How much money was awarded in case 5319979?

Compensation: $380.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319979?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319979?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12698558-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5319979?

Compensation: $380.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5319979?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5319979?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12698558-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat D3, 64A Rosella Road, Mangere East, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5319979 — Tenancy dispute

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5319979 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319979 — net $408.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for defective power card	$380.00	Compensation for defective power card
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$408.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$408.00

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

Clarke Group Property Management Limited T/A T/A Studiohomes On Behalf Of Leafia Apartments Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $408.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference.

This is a boarding house tenancy that commenced on 24 January 2025. The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 66I(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.

The landlord’s obligation under s66I is investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention under within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances. As to what that time is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be. Furthermore, a tenant has a statutory duty to advise of any defects under section 66K(1)(d) of the Act. Therefore, a tenant should promptly notify a landlord of any defects and a landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy the defect before being liable for any failure to do so.

There is no dispute that the power card used to open the door to the tenant’s bedroom and activate power in the room was defective causing overloading. This resulted in the tenant being unable to use his computer and microwave at night. The power card terminal was also noisy at night and had a flickering light which disturbed the tenant’s sleep. Therefore, he would often need to turn the power off completely to sleep. This was only a problem in the evening and nighttime from about 4.30pm. The tenant reported the problem to the landlord on or about 23 July 2025.

The landlord says that he immediately raised a work order authorising an electrician to investigate and repair the issue. Unfortunately, the electrician did not attend because of illness and it took several follow up emails to get the work done. The power card and terminal was fixed on 7 August 2025, two weeks after the tenant reported the problem. The landlord confirmed that the card activator had a faulty connector.

I accept on the evidence that the time taken to fix the problem was longer then reasonable (although not through any intentional failure by the landlord). Nevertheless, the tenant suffered a loss of amenity over the two week period for which some compensation should be awarded.

The tenant seeks compensation of $700. The landlord says that this is not a reasonable sum.

It is a well-accepted principle when awarding damages that, so far as money can do it, the injured party shall be put in the same position as he would have been in, but for the breach of the tenancy agreement. Liability exists for foreseeable losses flowing from the breach of a tenancy agreement. Appellate Courts have advised of the need to adopt a global approach when considering compensation awards. They have repeatedly emphasized that the assessment of the proper amount of compensation is a question of fact in each case; it is not an exact exercise and a commonsense approach is required; there are no general or absolute rules for calculating the amount of compensation but the primary purpose of awarding compensation is to reflect the extent of the loss actually and reasonably suffered by the injured party.

The tenant says that the problem occurred mainly in the evening/nighttime and meant that he could not use his computer or microwave. Rent paid over the relevant two week period was $760. Having regard to all relevant factors, I assess that an award of $380 is justified which equates to a rent reduction of approximately 50%. As the tenant has substantially succeeded with his claim, he is entitled to suppression of his name and identifying details as requested and to reimbursement of the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5319979 — net $408.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for defective power card	$380.00	Compensation for defective power card
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$408.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$408.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Clarke Group Property Management Limited T/A T/A Studiohomes On Behalf Of Leafia Apartments Limited must pay [The tenant/s] $408.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing by video conference.
This is a boarding house tenancy that commenced on 24 January 2025. The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 66I(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) to maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
The landlord’s obligation under s66I is investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention under within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances. As to what that time is, depends on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be. Furthermore, a tenant has a statutory duty to advise of any defects under section 66K(1)(d) of the Act. Therefore, a tenant should promptly notify a landlord of any defects and a landlord should be given a reasonable opportunity to remedy the defect before being liable for any failure to do so.
There is no dispute that the power card used to open the door to the tenant’s bedroom and activate power in the room was defective causing overloading. This resulted in the tenant being unable to use his computer and microwave at night. The power card terminal was also noisy at night and had a flickering light which disturbed the tenant’s sleep. Therefore, he would often need to turn the power off completely to sleep. This was only a problem in the evening and nighttime from about 4.30pm. The tenant reported the problem to the landlord on or about 23 July 2025.
The landlord says that he immediately raised a work order authorising an electrician to investigate and repair the issue. Unfortunately, the electrician did not attend because of illness and it took several follow up emails to get the work done. The power card and terminal was fixed on 7 August 2025, two weeks after the tenant reported the problem. The landlord confirmed that the card activator had a faulty connector.
I accept on the evidence that the time taken to fix the problem was longer then reasonable (although not through any intentional failure by the landlord). Nevertheless, the tenant suffered a loss of amenity over the two week period for which some compensation should be awarded.
The tenant seeks compensation of $700. The landlord says that this is not a reasonable sum.
It is a well-accepted principle when awarding damages that, so far as money can do it, the injured party shall be put in the same position as he would have been in, but for the breach of the tenancy agreement. Liability exists for foreseeable losses flowing from the breach of a tenancy agreement. Appellate Courts have advised of the need to adopt a global approach when considering compensation awards. They have repeatedly emphasized that the assessment of the proper amount of compensation is a question of fact in each case; it is not an exact exercise and a commonsense approach is required; there are no general or absolute rules for calculating the amount of compensation but the primary purpose of awarding compensation is to reflect the extent of the loss actually and reasonably suffered by the injured party.
The tenant says that the problem occurred mainly in the evening/nighttime and meant that he could not use his computer or microwave. Rent paid over the relevant two week period was $760. Having regard to all relevant factors, I assess that an award of $380 is justified which equates to a rent reduction of approximately 50%. As the tenant has substantially succeeded with his claim, he is entitled to suppression of his name and identifying details as requested and to reimbursement of the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319979 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat D3, 64A Rosella Road, Mangere East, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5319979 — Tenancy dispute at Unit/Flat D3, 64A Rosella Road, Mangere East, Auckland

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