What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5334516 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 5334516?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5334516?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5334516?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12789237-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5334516 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 5334516?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5334516?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5334516?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12789237-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

65 Cobra Street, Halswell, Christchurch 8025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5334516 — Mould & damp

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord’s name and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing I held on 4 November 2025. I heard evidence from the tenant and her daughter and from the landlord’s representative. I also heard 3 recordings of conversations between the tenant and the property managers (2) taken without them being aware they were being recorded and between her and the log burner service contractor (1).
The tenant has applied for compensation, exemplary damages, and reimbursement of the filing fee.
The tenancy is a current tenancy. It will end on 19 June 2026. Background
This tenancy started on 13 June 2025 although the tenant was given the keys the day before.
On 21 June 2025, the tenant emailed her property manager with a list of 16 things she considered required attention. In addition to the need for cleaning, she said that a smoke alarm was missing, some curtains had black mould on them, there were draughts coming through the windows in all the rooms, the log burner was not working, the hallway plug did not work, water ponded outside the conservatory door, and there was a dripping sound in the toilet.
Despite the landlord attending to repair issues promptly, the tenant has continued to send multiple emails (the landlord estimates over 100) expressing her dissatisfaction with the state of the premises. The tenant’s claims
The tenant has the following claims: •The premises were not compliant with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) – exemplary damages of $7,200.00. •The landlord did not provide the premises in a reasonably clean condition – compensation of $2,800.00. •Excessive electricity consumption due to the log burner being unusable; draughts; firewood being made wet – compensation of $2,300.00. •Plumbing and water pooling issues – compensation of $720.00. •Time, effort, inconvenience – compensation of $2,000.00. •Mental and physical stress and strain – compensation of $2,000.00. •Loss of quiet enjoyment and unfair harassment – compensation of $2,000.00. •Misrepresentation and false advertising – compensation of $2,000.00.
In total, the tenant’s claim amounts to $21,000.00 (amended from $33,000.00). Issues
The Tribunal must determine the following issues: • Did the landlord fail to comply with their section 45 RTA responsibilities? • Has the tenant proved claims for compensation? • Has the tenant provided a claim for exemplary damages? Relevant law
Section 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) provides that a tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without interruption by the landlord and that the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant.
Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to provide the premises in a reasonably clean state; to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to the age and character of the premises); and to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS).
A failure by a landlord to provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness, to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, to comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms, and to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) is declared to be an unlawful act 1 .
Section 109 RTA sets out the matters the Tribunal must consider when awarding exemplary damages. They are the intention of the person; the effect of the unlawful act; the interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and the public interest. Discussion

Did the landlord fail to comply with their section 45 RTA responsibilities?

