What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5347462 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties, names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5347462?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5347462?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5347462?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12964621-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5347462 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties, names and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5347462?

Property Damage: $750.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5347462?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5347462?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12964621-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5347462 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5347462 — net $778.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: fail to provide agreement	$750.00	fail to provide agreement
Filing fee	$28.00	Filing fee
Net award	$778.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$778.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5347462 — net $778.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: fail to provide agreement	$750.00	fail to provide agreement
Filing fee	$28.00	Filing fee
Net award	$778.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$778.00

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the parties, names and identifying details.
The Notice of Termination issued by the landlord on 20 August 2025, requiring that the tenant vacate the premises 17 September 2025 is declared to be retaliatory and is set aside.
It is declared to be a term of the parties’ agreement that the tenant is entitled to have one, but only one small dog living with him – the one seen and approved by the landlord before the tenancy started. The tenant must ensure that he immediately cleans up any droppings or other mess made by his dog at the property.
[The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $778.00 immediately, calculated below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing which was held by teleconference. Background
An Order was made on 30 September 2025. At that stage, the only application before the Tribunal was the landlord’s application for termination and possession, based on a Notice of Termination given by the landlord on 20 August 2025, requiring that the tenant vacate by 17 September 2025.
Although the tenant had not filed an application to set aside the notice, he did file a response to the landlord’s claim for possession, making it clear: a. that he challenged the termination notice as being retaliatory; and b. that there were counter claims the tenant wanted to be considered.
Because there was not enough time allocated to hear those claims, the hearing was adjourned.
In the meantime, the tenant has filed multiple claims, submissions, allegations and procedural requests.
With respect to the tenant, that series of claims and applications is somewhat hard to follow. Allegations are made of criminal conduct, with claims outside the Tribunal’s jurisdiction. Claims are made for exemplary damages in amounts exceeding the maximum specified or that do not relate to unlawful acts under the RTA. Claims are made citing provisions of the RTA that are unrelated. Some cases referred to in the tenant’s submissions either cannot be located or have no bearing on the issues raised.
The tenant is entitled to have his legitimate claims considered. It will be helpful I think to set out the approach I have taken to assessing them. Principles
The Tribunal’s jurisdiction is to determine disputes between landlords and tenants. 1
Compensation can be awarded where a party has breached an obligation owed to the other party, causing loss. That can be to compensate for financial loss or loss of amenity or it can be to compensate for psychological or emotional harm by way of general damages.
Where a party’s breach is categorised by the RTA as an unlawful act, exemplary damages can be awarded up to the maximum specified in Schedule 1A.
The Tribunal does not have any general jurisdiction to sanction criminal or otherwise wrongful conduct. 1 S. 77(1) RTA
The Tribunal is required to exercise its jurisdiction, “... in a manner that is most likely to ensure the fair and expeditious resolution of disputes between landlords and tenants of residential premises to which this Act applies........according to the general principles of the law relating to the matter and the substantial merits and justice of the case, but shall not be bound to give effect to strict legal rights or obligations or to legal forms or technicalities. 2 ”
Claimants need to provide evidence that proves the facts on which the claim is based on the balance of probabilities (ie. more likely than not). Where serious allegations are made, a solid evidence foundation is required.
In this case, what a fair and expeditious resolution of the dispute requires is that: a. the Tribunal need not assess and address claims that are simply outside its jurisdiction; b. where evidence provided by the tenant shows a basis for a possible claim under the RTA, the claim should be assessed against the relevant provisions.
Several witness summons’ were issued, at the tenant’s request, requiring other occupants of this boarding house to be available to give evidence by phone at the hearing on 8 December 2025 . Only one of those witnesses was able to be contacted.
I have given thought to whether further hearing time and further witness’ summons’ should be arranged, to allow the Tribunal to hear from those witnesses.
Having heard from the one witness, considering that the other witness’ evidence is also likely to be of an indirect nature, and given the time since the proceedings were filed, my finding is that the interest in achieving an expeditious resolution of the dispute outweighs any possible unfairness in a decision being made without hearing from those other witnesses.

Was the Notice of Termination retaliatory?

For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord 3 . 2 S.85 RTA 3 S. 54(1) RTA
Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00 4 .
The tenant says that he was given notice of termination because he had been complaining to the landlord about the landlord entering his room and about the actions of other residents, engaging in unlawful drug taking.
The landlord’s initial evidence was that the termination notice was issued, not because the tenant was making those complaints but because the tenant occupies one of the larger rooms in the boarding house, which the landlord wanted to make available for a staff member.
At the second hearing however, the landlord said that he would be happy for the tenant to stay living there, as long as he no longer had dogs and allowed his room to be inspected and Healthy Homes compliance work done (an Order requiring access for those purposes was made on 8 December 2025).
Correspondence provided in the evidence shows that in March 2025, the tenant had complained to the landlord about management entering his room without notice. Shortly before the termination notice was issued there had been conflict about the landlord’s tradespeople having access to the room so a wall heater could be installed to meet HH standards compliance.
The evidence persuades me, on balance, that although there may have been other reasons influencing the decision as well, the decision to issue the termination notice was motivated, at least partly, by the tenant’s complaints and the position he had taken over access to his room for the compliance work.
I find that the notice of termination was retaliatory and should be set aside.

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

The Tribunal need not declare a notice to be retaliatory if it is satisfied that the tenant’s complaints were vexatious or frivolous to such an extent that the landlord was justified in giving the notice.
Evidence of the communication between the parties shows that: a. the landlord was responding appropriately to complaints made by the tenant that were combative and hostile in tone; b. the landlord was acting appropriately in giving notice of entry to the tenant’s room for compliance work, whereas the tenant was asserting 4 S. 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A RTA rights to prevent access that he did not have under the RTA – the landlord has a statutory right of entry for such purposes, provided proper notice is given. 5
On balance, while I do not find that the nature of the tenant’s complaints and attitude should prevent the termination notice being set aside as retaliatory, it does mean that it would be unjust for an award of exemplary damages to be made against the landlord as well as the Notice being set aside.

Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a copy of the agreement?

A landlord must ensure that the tenancy agreement is in writing and that a signed copy of provided to the tenant before the tenancy begins 6 . Failure to do so is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages of up to $750.00 may be awarded
The tenant says that he was not provided with a signed copy of the agreement. Furthermore, he says that after he signed, the agreement was changed to add in a clause that, “No pets are allowed in the room and all premises”
The tenant says that change is obvious because the colour and density of that handwritten clause in the agreement is a little different from the other handwritten clauses.
The tenant has also provided evidence from [Community organisation], which was supporting him, stating, “I am writing to confirm that a keyworker in my team here at [Community organisation] named [The keyworker], supported [The tenant/s] into accommodation at [Tenancy address suppressed] on the 1st of July 2025. In our system from that date there is a note recorded with an extract below provided: [The keyworker] contacted [Tenancy address suppressed]. They had a room available and would be open to allowing the dog, but [The tenant/s] must come in for a face-to-face interview. [The keyworker] then confirms that upon arrival and the manager seeing the small size of the dog, that verbal approval was given to [The tenant/s] was able to have the dog onsite staying with him.” (I infer that the intended reference date was 1 July 2024)
It seems clear from the evidence that the tenant placed very high value on being able to have an emotional support dog with him. The evidence from the [Community organisation] persuades me that it was agreed that the tenant could have that one small dog.
It is appropriate that the Tribunal confirm that as a term of the agreement, which the landlord is bound by. Of course, the tenant is responsible for ensuring that the dog does not interfere with the cleanliness and hygiene of the premises and 5 S.66R(2) RTA 6 S.13 RTA does not interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of the premises by other residents.
There is no compelling evidence of any agreement that an additional dog could be kept.
Because of the importance of his dog to the tenant, it does not seem to me credible that the tenant would sign an agreement stating that no pets were allowed.
That means it is more likely than not: a. the clause was added after the agreement was signed by the tenant; b. the tenant was not given an accurate (if any) copy of the agreement.
The landlord therefore committed an unlawful act. It was intentional and altering the agreement after it was signed is unacceptable. In those circumstances the maximum award of exemplary damages is appropriate. Did the landlord fail to lodge the tenant’s bond?
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching that obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. 7
The agreement does not provide for a bond to be paid.
The tenant highlights 2 payments of $1,000.00 each made to the landlord by WINZ on 1 July 2024. He says that comprised one weeks’ rent ($500.00) in advance and 3 weeks’ rent as a bond, which ought to have been lodged. The coding on the WINZ payments supports that interpretation.
The landlord says that despite how WINZ might have coded the payments, they comprised one weeks’ rent as a bond, which does not need to be lodged 8 and 3 weeks’ rent.
The landlord’s rent records show that the next rent payment was not made until 23 July 2024, which is consistent with 3 weeks’ rent in advance having been paid on 1 July. So either that $1,500.00 was intended as rent, consistent with the agreement which did not require a bond, or it was intended as a bond and the tenant has been 3 weeks in arrears throughout the tenancy. The former intention seems most likely. 7 S. 19(2) and Schedule 1A RTA. 8 S.66D RTA
The evidence does not prove, on balance, that the landlord wrongfully failed to lodge a bond paid by the tenant.

Did the landlord harass the tenant or allow him to be harassed?

A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises 9 . Breaching this obligation in circumstances that amount to harassment is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $3,000.00 10 .
They must take reasonable steps to ensure that other tenants do not interfere with a tenant’s reasonable peace comfort or privacy. 11
A boarding house landlord must also take reasonable steps to ensure that the house rules are observed and consistently enforced 12 .
The tenant alleges that the landlord breached all of those obligations in egregious ways. He says that there was a campaign of harassment of him by the landlord, particularly after he raised concerns about drug use at the property. He says he was harassed by other tenants, with, at least, the knowledge of the landlord. He says that by failing to enforce the house rules consistently and by compromising the security of the premises by providing a master key to other occupants, the landlord has jeopardised the tenant’s safety and right to peaceful enjoyment of his room and the premises.
The landlord has provided a detailed response denying any harassment of the tenant and essentially denying any knowledge of the incidents complained of, including interfering with the tenant’s clothing on the clothes line.
There is evidence of the landlord seeking access to the tenant’s room. The txts show the landlord txting the tenant, “Hi [The tenant/s], we are outside your room please open the door.”
That was after proper notice of an intended entry for an inspection and compliance work had been given. The tenant was acting unlawfully by denying the landlord access 13 . The landlord’s attempt to exercise that right of access in that way does not constitute harassment.
The evidence also shows that when the tenant complained that some of his food had been taken from a refrigerator, the landlord attempted to help with camera footage. Signs were placed by the landlord remining resident of the prohibition on taking others’ food. Signs are posted reminding residents of the no smoking and no drugs (and no pets) requirements. 9 S.66G(2) RTA 10 S.66G(4) RTA 11 S.45(1)(e) RTA 12 S.66I(h) RTA 13 S.66T(1)(c) RTA
While the tenant complains about being locked out of his room, the evidence shows 3 txts to the landlord all sent at 12:16am: “Hello can you please come to open my door? Thanks...I sleep on a medical machine. Are you coming? Or, I call 111 to open the door? ......I’ll be calling the fire hazard to open my door if no one comes in 30 minutes”
The tenant alleges that the landlord encouraged hostility toward him from other tenants, suppressed key evidence, removed key individual witnesses, destroyed CCTV footage and continued to tolerate drug related activity at the premises.
The tenant notes that after his written complaint about a manager made in February 2025, that manager, who had been living at the property, was relocated to another property. The tenant characterises that as concealment.
The tenant goes so far as to allege that the landlord intentionally cut power to the premises, knowing that the tenant depends on a CPAP machine during sleep, a “....targeted and malicious disruption of life support equipment.”
There is some evidence of hostility toward the tenant exhibited by other residents, particularly a mother and daughter [Resident 1] and [Resident 2]. [Resident 1] left the boarding house shortly after the initial hearing, which the tenant characterises as the landlord suppressing her availability as a witness.
There is no evidence that the behaviour of those residents was encouraged or condoned by the landlord.
Having considered all of the evidence provided, while I do not doubt the depth and sincerity of the tenant’s concerns, the very serious allegations made by the tenant are not supported by evidence necessary for the Tribunal to find them proved.
These claims for breach of quiet enjoyment/ harassment are dismissed.

Was the tenant discriminated against?

It is unlawful for a landlord to discriminate against any person in respect of the grant, continuance, extension, variation, termination, or renewal of a tenancy agreement in contravention of the Human Rights Act 14 .
The tenant says he was discriminated against because of his disability, which is a prohibited ground of discrimination 15 . He says the discrimination is shown through the landlord’s resistance to his having an emotional support dog.
There is no evidence of a diagnosis requiring the tenant to have the support of a disability assist dog. 14 S.12 RTA 15 S.21(1)(h)(vi) Human Rights Act 1993
Also, I have found it was an agreed term of the tenancy that the tenant be able to have the small dog that was approved when the tenancy began. The tenant has had that support throughout the tenancy.
The landlord’s position in wanting the “no pets” policy enforced was not so much that the tenant had a support dog, but that he had 2 dogs and the tenant’s failure to clean up after them was causing problems with the other residents.
I do not find it proved that the landlord unlawfully discriminated against the tenant.
Because the tenant has succeeded with some claims I reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5347462 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5347462 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the Notice of Termination retaliatory?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a copy of the agreement?

Did the landlord harass the tenant or allow him to be harassed?

Was the tenant discriminated against?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Was the Notice of Termination retaliatory?

Should exemplary damages be awarded?

Did the landlord fail to provide the tenant with a copy of the agreement?

Did the landlord harass the tenant or allow him to be harassed?

Was the tenant discriminated against?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions