What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5367063 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 5367063?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5367063?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5367063?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13809329-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5367063 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 5367063?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5367063?

The primary dispute was Healthy homes.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5367063?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13809329-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 8, 5 Claybrook Road, Parnell, Auckland 1052 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5367063 — Healthy homes

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5367063 — net $1,458.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond	$1,000.00	Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond
Refund of bond	$430.00	Refund of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,458.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,458.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Jacqueline Walker must pay [The tenant/s] $1,458.00 immediately, as per below: DescriptionTenant Exemplary damages: Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond $1,000.00 Refund of bond $430.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $1,458.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $1,458.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 15 May 2026.
The tenancy was from 20 November 2021 until 13 September 2025.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant applied to the Tenancy Tribunal for refund of the bond, exemplary damages for the premises not complying with Healthy Homes Standards (“HHS”), the tenancy agreement not complying with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), failing to appoint an agent whilst overseas, and for compensation for the landlord reporting the tenants to their new property manager. Refund of the bond
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord acknowledged that the tenant had paid one week’s rent as bond at the beginning of the tenancy.
The landlord explained that she thought landlords did not have to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre when the bond was only one week’s worth of rent.
The landlord acknowledged that she had refused the refund of the bond as she believed that the tenant should pay for the cost of exit cleaning and costs for damage occurred during the tenancy. However, she had not filed a counterclaim with the Tenancy Services.
Section 22B(2) RTA provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant. Exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre
Under section 19(1) RTA, a landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00.
The landlord acknowledged that she had not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.
Mistake of law is not a defence. It was a conscious decision by the landlord. It has resulted in an unfair power imbalance between the parties at the end of the tenancy. There is public interest in ensuring bonds are lodged with the Bond Centre for the Tribunal to make decisions on them when disputes arise between the parties.
I award exemplary damages against the landlord for this. Failure to comply with HHS
Under section 45 RTA, a landlord must comply with the HHS.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. ee section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord acknowledged that she did not know about the requirement for HHS as she was elderly and had been renting the premises together with her late husband for many years, possibly from even before the Tenancy Tribunal came into existence.
At the time of the tenancy, there was no extractor fan in the kitchen or in the bathroom. Insulation was only installed by the Body Corporate after this tenancy had ended. The tenant was provided with a heater, but it was not a fixed heater. There was a dispute as to why the heater was not fixed but there was no dispute that having a non-fixed heater was not compliant with the HHS.
The tenant stated that the bathroom was damp and the build up of the mould in the shower was difficult to maintain due to there being no extractor fan. The tenant also had to keep the windows open when cooking. The tenant said that this has led to higher power bills. However, the tenant did not have any evidence to quantify the difference in the power bills.
I find that the premises was not compliant with HHS. Failure to ensure a healthy, warm and dry premises has affected the tenant’s quality of living whilst at the tenancy.
I award exemplary damages against the landlord for this breach. Non-compliant tenancy agreement
The tenant claimed that the tenancy agreement signed by the parties was not the current, standard tenancy agreement. It was an outdated template. The tenancy agreement omitted key parts of a full tenancy agreement. The omissions included a Healthy Homes Statement. There was no insulation statement, no insurance statement and no physical address for service for the landlord other than the tenancy address itself.
The landlord explained that she had used an old template that she and her late husband had been using and just used one of the hardcopies that had already been printed in the past.
This shows lack of awareness of the updates in the RTA and the landlord’s obligations.
However, I do not award any additional costs as a result of this breach as I award exemplary damages for the substantive breaches. Failure to appoint an agent while overseas
The tenant claimed that the landlord has been overseas for longer than the RTA permits without appointing an agent.
A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00.
The landlord acknowledged that she was away for longer than 21 consecutive days every year to see family overseas.
In the tenancy agreement, there was an “emergency contact” with full name, address and phone number. I find in the circumstances, that was sufficient for the purposes of being an “agent”. I do not order any exemplary damages against the landlord for this. Compensation for the landlord reporting to the tenants to their new property manager
The tenant complained about the landlord’s behaviour following the end of the tenancy. The tenant had moved out on 13 September 2025. However, the landlord was overseas at the time and did not conduct the exit inspect until the week of 4 October 2025.
When the landlord returned, she phoned the tenant saying there was extensive damage and the premises was not clean and therefore she would not be refunding the bond. When the tenant challenged the landlord’s right to keep the bond, including her failure to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre, she became hostile. The tenant ended the call and requested that the landlord contact the tenant in writing from then on.
The tenant requested a list of any reported damages via email. The landlord provided a copy of an email sent to the tenant’s new property manager, indicating that the property was left in “poor condition, dirty and with considerable damage.” The tenant was concerned by the landlord’s decision to contact the new property manager as it could impact their housing situation and reputation.
As a result, the tenant ceased any further contact with the landlord and applied to the Tribunal.
This is concerning behaviour by the landlord, but not one the Tenancy Tribunal can make any order on as it does not amount to “harassment”. I simply note it in this order to denounce such conduct. Amount of exemplary damages
I find with the two unlawful acts, exemplary damages of $1,000.00 would be appropriate.
Accordingly, I order the landlord to pay the tenant $1,000.00 as exemplary damages. Filing fee reimbursement
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the landlord to reimburse the tenant’s filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5367063 — net $1,458.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Exemplary damages: Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond	$1,000.00	Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond
Refund of bond	$430.00	Refund of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,458.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,458.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Jacqueline Walker must pay [The tenant/s] $1,458.00 immediately, as per below: DescriptionTenant Exemplary damages: Breach of HHS/Failure to lodge bond $1,000.00 Refund of bond $430.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $1,458.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $1,458.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 15 May 2026.
The tenancy was from 20 November 2021 until 13 September 2025.
At the end of the tenancy, the tenant applied to the Tenancy Tribunal for refund of the bond, exemplary damages for the premises not complying with Healthy Homes Standards (“HHS”), the tenancy agreement not complying with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”), failing to appoint an agent whilst overseas, and for compensation for the landlord reporting the tenants to their new property manager. Refund of the bond
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond. The landlord acknowledged that the tenant had paid one week’s rent as bond at the beginning of the tenancy.
The landlord explained that she thought landlords did not have to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre when the bond was only one week’s worth of rent.
The landlord acknowledged that she had refused the refund of the bond as she believed that the tenant should pay for the cost of exit cleaning and costs for damage occurred during the tenancy. However, she had not filed a counterclaim with the Tenancy Services.
Section 22B(2) RTA provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant. Exemplary damages for failure to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre
Under section 19(1) RTA, a landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00.
The landlord acknowledged that she had not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.
Mistake of law is not a defence. It was a conscious decision by the landlord. It has resulted in an unfair power imbalance between the parties at the end of the tenancy. There is public interest in ensuring bonds are lodged with the Bond Centre for the Tribunal to make decisions on them when disputes arise between the parties.
I award exemplary damages against the landlord for this. Failure to comply with HHS
Under section 45 RTA, a landlord must comply with the HHS.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. ee section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord acknowledged that she did not know about the requirement for HHS as she was elderly and had been renting the premises together with her late husband for many years, possibly from even before the Tenancy Tribunal came into existence.
At the time of the tenancy, there was no extractor fan in the kitchen or in the bathroom. Insulation was only installed by the Body Corporate after this tenancy had ended. The tenant was provided with a heater, but it was not a fixed heater. There was a dispute as to why the heater was not fixed but there was no dispute that having a non-fixed heater was not compliant with the HHS.
The tenant stated that the bathroom was damp and the build up of the mould in the shower was difficult to maintain due to there being no extractor fan. The tenant also had to keep the windows open when cooking. The tenant said that this has led to higher power bills. However, the tenant did not have any evidence to quantify the difference in the power bills.
I find that the premises was not compliant with HHS. Failure to ensure a healthy, warm and dry premises has affected the tenant’s quality of living whilst at the tenancy.
I award exemplary damages against the landlord for this breach. Non-compliant tenancy agreement
The tenant claimed that the tenancy agreement signed by the parties was not the current, standard tenancy agreement. It was an outdated template. The tenancy agreement omitted key parts of a full tenancy agreement. The omissions included a Healthy Homes Statement. There was no insulation statement, no insurance statement and no physical address for service for the landlord other than the tenancy address itself.
The landlord explained that she had used an old template that she and her late husband had been using and just used one of the hardcopies that had already been printed in the past.
This shows lack of awareness of the updates in the RTA and the landlord’s obligations.
However, I do not award any additional costs as a result of this breach as I award exemplary damages for the substantive breaches. Failure to appoint an agent while overseas
The tenant claimed that the landlord has been overseas for longer than the RTA permits without appointing an agent.
A landlord who is out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days must ensure they have an agent in New Zealand. See section 16A(1) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00.
The landlord acknowledged that she was away for longer than 21 consecutive days every year to see family overseas.
In the tenancy agreement, there was an “emergency contact” with full name, address and phone number. I find in the circumstances, that was sufficient for the purposes of being an “agent”. I do not order any exemplary damages against the landlord for this. Compensation for the landlord reporting to the tenants to their new property manager
The tenant complained about the landlord’s behaviour following the end of the tenancy. The tenant had moved out on 13 September 2025. However, the landlord was overseas at the time and did not conduct the exit inspect until the week of 4 October 2025.
When the landlord returned, she phoned the tenant saying there was extensive damage and the premises was not clean and therefore she would not be refunding the bond. When the tenant challenged the landlord’s right to keep the bond, including her failure to lodge the bond with the Bond Centre, she became hostile. The tenant ended the call and requested that the landlord contact the tenant in writing from then on.
The tenant requested a list of any reported damages via email. The landlord provided a copy of an email sent to the tenant’s new property manager, indicating that the property was left in “poor condition, dirty and with considerable damage.” The tenant was concerned by the landlord’s decision to contact the new property manager as it could impact their housing situation and reputation.
As a result, the tenant ceased any further contact with the landlord and applied to the Tribunal.
This is concerning behaviour by the landlord, but not one the Tenancy Tribunal can make any order on as it does not amount to “harassment”. I simply note it in this order to denounce such conduct. Amount of exemplary damages
I find with the two unlawful acts, exemplary damages of $1,000.00 would be appropriate.
Accordingly, I order the landlord to pay the tenant $1,000.00 as exemplary damages. Filing fee reimbursement
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I order the landlord to reimburse the tenant’s filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5367063 — Healthy homes at Unit/Flat Flat 8, 5 Claybrook Road, Parnell, Auckland 1052

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5367063 — Healthy homes at Unit/Flat Flat 8, 5 Claybrook Road, Parnell, Auckland 1052

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