The tenant would have the Tribunal believe that she has been subjected to great inconvenience, mental stress, harassment, and a failure to maintain the premises leading to a significant loss of enjoyment of the tenancy.
There are inconsistencies in the tenant’s evidence. For example, in her email to the landlord dated 21 June 2025 when she first raised the several complaints about the premises, she said This is so stressful and depressing when we were looking forward to the move to a dryer, warmer home with a fire we thought, as the last place was a nightmare...
Yet, in evidence at the hearing the tenant said: It was a shame to move from the last house. It was painted and all nice. And warm...Bayleys managed it better. 1 See section 45(1A) RTA
The landlord produced in evidence a decision I issued recently in relation to the tenant’s previous tenancy 2 . I dismissed the tenant’s application for orders similar to the orders sought now based on many of the same alleged breaches. I observed in that decision that I believed the tenant’s application was contrived.
At that hearing the tenant was critical of the management of her tenancy and of the premises. It is therefore difficult to reconcile the evidence she gave then with the evidence she gave at the hearing of this application.
I have taken time with my consideration of the issues the tenant raised in this application, given that I heard her previous application. I wanted to be sure that I considered this application objectively and fairly. I have done that.
I am unable to find that the landlord failed to comply with its section 45 RTA responsibilities in this case – repairs and maintenance and HHS compliance. I note, and can understand, the landlord’s representative’s submission: After considering all interactions with Megan, her video/voice recordings and emails, I feel that her intention has always been to create this tenancy tribunal hearing for hefty amounts of compensation and was pre-meditated and planned from the beginning. Just like she said good things about Bayleys in her tenancy application to us, then filed against them for pretty much identical claims as with us. As per all recordings, we never knew we were being recorded yet were always nothing but respectful and pleasant to Megan. Ourselves and the property owners (the sole and proudly owner/maintained rental property of two sisters and their husbands) are absolutely gutted by this application.
The landlord’s representative also noted that a complaint the tenant made to the Tenancy Services Compliance Team concluded that there were no landlord breaches of the HHS and closed the file.
The landlord’s representative said that nothing they did was good enough and there was a constant barrage of complaints and demands.
The tenant appears to not understand that condensation on windows occurs naturally with temperature variations. It is not a landlord breach. It can only be remedied by the manner in which the premises are used – wiping down the condensation and ensuring ventilation.
The tenant appears to by hyper-vigilant, contacting the landlord repeatedly about minor matters and demanding actions that the landlord is not required to do. An example is her belief that the bedrooms had to reach a certain temperature in order to be HHS compliant. That is not correct. She requested thermal backed curtains. A landlord does not have to provide such curtains. She 2 [2025] NZTT 5283742 also appears to believe that because she pays what she considers is a high rent, everything she raises must be dealt with immediately.
The tenant’s submissions were hyperbolic. This is an example: Mental and physical stress/strain caused by the trauma of cold living conditions kept awake frequently throughout the night, unprofessional attitude and communication, betrayal, non-transparency, dishonesty, gaslighting to the point of psychological abuse and manipulative game playing, in order to try and convince me I was imagining things....Health impacts on me and my children including shivering, coughing, mould exposure, medical visits.
The objective evidence does not support that submission. The photos show well-presented and well-maintained premises, with numerous invoices for repair and maintenance work. The premises were assessed for HHS compliance by a professional company in 2022. That maintenance is required from time to time does not mean that the premises suddenly become HHS non-compliant. The evidence does not establish that the log burner was non-compliant with the heating standard

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

Compensation is not punitive. It seeks to restore the person seeking it to the position they would have been in but for a breach by the other party.
I do not find that the landlord has committed any breaches of its section 45 RTA responsibilities in this case, nor any of its other landlord responsibilities. Nor do I find that there was any misrepresentation by the landlord.
Without a proven breach by the landlord, the tenant’s claim for compensation ($13,820.00 - $4,000.00 of which is for time, effort, inconvenience, mental and physical stress and strain) must fail.
The tenant’s application for compensation is dismissed.

Has the tenant provided a claim for exemplary damages?

To success on a claim for exemplary damages the party seeking them must first identify a breach that is a defined unlawful act and then prove that the party from whom damages are sought committed the unlawful act with intent. That means that they ‘turned their mind to the act and deliberately set about to commit it’ 3
I find no proven breaches by the landlord that are defined unlawful acts in this case. The application for exemplary damages is dismissed. 3 See Birch v Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust [2020] NZDC 17667 Result
The application is dismissed Name suppression
Both parties sought name suppression. The tenant is not entitled to name suppression as her application is unsuccessful. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as its defence to the application is successful 4 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5334516 — Mould & damp at 65 Cobra Street, Halswell, Christchurch 8025

Tenancy Tribunal case 5334516 — Mould & damp at 65 Cobra Street, Halswell, Christchurch 8025

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to comply with their section 45 RTA responsibilities?

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

Has the tenant provided a claim for exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlord fail to comply with their section 45 RTA responsibilities?

Has the tenant proved claims for compensation?

Has the tenant provided a claim for exemplary damages?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions