What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5313780 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 5313780?

Compensation: Loss of use of the gar…: $2,392.50 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5313780?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5313780?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13118111-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5313780 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 5313780?

Compensation: Loss of use of the gar…: $2,392.50 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5313780?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5313780?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13118111-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

146 Calliope Road, Stanley Point, Auckland 0624 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5313780 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5313780 — net $2,420.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Loss of use of the garage	$2,392.50	Loss of use of the garage
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,420.50
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,420.50

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 12 January 2026.
The tenancy was originally for fixed-term tenancy from 23 August 2024 until 22 August 2025. The tenancy ended earlier by mutual agreement on 29 June 2025.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant applied for compensation for: a. Misrepresentation; b. Poor complaint handling and lack of accountability; c. Unlawful entry by the landlord and loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises; and d. Moving costs.
I deal with each claim in turn. Misrepresentation
The premises had been marketed as having a garage for extra storage. The original advertisement noted that the garage might be too small to fit a car but that it was suitable for storage.
However, in reality, the garage was subject to frequent flooding and water ingress, making it unusable to store items.
The tenant raised multiple complaints, but no meaningful action was taken by the landlord.
The tenant also raised issues with the property manager’s misleading or false representation at the start of the tenancy. Prior to signing the tenancy agreement, the tenant was advised that kitchen and bathroom upgrades were expected. However, no such improvements occurred during the tenancy.
The biggest issue for this tenancy was that the premises was marketed as having storage space. The tenant relied on this but could not use the garage due to the constant flooding and leaking due to its design. The tenant’s items stored in the garage became wet.
The tenant sought 10 percent reduction of the rent for the tenant’s loss of use of the garage. I find that amount reasonable and justified.
I order the landlord to compensate the tenant $2,392.50 being 10 percent of the weekly rent of $725.00 for 33 weeks.
The kitchen, bathroom upgrades and other possible improvements were never agreed to formally by the landlord. There is no compensation resulting from it. Poor complaint handling and lack of accountability
The tenant complained to the Tribunal regarding the poor complaint handling and lack of accountability by the landlord and the property management company.
As explained in the hearing, the Tribunal makes decisions based on compliance with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The RTA does not cover code of conduct or standards of conduct by the landlord or the property managers. The responsibilities of the landlords are listed in section 45 RTA.
The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to make any decisions regarding any complaints against the landlord’s complaint handling procedures.
Therefore, this claim is not considered. Unlawful entry by the landlord and loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises
The tenant claimed the owner has entered the premises without consent or notice and this had caused the loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A RTA.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) RTA.
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’s issue was that the property owner came together with the property manager for an inspection without having informed the tenant about it before. The notice of inspection by the property manager was given in compliance with the RTA. However, the tenant was not told that the owner would be accompanying the property manager.
Although that was not ideal, landlord as defined in the RTA includes the owner as well as the property manager. In fact, property managers are extensions of the owner and not the other way around. Giving notice of inspection is for the owner as the landlord and any of the landlord’s agent to inspect the premises.
There was no unlawful entry by the landlord.
Legal entry by the landlord cannot be an interference with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant.
These claims are dismissed. Moving costs
The tenant had also sought $2,090.00 for moving costs.
The tenancy ended by agreement. There is no basis for moving costs.
This claim is dismissed. Filing fee reimbursement
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the landlord to reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5313780 — net $2,420.50 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Loss of use of the garage	$2,392.50	Loss of use of the garage
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,420.50
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,420.50

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details. 2.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 12 January 2026.
The tenancy was originally for fixed-term tenancy from 23 August 2024 until 22 August 2025. The tenancy ended earlier by mutual agreement on 29 June 2025.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant applied for compensation for: a. Misrepresentation; b. Poor complaint handling and lack of accountability; c. Unlawful entry by the landlord and loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises; and d. Moving costs.
I deal with each claim in turn. Misrepresentation
The premises had been marketed as having a garage for extra storage. The original advertisement noted that the garage might be too small to fit a car but that it was suitable for storage.
However, in reality, the garage was subject to frequent flooding and water ingress, making it unusable to store items.
The tenant raised multiple complaints, but no meaningful action was taken by the landlord.
The tenant also raised issues with the property manager’s misleading or false representation at the start of the tenancy. Prior to signing the tenancy agreement, the tenant was advised that kitchen and bathroom upgrades were expected. However, no such improvements occurred during the tenancy.
The biggest issue for this tenancy was that the premises was marketed as having storage space. The tenant relied on this but could not use the garage due to the constant flooding and leaking due to its design. The tenant’s items stored in the garage became wet.
The tenant sought 10 percent reduction of the rent for the tenant’s loss of use of the garage. I find that amount reasonable and justified.
I order the landlord to compensate the tenant $2,392.50 being 10 percent of the weekly rent of $725.00 for 33 weeks.
The kitchen, bathroom upgrades and other possible improvements were never agreed to formally by the landlord. There is no compensation resulting from it. Poor complaint handling and lack of accountability
The tenant complained to the Tribunal regarding the poor complaint handling and lack of accountability by the landlord and the property management company.
As explained in the hearing, the Tribunal makes decisions based on compliance with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”).
The RTA does not cover code of conduct or standards of conduct by the landlord or the property managers. The responsibilities of the landlords are listed in section 45 RTA.
The Tribunal has no jurisdiction to make any decisions regarding any complaints against the landlord’s complaint handling procedures.
Therefore, this claim is not considered. Unlawful entry by the landlord and loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises
The tenant claimed the owner has entered the premises without consent or notice and this had caused the loss of quiet enjoyment of the premises.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A RTA.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) RTA.
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’s issue was that the property owner came together with the property manager for an inspection without having informed the tenant about it before. The notice of inspection by the property manager was given in compliance with the RTA. However, the tenant was not told that the owner would be accompanying the property manager.
Although that was not ideal, landlord as defined in the RTA includes the owner as well as the property manager. In fact, property managers are extensions of the owner and not the other way around. Giving notice of inspection is for the owner as the landlord and any of the landlord’s agent to inspect the premises.
There was no unlawful entry by the landlord.
Legal entry by the landlord cannot be an interference with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant.
These claims are dismissed. Moving costs
The tenant had also sought $2,090.00 for moving costs.
The tenancy ended by agreement. There is no basis for moving costs.
This claim is dismissed. Filing fee reimbursement
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the landlord to reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5313780 — Tenancy dispute at 146 Calliope Road, Stanley Point, Auckland 0624

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5313780 — Tenancy dispute at 146 Calliope Road, Stanley Point, Auckland 0624

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions