How much money was awarded in case 5359657?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5359657?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5359657?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12852497-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5359657?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5359657?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5359657?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12852497-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Room 3, Unit/Flat 4, 48 Aurora Terrace, Kelburn, Wellington Tenancy Tribunal Case 5359657 — Exemplary damages

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5359657 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5359657 — net $1,128.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Reimbursement of bond and rent	$800.00	Reimbursement of bond and rent
Exemplary damages: tenancy agreement breach	$300.00	tenancy agreement breach
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,128.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,128.00

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

Property Management Wellington Limited As Agent For Platinum Property Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $1,128.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by a property manager.

The tenant has applied for the $800 he paid for a room he never moved into, and for exemplary damages because the landlord did not sign a tenancy agreement.

The tenant signed a tenancy agreement for a room. The tenancy was meant to start on 25 September 2025. The tenant signed a tenancy agreement and returned it to the landlord by email on 21 September. The property manager looking after the tenancy was away sick. No one got back to the tenant.

On 24 September the tenant tried to arrange to collect the keys. The property manager asked what time he wanted to meet and he said 8.45am on 25 September. He was very clear he had to go to work after getting the keys. The tenant was there at 8.45 and he sent two messages to the landlord. At this point he started to doubt himself, whether or not he even had a tenancy, and the professionalism of the landlord. He arranged to extend his existing lease instead and advised the landlord he would not be taking the tenancy.

The landlord has not refunded the bond and the first weeks rent, a total of $800. The landlord advised at the hearing that the bond should have been refunded and that the landlord would like some of the first week’s rent because the tenant did not give notice. The landlord did not file an application so this has not been considered.

I find the tenant’s reaction on 25 September to be a reasonable response to the lack of communication from the landlord. I also find it was reasonable for the tenant to question whether there was a contract because the landlord had not accepted his offer to rent by signing and returning the tenancy agreement. The landlord should refund all the money paid.

The claim for exemplary damages relates to the tenancy agreement. It is agreed evidence the landlord did not sign the tenancy agreement and provide a signed copy to the tenant. The RTA requires a landlord to ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A RTA.

The tenant said he doubted the landlord because there was no signed tenancy agreement. The landlord said there was no intention to not provide the signed agreement, and the mistake happened because the staff member was sick. The landlord said he had printed a signed copy of the agreement and was hoping to hand it to the tenant with the keys on 25 September. I find landlord did not comply with the RTA and committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.

I find the landlord acted intentionally because there were three working days for someone to sign the tenancy agreement and email a copy back to the tenant. The effect for the tenant was uncertainty and stress. It is in tenants interests that landlords complete the tenancy agreement before the tenancy starts so there is certainty of terms. There is public interest in landlords paying exemplary damages to encourage compliance. I allow $300 which is mid range because the landlord knows the rules about providing tenancy agreements before the tenancy starts. Other orders

Because the tenant has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed. This is because the tenant is the most successful party. The landlord’s name will be published because there is public interest when landlord’s pay exemplary damages. See section 95A RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5359657 — net $1,128.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Reimbursement of bond and rent	$800.00	Reimbursement of bond and rent
Exemplary damages: tenancy agreement breach	$300.00	tenancy agreement breach
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,128.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,128.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Property Management Wellington Limited As Agent For Platinum Property Trust must pay [The tenant/s] $1,128.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. The landlord was represented by a property manager.
The tenant has applied for the $800 he paid for a room he never moved into, and for exemplary damages because the landlord did not sign a tenancy agreement.
The tenant signed a tenancy agreement for a room. The tenancy was meant to start on 25 September 2025. The tenant signed a tenancy agreement and returned it to the landlord by email on 21 September. The property manager looking after the tenancy was away sick. No one got back to the tenant.
On 24 September the tenant tried to arrange to collect the keys. The property manager asked what time he wanted to meet and he said 8.45am on 25 September. He was very clear he had to go to work after getting the keys. The tenant was there at 8.45 and he sent two messages to the landlord. At this point he started to doubt himself, whether or not he even had a tenancy, and the professionalism of the landlord. He arranged to extend his existing lease instead and advised the landlord he would not be taking the tenancy.
The landlord has not refunded the bond and the first weeks rent, a total of $800. The landlord advised at the hearing that the bond should have been refunded and that the landlord would like some of the first week’s rent because the tenant did not give notice. The landlord did not file an application so this has not been considered.
I find the tenant’s reaction on 25 September to be a reasonable response to the lack of communication from the landlord. I also find it was reasonable for the tenant to question whether there was a contract because the landlord had not accepted his offer to rent by signing and returning the tenancy agreement. The landlord should refund all the money paid.
The claim for exemplary damages relates to the tenancy agreement. It is agreed evidence the landlord did not sign the tenancy agreement and provide a signed copy to the tenant. The RTA requires a landlord to ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A RTA.
The tenant said he doubted the landlord because there was no signed tenancy agreement. The landlord said there was no intention to not provide the signed agreement, and the mistake happened because the staff member was sick. The landlord said he had printed a signed copy of the agreement and was hoping to hand it to the tenant with the keys on 25 September. I find landlord did not comply with the RTA and committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that it would be just to do so, having regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. See section 109(3) RTA.
I find the landlord acted intentionally because there were three working days for someone to sign the tenancy agreement and email a copy back to the tenant. The effect for the tenant was uncertainty and stress. It is in tenants interests that landlords complete the tenancy agreement before the tenancy starts so there is certainty of terms. There is public interest in landlords paying exemplary damages to encourage compliance. I allow $300 which is mid range because the landlord knows the rules about providing tenancy agreements before the tenancy starts. Other orders
Because the tenant has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
The tenant’s application for suppression is allowed. This is because the tenant is the most successful party. The landlord’s name will be published because there is public interest when landlord’s pay exemplary damages. See section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5359657 — Exemplary damages at Room 3, Unit/Flat 4, 48 Aurora Terrace, Kelburn, Wellington

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5359657 — Exemplary damages at Room 3, Unit/Flat 4, 48 Aurora Terrace, Kelburn, Wellington

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions