What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5328964 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant shall install smoke alarms of the same type and specification of

How much money was awarded in case 5328964?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5328964?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5328964?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12524247-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5328964 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenant shall install smoke alarms of the same type and specification of

How much money was awarded in case 5328964?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5328964?

The primary dispute was Smoke alarms. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5328964?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12524247-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 12, 121 Church Street, West End, Palmerston Tenancy Tribunal Case 5328964 — Smoke alarms

Order

The tenant shall install smoke alarms of the same type and specification of those missing from the property by 2 pm Thursday 9 October 2025 when the landlord shall inspect the property to confirm compliance.
In a good and tradesperson like manner, the tenant shall: a. Repair all wall damage including plastering, sanding and painting. b. Repair the damaged exterior window onto the balcony. c. Replace the towel rail, toilet roll holder, toilet seat, shower drain cover and the kitchen cupboard handles. d. Remove the red stain on the carpet, the paint on the floor in the lounge, hallway, bathroom and balcony and all marks from the kitchen ceiling. e. Repair or replace the burn mark on the carpet in the hallway. f. Clean the oven.
The tenant shall allow the landlord’s contractor to inspect the shower and carry out any necessary repairs so that the shower drains freely.
The landlord shall inspect the property at 1 pm Tuesday 28 October 2025 to confirm that the tenant has completed all the works in Order 2 to a satisfactory standard.
If the tenant fails to replace the smoke alarms as required by Order 1 or to complete all the works to a satisfactory standard as required by Order 2, the tenancy at Unit/Flat 12, 121 Church Street, West End, Palmerston North 4412 will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises.
This matter is determined as indicated by the orders above, but if the tenant causes further damage to the property or removes the smoke alarms again before 11 November 2025 or disputes that the work has been completed to a satisfactory standard, then either the landlord or the tenant can email palmerstonnorthtt@justice.govt.nz and request that the application be brought back before the Tribunal with new evidence in respect of the damage and repairs so that the matter will be re-opened and a further hearing held.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. Once the hearing had ended, it was found that the tenant was waiting outside. The hearing was reconvened so that the tenant could explain her situation and an agreement was reached.
The landlord had applied for termination of the tenancy under section 56 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) because the tenant had failed to remedy the matters raised in breach letters dated 23 July 2025 and 13 August 2025.
The letters required the tenant to: a. Replace missing smoke alarms. b. Repair damage to the walls, carpet and vinyl. c. Replace missing or damaged chattels. d. Clean the oven. e. Remove rubbish.
Despite being given two periods of 14-days to remedy the breaches, the tenant had failed to remedy more than a couple of the breaches. Discussion and decision
Section 56 RTA provides that the Tribunal may make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that: a. The tenant has committed a breach of the tenancy agreement or the RTA, and b. The landlord has given the tenant 14-days’ notice to remedy the breach, and c. The tenant failed to remedy the breach within the specified period, and d. The breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy.
On the evidence before the Tribunal, it is satisfied that: a. The tenant has breached the terms of the tenancy agreement and the RTA, and b. The landlord gave the required breach notice on two separate occasions, and c. The tenant has failed to remedy the breaches within the specified time.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the breaches are of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy for the following reasons: a. The scope and nature of the damage shows that this four-year-old property is suffering a significant negative impact because of the actions of the tenant, her children and guests for which the tenant is responsible. Every room in the house has suffered damage to the walls, some of it significant and extensive. A number of the landlord’s chattels have been damaged or removed. The tenant acknowledged that much of damage was caused by her children. Such damage is intentional because the tenant has allowed a situation to continue knowing that damage was inevitable. b. Despite being given over two months to repair the damage, the tenant has failed to do so. The breach has therefore been ongoing and deliberate. c. The removal of the smoke alarms and the continued failure to replace them is serious. It poses a significant risk to the health and safety of not just the tenant and her children, but also to the occupants of the eight other units in this complex. In addition, the removal of smoke alarms and the continued failure to replace them is an unlawful act under section 40(2)(ab) RTA. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. d. These breaches and their continuing nature are serious and termination is a proportionate response considering the extent of the damage to the landlord’s property, the ongoing failure to replace the smoke alarms and the risk this poses to the landlord’s other tenants and its insurance cover.
Despite the Tribunal’s finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence and the tenant’s promise to remedy the breaches, the Tribunal has determined that it is appropriate that the tenant be given a final opportunity to remedy the breaches and keep her tenancy. The Tribunal has therefore made a conditional termination order. See section 78(3) RTA.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) RTA.
The tenant needs to understand that if she does not carry out the work specified in this Order to an acceptable standard within the timeframe given, her tenancy will be terminated. Should further damage continue to be caused to the property or the smoke alarms be removed again, the landlord may bring a further application for termination. As discussed at the hearing, the fact that the tenant has already been given an opportunity to stop the behaviours causing such damage to the property, it is unlikely that the Tribunal will grant a further conditional termination order.

Order

The tenant shall install smoke alarms of the same type and specification of those missing from the property by 2 pm Thursday 9 October 2025 when the landlord shall inspect the property to confirm compliance.
In a good and tradesperson like manner, the tenant shall: a. Repair all wall damage including plastering, sanding and painting. b. Repair the damaged exterior window onto the balcony. c. Replace the towel rail, toilet roll holder, toilet seat, shower drain cover and the kitchen cupboard handles. d. Remove the red stain on the carpet, the paint on the floor in the lounge, hallway, bathroom and balcony and all marks from the kitchen ceiling. e. Repair or replace the burn mark on the carpet in the hallway. f. Clean the oven.
The tenant shall allow the landlord’s contractor to inspect the shower and carry out any necessary repairs so that the shower drains freely.
The landlord shall inspect the property at 1 pm Tuesday 28 October 2025 to confirm that the tenant has completed all the works in Order 2 to a satisfactory standard.
If the tenant fails to replace the smoke alarms as required by Order 1 or to complete all the works to a satisfactory standard as required by Order 2, the tenancy at Unit/Flat 12, 121 Church Street, West End, Palmerston North 4412 will terminate and the landlord will have immediate possession of the premises.
This matter is determined as indicated by the orders above, but if the tenant causes further damage to the property or removes the smoke alarms again before 11 November 2025 or disputes that the work has been completed to a satisfactory standard, then either the landlord or the tenant can email palmerstonnorthtt@justice.govt.nz and request that the application be brought back before the Tribunal with new evidence in respect of the damage and repairs so that the matter will be re-opened and a further hearing held.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing. Once the hearing had ended, it was found that the tenant was waiting outside. The hearing was reconvened so that the tenant could explain her situation and an agreement was reached.
The landlord had applied for termination of the tenancy under section 56 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) because the tenant had failed to remedy the matters raised in breach letters dated 23 July 2025 and 13 August 2025.
The letters required the tenant to: a. Replace missing smoke alarms. b. Repair damage to the walls, carpet and vinyl. c. Replace missing or damaged chattels. d. Clean the oven. e. Remove rubbish.
Despite being given two periods of 14-days to remedy the breaches, the tenant had failed to remedy more than a couple of the breaches. Discussion and decision
Section 56 RTA provides that the Tribunal may make an order terminating the tenancy if the Tribunal is satisfied that: a. The tenant has committed a breach of the tenancy agreement or the RTA, and b. The landlord has given the tenant 14-days’ notice to remedy the breach, and c. The tenant failed to remedy the breach within the specified period, and d. The breach is of such a nature or of such an extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy.
On the evidence before the Tribunal, it is satisfied that: a. The tenant has breached the terms of the tenancy agreement and the RTA, and b. The landlord gave the required breach notice on two separate occasions, and c. The tenant has failed to remedy the breaches within the specified time.
The Tribunal is satisfied that the breaches are of such a nature and extent that it would be inequitable to refuse to make an order terminating the tenancy for the following reasons: a. The scope and nature of the damage shows that this four-year-old property is suffering a significant negative impact because of the actions of the tenant, her children and guests for which the tenant is responsible. Every room in the house has suffered damage to the walls, some of it significant and extensive. A number of the landlord’s chattels have been damaged or removed. The tenant acknowledged that much of damage was caused by her children. Such damage is intentional because the tenant has allowed a situation to continue knowing that damage was inevitable. b. Despite being given over two months to repair the damage, the tenant has failed to do so. The breach has therefore been ongoing and deliberate. c. The removal of the smoke alarms and the continued failure to replace them is serious. It poses a significant risk to the health and safety of not just the tenant and her children, but also to the occupants of the eight other units in this complex. In addition, the removal of smoke alarms and the continued failure to replace them is an unlawful act under section 40(2)(ab) RTA. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $4,000.00. d. These breaches and their continuing nature are serious and termination is a proportionate response considering the extent of the damage to the landlord’s property, the ongoing failure to replace the smoke alarms and the risk this poses to the landlord’s other tenants and its insurance cover.
Despite the Tribunal’s finding that it would be inequitable to refuse to terminate the tenancy, having heard the evidence and the tenant’s promise to remedy the breaches, the Tribunal has determined that it is appropriate that the tenant be given a final opportunity to remedy the breaches and keep her tenancy. The Tribunal has therefore made a conditional termination order. See section 78(3) RTA.
The conditional termination order will lapse if it is fully complied with. If the tenant breaches the order, the possession order is enforceable for 90 days from the first breach. See section 64(4)(b) RTA.
The tenant needs to understand that if she does not carry out the work specified in this Order to an acceptable standard within the timeframe given, her tenancy will be terminated. Should further damage continue to be caused to the property or the smoke alarms be removed again, the landlord may bring a further application for termination. As discussed at the hearing, the fact that the tenant has already been given an opportunity to stop the behaviours causing such damage to the property, it is unlikely that the Tribunal will grant a further conditional termination order.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5328964 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat 12, 121 Church Street, West End, Palmerston

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5328964 — Smoke alarms at Unit/Flat 12, 121 Church Street, West End, Palmerston

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.