What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344395 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s applications are dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5344395?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344395?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344395?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12762081-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5344395 about?

The tribunal order states: The landlord’s applications are dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5344395?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5344395?

The primary dispute was State of repair. Related themes: Cleanliness, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5344395?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12762081-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

21 Tamar Street, South Hill, Oamaru 9400 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5344395 — State of repair

Tenantcheck Insights

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Cottier and Ms Robertson represented the landlord.

There are 2 landlord applications and 1 tenant application before the Tribunal. Background

The parties entered a fixed term tenancy that started on 18 July 2025 and was to end on 18 July 2026.

Following the first inspection the landlord emailed the tenant and raised a cleaning issue – soap scum on the shower tray.

That issue appears to have acted as a catalyst for the tenant becoming frustrated with the landlord’s management of the tenancy. He considered that issuing a 14-day notice for the cleaning of the shower tray was unnecessary and a poor approach to the landlord/tenant relationship.

Matters escalated and the tenant issued a 14-day notice for some repairs and gardening. He also advised the landlord that he wanted to be released from the fixed term tenancy. The landlord sent him (standard) conditions to be released from the tenancy with fees that are commonly charged, sometimes referred to as ‘break lease’ costs, although that is not a statutory term.

The parties could not reach an agreement about when the tenancy would end. They both provided the email exchanges on that issue. The landlord believed a 21-day period was reasonable. The tenant wanted a much longer period.

Each filed applications seeking orders, or at least clarification, about ending the tenancy. The tenant also sought a declaration that the landlord had given notice to end the tenancy in relation for him raising issues in his 14-day notice, exemplary damages, and compensation for the landlord’s failure to maintain the premises. The landlord filed a second application seeking exemplary damages for what it considered was tenant harassment. Issues

The issues the Tribunal must determine are these: •Can any order be made about the ending of the tenancy? •Has the landlord proved a claim for harassment by the tenant? •Has the tenant proved claims for a declaration that the termination notice was retaliatory, compensation and/or exemplary damages? Law Statutory provisions

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 40 RTA sets out a tenant’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to pay rent when due; to keep the premises reasonably clean and tidy; to leave the premises in a reasonably clean and tidy condition; and to quit the premises when the tenancy ends.

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).

Section 54 RTA allows the Tribunal to declare a notice to terminate the tenancy (that complies with section 51 RTA) retaliatory, to set it aside, and to award exemplary damages for the giving of the notice. Compensation and exemplary damages

The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.

Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.

In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.

Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.

Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has, with intent, committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: 1 [2020] NZDC 17667 • 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

Can any order be made about the ending of the tenancy?

The tenancy ended on 10 November 2025 by agreement. There is no order the Tribunal can make. That issue is moot.

Has the landlord proved a claim for harassment by the tenant?

I have referred to section 38 RTA which provides for a tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment. A serious or sustained breach of a tenant’s quiet enjoyment by a landlord is a defined unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages if the breach is proved.

There is no corresponding provision in the RTA for the breach of a landlord’s quiet enjoyment amounting to harassment and therefore no defined unlawful act.

There is no order the Tribunal can make. The landlord’s applications are therefore dismissed. Has the tenant proved claims for a retaliatory notice declaration, compensation and/or exemplary damage?

The tenant has not proved that the landlord gave a notice to terminate the tenancy that complies with section 51 RTA. After requesting to be released from the tenancy, the parties started to negotiate a date when the tenancy would end. That the landlord mentioned 21 days does not constitute the giving of a notice to terminate a tenancy; it was just part of the negotiations between the parties.

I find that the landlord did not give a 21-day notice to end the tenancy. It could not do that because the tenancy was a fixed term tenancy. All that happened was a discussion initiated by the tenant’s request to end the tenancy early. I dismiss this part of the application.

The tenant has not proved any breach by the landlord that would amount to an unlawful act for which the Tribunal might award exemplary damages. To prove a claim for exemplary damages a party must establish on the balance of probabilities that the other party committed a breach of their statutory responsibilities, that the breach is a defined unlawful act, and that the party acted with intent which in this context means ‘turned their mind to the act and deliberately set about to commit it’ – see Birch.

Nothing in the evidence establishes any intentional breach by the landlord in this case. The tenant’s application for exemplary damages is dismissed.

The tenant raised some repair issues, and gardening, in a 14-day notice. The main unresolved issues were the repair of the dish-drawer dishwasher, and the gardening. A lock, mentioned in the notice was repaired. And a drainage issue arose after the notice was issued.

The landlord arranged for some gardening to be done. However, the tenancy agreement specifically provided that the gardens were for the tenant to maintain.

The landlord had the dishwasher repaired. While an error message started to appear again after the repair was done, and was never addressed, this is not a case where the landlord simply failed to act. When relations between the landlord and the tenant deteriorated, so did the clarity of the communications. Ms Cottier said she did not recall receiving emails from the tenant about the dishwasher needing further repair to correct the error message.

This is not a matter of such significance that the Tribunal need intervene. The tenant had the use of one of the dish drawers; the bottom drawer worked.

The evidence produced establishes that the landlord generally responded promptly and well to the issues raised by the tenant in the context of a deteriorating relationship. The application for compensation and an alleged failure by the landlord to maintain the premises is dismissed.

Finally, Mr Cryer expressed concern that the landlord had altered some precedent forms obtained from the Tenancy Services website. He referred to them as ‘government templates’.

Even if the landlord did change some of the forms there is nothing sinister about that. Tenancy Services is an advisory service for landlords and tenants. Its website contains downloadable precedent forms that are fully RTA compliant. But they are not mandated. Parties can alter them but do so at their risk; any changes risk the forms not complying with the requirements of the RTA. Result

Both parties’ applications are dismissed. Name suppression

Both parties applied for name suppression. Neither party is eligible for name suppression as the applications are unsuccessful 2 .

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Ms Cottier and Ms Robertson represented the landlord.

There are 2 landlord applications and 1 tenant application before the Tribunal. Background

The parties entered a fixed term tenancy that started on 18 July 2025 and was to end on 18 July 2026.

Following the first inspection the landlord emailed the tenant and raised a cleaning issue – soap scum on the shower tray.

The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.

Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.

Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.

Can any order be made about the ending of the tenancy?

The tenancy ended on 10 November 2025 by agreement. There is no order the Tribunal can make. That issue is moot.

Has the landlord proved a claim for harassment by the tenant?

There is no corresponding provision in the RTA for the breach of a landlord’s quiet enjoyment amounting to harassment and therefore no defined unlawful act.

Nothing in the evidence establishes any intentional breach by the landlord in this case. The tenant’s application for exemplary damages is dismissed.

The landlord arranged for some gardening to be done. However, the tenancy agreement specifically provided that the gardens were for the tenant to maintain.

This is not a matter of such significance that the Tribunal need intervene. The tenant had the use of one of the dish drawers; the bottom drawer worked.

Finally, Mr Cryer expressed concern that the landlord had altered some precedent forms obtained from the Tenancy Services website. He referred to them as ‘government templates’.

Both parties’ applications are dismissed. Name suppression

Both parties applied for name suppression. Neither party is eligible for name suppression as the applications are unsuccessful 2 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344395 — State of repair at 21 Tamar Street, South Hill, Oamaru 9400

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5344395 — State of repair at 21 Tamar Street, South Hill, Oamaru 9400

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Can any order be made about the ending of the tenancy?

Has the landlord proved a claim for harassment by the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Can any order be made about the ending of the tenancy?

Has the landlord proved a claim for harassment by the tenant?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.