secure environment and that is her home.
The tenant gave evidence and written submissions as follows: a. They had been renting a property for six years and spent several months searching before finding a suitable property for themselves and their 12 year-old daughter. b. The property is near their daughter’s intermediate school where she is in her last year. c. This property is zoned for the high school they have chosen for her which is over the road from her intermediate school. This area is geographically restricted and there are few properties available to rent in this area. d. They were very distressed to find the landlord wanted to end their tenancy after only a matter of two weeks. e. This has caused them very significant stress. “My mental health has deteriorated this year, we have been through an extremely difficult time finding a suitable property after living in our [previous property] for 6 years which has been compounded by the many problems we have had since moving into [the property] including the personal issues of the landlord which do not have anything to do with our family. It has impacted my work, sleep, social activities and day to day routines.” She has been prescribed sleeping tablets and referred to a psychologist. f. The privacy, quiet and security of the property is equally important to them as a family, especially when one of the tenants is away from home for work. “My husband has an extremely high work load... He is under an extreme amount of pressure, working an astronomical number of hours each week.” g. From their recent experience, the stress and financial cost of finding a new rental is significant. While they appreciate the landlord’s predicament, they are not willing to subject themselves and their young daughter to the stresses and inconvenience of trying to find another property and moving home once again within three months when they had agreed to a fixed term tenancy to provide them with security. h. Because of recent climate events in this city, there is a much reduced number of suitable properties available to rent. i. The PM has offered the landlord a property to rent from her portfolio.
The PM expressed the view that there is a reasonable pool of properties available to rent in this city, but that it has diminished over recent months.
As the parties can appreciate, the Tribunal’s decision is difficult. While having sympathy for the landlord in her difficult and stressful predicament, the Tribunal also has sympathy for the tenant who had contracted to rent the property for a year but who has been asked to give up their home and suffer the significant stress and disruption of moving after only some three months.
Having considered all the evidence and submissions provided by the parties, the Tribunal concludes that both will suffer severe hardship, whatever the outcome. The Tribunal can therefore only determine that their hardship is equal.
Because the landlord has not therefore proven on the balance of probabilities that the severe hardship which the landlord would suffer would be greater than the hardship which the tenant would suffer if the term were reduced, the landlord’s claim must be dismissed.
The landlord has suggested in her written submission that there is an obligation on the tenant to negotiate breaking the fixed term tenancy in good faith. There is no such requirement in the RTA and the landlord has not referred to any authority for that assertion. There is nothing to prevent a landlord from attempting to negotiate an earlier termination date with a tenant, but equally, there is nothing that requires the tenant to agree or, indeed, to negotiate.
If negotiations fail then the proper course of action is an application under section 66 RTA which the landlord has made. Section 50(1)(a) RTA lists the statutory exceptions which allow a fixed term tenancy to be terminated and none of those apply in the present situation.
The landlord has also asked the Tribunal to draw an analogy with its jurisdiction under section 56B RTA which applies only to tenants wishing to withdraw from tenancies following family violence. The Tribunal has no authority to extend its jurisdiction in this way. The words of section 56B RTA show Parliament’s intention that such applications can only be made by tenants. The Tribunal has no power to extend the clear words of the RTA to include landlords.
Section 56B RTA is not an apt analogy. One of the rationales for a tenant being given the ability to terminate a fixed term tenancy following family violence is that otherwise, the victim of the violence would be required to continue living with the perpetrator of family violence in the premises. That is not the situation here. Termination without grounds
Section 60AA RTA declares it to be an unlawful act for a landlord to give or purport to give a notice to terminate or apply to the Tribunal for an order terminating the tenancy, knowing that they are not entitled under the Act to do so. The maximum amount of exemplary damages payable for a breach of section 60AA RTA is $6,500. See Schedule 1A RTA.
As discussed at the hearing, there is no evidence that the landlord gave a termination notice to the tenant. The landlord sent a letter seeking to negotiate an end to the tenancy. That is not the same thing.
The landlord’s application to the Tribunal to reduce the term of the fixed term tenancy is an action which she was entitled to make and has done so on reasonable grounds.
On the evidence before the Tribunal, it is not satisfied that the landlord has committed the unlawful act under section 60AA RTA and so the tenant’s claim is dismissed. Breach of quiet enjoyment
The tenant claims the landlord has harassed them and breached their quiet enjoyment.
Under section 38(2) RTA a landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises.
Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenant claimed that the landlord breached their quiet enjoyment by: a. Having mail continue to come to the property which required redirection. b. Having the PM raise with them breaking their fixed term tenancy only two weeks into the tenancy. c. Having the PM email them with the landlord’s letter seeking to end the tenancy on mutually agreeable terms and disclosing general details of the trauma she had suffered. d. Twice requesting to visit the property to collect possessions from the garage. e. Visiting the property on one occasion to collect her possessions from the garage.
As already noted, the landlord’s request to break the fixed term tenancy has caused the tenant considerable ongoing stress and uncertainty. However, there is no evidence or suggestion that the landlord was intending to harass the tenant as that term is defined above.
The evidence is that the landlord found herself in a very distressing situation and has tried to negotiate an acceptable solution with the tenant through the PM. While this undoubtedly impacted on the tenant, the Tribunal does not see that there is anything unreasonable in the steps which she took to do so.
The tenant’s claim is therefore dismissed. Suppression
Because of issues regarding the parties’ mental health, it is appropriate for the Tribunal to exercise the discretion in section 95A(4) RTA and order suppression of their names and identifying details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5299661 — Harassment

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5299661 — Harassment

At a glance

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