What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5323379 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5323379?

Compensation: $2,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5323379?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5323379?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12717555-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5323379 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5323379?

Compensation: $2,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5323379?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5323379?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12717555-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5323379 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5323379 — net $2,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for breach of quiet enjoyment	$2,500.00	Compensation for breach of quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,528.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,528.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5323379 — net $2,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation for breach of quiet enjoyment	$2,500.00	Compensation for breach of quiet enjoyment
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$2,528.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$2,528.00

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
There is a residential tenancy between the parties of premises at the tenancy address.
The notice to terminate the tenancy given by the landlord to the tenant by email on 17 June 2025 is invalid and of no effect.
Peter Carson must pay [The tenant/s] $2,528.00 immediately, calculated as in the table below.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 4 November 2025.
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has given him an unlawful notice to terminate the tenancy and there has been other unreasonable behaviour from the landlord which has caused him stress and humiliation.
He has applied for financial compensation and/or exemplary damages (of an unspecified amount).
The purpose of compensation is to try to put the innocent party back in the position they would have been in if the other party had not breached the law or contract. Compensation usually relates to measurable expenses, costs, or damage reasonably related to the breach.
The Tenancy Tribunal may also award compensation for emotional injury because a tenancy is a contract that promises a right to a home and to peace, comfort and security. 1
Exemplary damages are like a fine or penalty and may be given to punish or deter where breach actions have been intentional and serious. Background
The landlord and tenant have known each other for about 15 years.
Around the end of 2019, they came to a verbal agreement that the tenant could live at the tenancy address for rental of $580.00 per week.
There is no written tenancy agreement.
To start with, the tenant lived at the address and worked elsewhere. Part way through the tenancy he began to also run a business from the premises.
Sometime in 2024, they verbally agreed to reduce the rent to $450.00 per week provided this was paid in cash.
Sometime towards the start of 2025, the landlord told the tenant that he wanted to sell the property and asked him if he knew anybody who would be interested.
Someone was interested and, on 17 June 2025, the landlord emailed the tenant saying that he was officially giving two months’ notice to vacate the premises.
The tenant did not think that this notice was valid and told the landlord this.
Exactly two months later, on 17 August 2025, the prospective purchaser came to the property and handed the tenant a Trespass Notice. He said that he would enforce this through the police. 1 General damages for emotional injury arising from a breach of contract are not generally available except when mental satisfaction is an object of the contract; see Court of Appeal decision Bloxham v Robinson [1996] 2 NZLR 664. Tenancy Tribunal decisions reflect an acceptance that a residential tenancy is more than a commercial contract. It gives a right of occupation and to quiet enjoyment (peace, comfort and privacy), such that mental satisfaction is very much an object of the contract. See Tenant v Kumar [2022] NZTT 4311712, 4314460.
Later that week, the tenant says he received a phone call from a police officer informing him that the police intended to evict him from the property on Friday of that week.
The tenant has not moved out.
The landlord says that the prospective purchaser has not continued with the purchase transaction because of this. The landlord wants the tenant to move out.
The tenant feels the landlord’s notice of termination was unlawful and his behaviour unreasonable and says this has caused him stress and humiliation.

What are the issues to be decided?

The issues to be decided are:- a. Is this a residential tenancy? Or is it commercial, or something else? b. Is the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy valid? c. Did the landlord give the notice to terminate the tenancy knowing he was not entitled to? d. Did the landlord’s actions breach the tenant’s rights to quiet enjoyment of the tenancy or amount to harassment? e. If the landlord has breached the law, should the tenant be financially compensated, or exemplary damages be awarded? Decisions Is this a residential tenancy? Or is it commercial, or something else?
The landlord says this is a commercial property and therefore any arrangement with the tenant is a commercial arrangement or lease. He said he thinks the tenancy property is zoned by the council for commercial uses. Neither party had any documentary evidence about this.
The tenant accepts that he uses part of the property for commercial or business purposes as he buys and sells cars and car-parts. However, he pointed out that he also lives there, and the house was the main reason he moved to the address.
There is no dispute that there is a house on the property which the tenant lives in. The landlord accepts that he rented the house to the tenant for him to live in.
A residential tenancy is the right to occupy residential premises in consideration for rent. Residential premises are any premises used or intended for occupation as a place of residence. See the definitions in section 2 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA).
Section 2(3) RTA says that if premises are used for both commercial and residential purposes, then the premises are deemed to be residential – unless the landlord proves they were let principally for purposes other than residential purposes.
My decision is that these are residential premises and there is a residential tenancy between the landlord and tenant. Is the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy valid?
A landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 90 days’ notice; section 51(1) RTA.
A landlord may terminate a periodic tenancy by giving at least 42 days’ notice if the owner is required, under an unconditional agreement for the sale of the premises, to give the purchaser vacant possession; section 51(2)(c) RTA.
The landlord acknowledges that there is no unconditional agreement for the sale of the premises.
The landlord’s emailed notice on 17 June 2025 does not give at least 90 days’ notice.
This means the landlord's notice of termination is invalid and of no effect.
The tenancy has not terminated. Did the landlord give the notice to terminate the tenancy knowing he was not entitled to do so?
Section 60AA RTA says that a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so. Breaching this obligation without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6500.00.
The landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy is invalid but is only a breach of s60AA RTA if the landlord gave the notice knowing he was not entitled to do so.
Oral evidence from both the tenant and landlord satisfies me that at the time the landlord gave the notice of termination, he genuinely believed that this was a commercial property so he could give a shorter period of notice.
The property is in a commercial area of the city and the tenant is now conducting a business from the property.
The landlord accepts that he owns other residential properties that he rents out.
He said he has written tenancy agreements for his other properties but didn't do so in this case because of the friendship between the parties and the history of helping each other out. He seemed to think that this might mean this arrangement was not a “formal tenancy”.
It could be argued that the landlord should have realised that this was a residential tenancy, and he needed to follow the Residential Tenancies Act if he wanted to give notice to terminate this tenancy.
He also should have ensured there was a written and signed tenancy agreement with completed insulation, insurance and Healthy Homes Standards compliance statements.
It is no excuse for someone to say that they did not know the law.
However, in the case of section 60AA RTA, the law has been written to say that a landlord only commits an unlawful act if they give a notice to terminate the tenancy (or apply to the Tribunal for such an order), knowing they are not entitled to do so.
In my view, this means that the landlord must know that what they are doing is wrong or unlawful.
My decision is, that at the time the landlord emailed the tenant the notice to terminate the tenancy, he genuinely thought that he had the right to do so on a shorter notice period because the property was commercial. Following on from this belief, he also genuinely thought that once the notice period expired, he had the legal right to issue a Trespass Notice and ask the police to evict the tenant.
The landlord was wrong about all of those things.
However, the fact that I find that the landlord was genuine in his belief at the time, means he did not give the notice to terminate the tenancy knowing he was not entitled to do so. I find the landlord did not breach s60AA RTA by giving the email notice on 17 June 2025. Did the landlord’s actions breach the tenant’s rights to quiet enjoyment of the tenancy or amount to harassment?
It has been established that the landlord’s notice of termination was invalid because it did not give enough notice.
The landlord accepts that he also told the tenant that if he did not move out, he would give him a Trespass Notice and have him evicted by the police.
The tenant says he told the landlord that the notice of termination did not give him enough notice and that he had no right to give him a Trespass Notice or evict him.
At this point, the landlord could have spoken to Tenancy Services or obtained other professional advice.
Instead, about six weeks later, the landlord wrote a letter addressed to the prospective purchaser (SM) of the property (dated 31 July 2025) which said that SM had “full permission to move into [Tenancy address suppressed]”.
The letter also said that SM “can or will use all means to have [the tenant] removed”.
The landlord personally delivered this letter to the tenant on about that same date (31 July 2025). He then left the country for a trip overseas.
The tenant says these actions were unreasonable and wrong and have caused him considerable stress and worry.
Section 38 RTA protects the right of a tenant to “quiet enjoyment” of tenancy premises without interruption or interference by the landlord, or anyone else claiming through the landlord.
The section says that a landlord must not cause or permit any interference with the tenant’s reasonable peace, comfort or privacy in their use of the premises and a breach that amounts to harassment is an unlawful act. Exemplary damages of up to $3,000.00 may be awarded.
Quiet enjoyment is a term not really used in everyday language. It means the right not to have the quality of the tenancy significantly impaired by actions of the landlord or anyone on behalf of the landlord. 2
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 gave oral evidence describing several subsequent events in detail:- a. SM came to the property on the expiry date of the termination notice (17 August 2025) and gave the tenant a Trespass Notice. The tenant screwed this up and threw it on the ground, saying that SM had no right to evict him. SM remained outside the property for several hours. b. A police officer telephoned the tenant on about the 19 th or 20 th of August and told him the police would come to the property and evict him that Friday (22 August 2025). The tenant disagreed and then went to the police station and became upset trying to explain that he did not agree that the landlord or SM had the legal right to evict him. He was asked to leave the police station. 2 Definition affirmed by the District Court in Neems v Fraser [2025] 1222 referring to Smith v Floris Auckland TT 1404/93, 9 March 1994 at [6]. c. The tenant spent the next few days frantically trying to find legal help and not having much success. He was very stressed at the thought that the police were going to turn up and evict him and that his belongings (including many car parts and wrecked vehicles that formed his business) would be disposed of. d. Eventually he found someone who agreed to help him (he did not have this person’s details handy during the hearing) and she phoned him on Friday evening (about 7 or 8pm) to say that she had spoken to the police and explained her view that they could not evict him but that she could not speak for the police or confirm for sure that they would not do so. e. The tenant described staying awake all night at the property, sitting in his car so that he could keep watch, waiting and worrying that the police would arrive. This continued over that weekend. He said he did not even leave to buy food just in case he returned to find he had been locked out of the property. f. The tenant heard nothing further until, a few days later, two police officers came to the property. This turned out to be about an unrelated matter (to do with the death of a friend of the tenant’s). When the tenant asked them, these officers said they were not assigned to the eviction matter, but they understood that the police were no longer intending to take action.
The above account was given as oral evidence. I was provided with a copy of the Trespass Notice but other than that there is no supporting documentary or photographic evidence or other witness statements. I did not hear from SM or receive any evidence from the police. The landlord was not present at these events and made no comment about them in the hearing.
That said, I accept the tenant’s oral evidence as credible. I take from his account that he believed he would be evicted by the police and was understandably very stressed.
I said in the hearing that the Tribunal has no role in assessing police actions and that the tenant is free to make a complaint or enquiry with them directly or with the Police Complaints Authority.
My role is to assess whether the landlord’s actions interfered with the tenant’s right to peace, comfort and privacy in his legal use of the premises.
My decision is that the landlord’s actions in giving an invalid notice of termination and going further to write the letter addressed to SM, and serve this on the tenant, breached s38 RTA. The purpose of that letter was to attempt to give SM a right of occupation of the premises and to facilitate actions to “use all means to have him removed”.
The actions of SM in coming to the property and attempting to serve the tenant with the Trespass Notice is also a breach of s38 RTA. This was an “ ... interruption by the landlord or any person claiming by, through, or under the landlord ... ”; s38(1) RTA. SM was claiming he had a right of possession given to him by the landlord.
Neither the landlord nor SM had any legal authority to issue the tenant with a Trespass Notice or ask the police to evict him because:- a. The landlord’s notice of termination was invalid. The tenancy had not ended; and b. Even if the tenancy had ended, the landlord did not have a possession order from the Tribunal.
Section 63 RTA makes it clear that no one can enter into possession of any residential premises in the occupation of a tenant without the consent of the tenant or pursuant to an order for possession made by the Tribunal and enforced by the process set out in section 106 of the RTA. The enforcement process requires an application to the District Court for a warrant of eviction.
The landlord was overseas at the key time and, by his own account, not easily contactable. He left the tenant to deal with SM (and the police).
The effect of the landlord’s and SM’s actions was to seriously interfere with the tenant’s right to live at the premises undisturbed. Being given a Trespass Notice and told you will be evicted from the place where you live is the ultimate disturbance.
I find the combined actions to be harassment. Either the landlord or SM could have sought advice at any point and reviewed their actions. Instead, they persisted in ongoing efforts to pressure the tenant to vacate the property.
Harassment is an unlawful act, and exemplary damages may be awarded where the act was committed intentionally, and this would be “just”; s109 RTA.
In this case, I find it more appropriate to award compensation to the tenant for the mental distress he suffered. The relevant considerations are similar to those of exemplary damages but less about punishment of the landlord than recognising the harm caused to the tenant. I have accepted that the landlord, although wrong, genuinely thought he had the right to terminate the tenancy and pursue eviction of the tenant. For that reason, I do not consider his intent justifies the penalty of exemplary damages.
However, the impact on the tenant of the landlord’s and SM’s wrongful and unlawful actions was significant.
It is difficult to assess a monetary value for emotional harm. The tenant has not presented evidence of any direct costs. Other decisions of the Tribunal and the District Court give some guidance.
The District Court awarded $2,000.00 to a tenant where the landlord had authorised contractors to enter her unit and do asbestos repair work without her permission. This was described as “a significant intrusion on the tenant’s rights”. 3
Past Tribunal decisions 4 have helpfully suggested bands or ranges for the compensation that might be awarded, as follows:- a. At the lower end of the scale, where a breach causes inconvenience, frustration, annoyance, or disappointment: an award of $200.00 to $1,000.00. b. Where due to the breach the party has endured more inconvenience and a higher level of mental distress such as worry, stress, tension, or anxiety: an award of $1,000.00 to $2,000.00. c. At the upper end of the scale, where the party has experienced hardship, insecurity, humiliation, intimidation, aggravation, or fear: an award of $2,000.00 and upwards.
I find the harm caused to the tenant in this case to be in the most serious category.
His legal right to possession was undermined and he suffered significant stress and worry over about eleven weeks. 5 He believed he would be evicted because of the phone call from the police. He could not easily contact the landlord for some of this time. He spent hours trying to find someone to help him. He was too afraid to leave the property in case he returned to find he had been locked out and his belongings removed. He applied to the Tribunal but has had to wait two further months to have his concerns heard.
I award $2,500.00 to be paid by the landlord to the tenant to compensate him for the emotional harm he has suffered. Other applications
There was some discussion at the end of the hearing about other issues including rent that may be owing and whether the premises can be lawfully rented out for residential purposes.
I have decided not to allow for a second hearing in these proceedings because there are currently no other applications before me. Either party is free to make a new application and provide supporting evidence. 3 Birch v Otautahi Community Housing [2020] NZDC 17667. 4 In particular, see the full discussion in Tenants v Singh [2022] NZTT 4315225. 5 From mid-June (when he was given the notice of termination) until about the end of August which was when he began to hope that the police were not going to arrive to evict him from the property. Filing fee and suppression
The tenant has been successful so I must award the filing fee.
I order the tenant’s name be suppressed as he has succeeded with the claims and there is no reason of conduct to refuse this; s95A(1) RTA.
The landlord’s name is not suppressed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5323379 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5323379 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What are the issues to be decided?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

What are the issues to be decided?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions