What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5338001 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying

How much money was awarded in case 5338001?

Compensation: Lack Of Heating: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5338001?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5338001?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13052470-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5338001 about?

The tribunal order states: By consent, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying

How much money was awarded in case 5338001?

Compensation: Lack Of Heating: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5338001?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5338001?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13052470-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5338001 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5338001 — net $1,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Lack of heating	$1,000.00	Lack of heating
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,028.00
Bond	$1,400.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,028.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5338001 — net $1,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Lack of heating	$1,000.00	Lack of heating
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,028.00
Bond	$1,400.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,028.00

Order

By consent, suppression of both the Tenant and Landlord names and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $1,028.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The landlord has applied for compensation following the end of the tenancy.
The tenant filed a cross application and applied for a refund of the bond, and compensation for landlord failure to maintain the premises.
The onus is on both parties to prove their claims on the balance of probabilities.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

The landlord is seeking $250.00 for damage to wallpaper, and $100.00 for damage to a panel heater.
A landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent (or four weeks' market rent in the case of a tenant paying income-related rent). See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent (or market rent). See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
Damage is intentional where a person intends to cause damage and takes the necessary steps to achieve that purpose. Damage is also intentional where a person does something, or allows a situation to continue, knowing that damage is a certainty.
I do not find that the tenant caused damage to the wallpaper in the lounge. I find it more likely that the wallpaper has been cracking and flaking off over time in an area with acknowledged pre-existing damage and peeling.
While I am satisfied that the panel heater had a dent in it at the end of the tenancy, I find this to be in the ‘wear and tear’ category rather than damage. In any event, the dent is superficial only and the heater was still in working order.
The landlord’s claim is dismissed. Cross application

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Under section 45, a landlord must [of relevance here] provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety, and comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (by 1 July 2025 for this tenancy).
Prior to the Healthy Homes Standards, Regulation 6 of the Housing Improvement Regulations 1947 required that every living room shall be fitted with a fireplace or chimney or other approved form of heating. In addition, Regulation 15 requires that every house shall be free from dampness.
Preventing the development of dampness and mould is a dual obligation of the tenant and landlord. Tenants must take preventative measures such as heating, ventilation (e.g. opening curtains and windows), using extractor fans (if any), and wiping away daily condensation that arises from ordinary living. Landlord must provide a house that is not prone to mould, fix any defect creating mould, and provide an adequate form of heating in every living room.
The tenants say the bathroom and second bedroom have been damp and mouldy from the start of the tenancy. They say they mentioned this repeatedly to their property manager and they were told it was just condensation and they needed to fully ventilate. The tenants said that despite ventilating regularly, the mould persisted in a corner of the bedroom and paint in the bathroom.
The landlord says they installed a mechanical moisture removal system which is hardwired and runs constantly. They say that there have been no issues with the gutters or roof, and they believe the problem has been condensation rather than any dampness or leaks. They rely on a statement from their painter who says that there was no indication of any water ingress or leaks in the bathroom and second bedroom, and he believes that mould is being caused by condensation and a lack of ventilation.
The landlord does not dispute that they did not achieve Healthy Homes compliance for heating and moisture until 15 August 2025 as a heat pump and moisture ground barrier had to be installed. However, I accept there is a mitigating factor as the parties were in active negotiations about the tenants buying the premises for some months prior to 1 July 2025, and as a result, compliance was stalled for a short time. Although the landlord is in technical breach, the tenants have not suffered loss in any event as the landlord gave them a rent reduction to cover this period.
On balance, I find that the tenants have not provided sufficient evidence to prove that there was a defect at the premises causing ongoing mould and dampness issues or that the premises were prone to mould for some other reason.
However, it is not disputed that the landlord is in breach of their responsibilities as they did not provide any form of heating from the start of the tenancy on 23 March 2018 until March 2021.
Quantifying the tenants’ loss is not an exact science. Weighing the substantial merits and justice of the case, I make an award of $1000.00 as fair, reasonable and proportionate compensation. This takes into account the fact that heating would not have been needed during the warmer months.
As the tenants have substantially succeeded with their claims, the landlord must reimburse the filing fee.
Both parties have agreed to name suppression for each other.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5338001 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5338001 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to the premises?

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions