What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5368762 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 5368762?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Hot Water: $100.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5368762?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5368762?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13622356-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5368762 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 5368762?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Hot Water: $100.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5368762?

The primary dispute was Property damage.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5368762?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13622356-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5368762 — Property damage

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5368762 — net $400.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Bathroom repairs/asbestos removal	$300.00	Bathroom repairs/asbestos removal
Compensation: Hot water	$100.00	Hot water
Net award	$400.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$400.00

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5368762 — net $400.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: Bathroom repairs/asbestos removal	$300.00	Bathroom repairs/asbestos removal
Compensation: Hot water	$100.00	Hot water
Net award	$400.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$400.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Kāinga Ora–Homes and Communities must pay [The tenant/s] $400.00 immediately, calculated as shown in the table below:

All other claims are dismissed.

Reasons

The Tribunal must consider an application filed by the tenant against the landlord.
Both parties attended the hearing, with Ms Maturan-Abuid representing the landlord.
This tenancy began on 30 December 2016. The premises is a two-bedroom home, with a sunroom, bathroom and toilet. The tenant resides at the premises with her children. The tenancy agreement provides that the maximum allowed to live at the property is 5 people. The current rent is $159.00 per week. The tenant’s application
The tenant has filed an application claiming breaches of landlord obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA). She claims compensation and exemplary damages. The claims include the landlord’s failure to repair and maintain the premises, breaches under the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS), and failure to comply with other obligations under section 45 of the RTA (building, health and safety). The tenant claims overcrowding issues and seeks to be transferred to another more suitable property.
The parties attended a case conference, and a Tribunal order issued afterwards identified that the following issues were included in the tenant’s failure to maintain claim: a. Mouldy windows and window latches; b. Blocked drains; c. Door falling off its hinges repeatedly; d. Leaking hot water on top of roof from spouting; e. No insulation; f. Asbestos in the bathroom; g. Pest control (spiders and rats); h. Electrical issues; i. Nails in the backyard.
The compensation claim was recorded as follows: a. Compensation for having to vacate the property for 2 weeks during removal of asbestos from the property. The tenant confirmed she was reimbursed for two weeks rent for this period, but wishes to proceed with claiming other compensation for this. The tenant will confirm the amount sought in compensation for this when providing her further evidence. b. Compensation for overcrowding issues impacting on the tenant’s and her children’s mental health and well-being. The tenant will confirm the amount sought in compensation for this also when providing her further evidence. General legal principles
In this jurisdiction, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim to the required civil standard of proof, which is on the balance of probabilities. This means they must establish, with evidence, that their claim is “more likely than not.”
The Tribunal can award compensation where a party has been in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) or has been in breach of the tenancy agreement, and the other party has suffered a loss because of that breach. In general, when awarding compensation, the accepted principle is that the injured party should be put in the same position as they would have been but for the breach, since there is liability for losses flowing from the breach.
Exemplary damages are penalties and can only be awarded for an unlawful act, as set out in various sections of the RTA and as listed in Schedule 1A of the Act. As explained by the Court of Appeal in Auckland City Council v Blundell [1986] NZLR 732, they are different from compensation, and are designed to punish and deter, more like a fine. Where one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act, before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 of the RTA. Repairs and maintenance
The tenant’s repair and maintenance claims are set out below. Windows
The tenant claims the windows and window latches are mouldy. She states in her evidence that this has been a problem from the start of the tenancy. She cleans the windows but found there is mould in the house. She has shown the landlord. She acknowledges the landlord does come to fix the problem once notified.
In response, the landlord states no issues with mould had been raised in the past six years. An annual inspection conducted in 2025 recorded no significant signs of mould and described the property as warm and secure. Any mould that may be present is likely attributable to condensation, overcrowding, and household practises such as curtains not being opened.
The landlord states problems with the window latches had been raised over the years and the issues were attended to in a timely manner. Drains
The tenant claims the drains are continuously getting blocked. She had informed the landlord, who then arranged for it to be fixed. They had to change some of the piping. These were all maintenance issues that she feels ought to have been addressed earlier. She acknowledges there were no unreasonable delays in the landlord attending to these issues.
In reply, the landlord states work orders have been raised periodically to address the blocked toilet, bath, and kitchen drains, all of which were attended to and completed within a reasonable timeframe. Where maintenance providers recommended pipe replacements, these were carried out, including replacement of a galvanised kitchen waste pipe in March 2024, replacement of a galvanised toilet stack in May 2024, and replacement of approximately 2 metres of bath waste pipe in January 2026. Door
The tenant claims that the door fell off its hinges, onto her daughter’s head, when her daughter was sleeping.
In response, the landlord states three work orders were raised regarding doors coming off their hinges, with all repairs being completed promptly. The most recent incident occurred on 25 August 2025, and was addressed the same day. Leaking hot water
The tenant states that she had a high power bill, but was unable to get the evidence from her electricity provider. She believes she ought to be reimbursed.
The landlord states that its records show only one historic work order from 12 June 2018 concerning water flowing onto the roof from spouting. The issue was addressed in a reasonable timeframe. There was no record of any invoices being provided to support the compensation claim and therefore, compensation was not paid. Asbestos in the bathroom
The tenant states that she wanted to be compensated for the landlord not transferring her and her children when the work was being undertaken to remove asbestos from the bathroom. She wanted to be compensated for the overcrowding and the fact that it was unsafe.
The landlord’s response is that during bath-related work in July 2019, asbestos was identified in the bathroom, consistent with the property’s 1946 construction date. The family was temporarily relocated, between 11 and 17 July 2019, while the work was undertaken. The asbestos was safely contained, and the work completed without incident. The landlord further states the work was done six years ago in July 2019, and the tenant received a two-week rent relief, amounting to $222.00, based on a weekly rental of $111.00. Pest control
The tenant states there was an infestation, and the property was unhealthy as there were spiders. Her children had to be taken to the doctors for spider bites. She says pest control came and put down bait, and covered the holes. She feels the house was not up to standard when she moved in.
In reply, the landlord has explained that pest control treatments were undertaken in November 2021, February 2022, October 2024 and March 2025, all within reasonable timeframes. No further pest-related concerns have been raised since. Therefore, requests were addressed promptly, and any delays were due to isolation from Covid. Electrical issues
The tenant states there were ongoing issues, with the hot water going cold. On 17 October 2017, there was no hot water. This was because the power output was not working. There were other ongoing issues over the years. She states that in January 2026, there was no hot water for two weeks. She called the landlord on 24 January 2026, and the plumber and electrician came to fix the problem.
In response, the landlord states various electrical work orders were raised and addressed promptly. The most recent was on 24 January 2026, when an after- hours electrician attended and replaced a failed hot water cylinder element by 26 January 2026. In terms of this incident, the landlord states that the issue was deemed urgent, and was attended to that evening. However, due to the lack of access, the tradesperson returned on 26 January 2026 to fix the problem.
The landlord agrees to arrange for an electrician to attend the premises to check the hot water cylinder, in view of the tenant’s claim that her electricity bill is high. Nails in the backyard
The tenant states there have been nails in the backyard since she moved into the property. She provided a photograph taken on 3 March 2026. She also provided video evidence in support. She states the whole backyard is full of nails. She explained that when she moved into the property, there was also wood in the backyard. However, she did not have any photographs.
In reply, the landlord states issues relating to protruding nails were addressed through repairs to rotting steps in September 2020, and to the stairway to the laundry entrance in November 2023. The landlord further notes that an unauthorised structure, erected by the tenant’s son, has been present at the property since 2022. Legal framework
The landlord’s obligations are set out under section 45 of the RTA. This includes the requirement that the landlord provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, having regard to the age and character of the premises. 1 The landlord is also required to comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health, and safety.
The extent of the landlord’s obligation to repair was considered in the decision of Barfoot & Thompson v Casey. 2 The Court noted that there was no absolute liability/responsibility obligation, so the landlord does not have to foresee a latent and unobservable defect before it causes damage. The tenant must notify the landlord as soon as possible after discovery of any damage to the premises, or of the need for repair. 3 Once notified, the landlord is obliged to repair within a reasonable time. The Court stated: ... the obligation of the landlord, under s.45, is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances; and as to what that time is, I think, depends not only on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem may be. 4
One of the key principles from the above case is that the obligation of the landlord, under section 45, is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe that is reasonable in the circumstances. Analysis
Overall, having considered the evidence and submissions of both parties, I am satisfied that the landlord has been responsive to the various repair and 1 Section 45(1)(b) 2 CIV-2005-004-001762, 7 November 2007 3 Section 40(1)(d) 4 Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington, CIV-2009-085 maintenance issues that have arisen during this tenancy. The landlord has provided comprehensive evidence which shows that it has attended within a reasonable timeframe, over the years, as the issues have arisen. Therefore, I am satisfied that the landlord has complied with its repair and maintenance obligations under the RTA.
However, despite the landlord’s efforts, it is evident that the tenant suffered a loss of amenity during some of these issues, particularly involving the removal of asbestos in the bathroom. It is acknowledged that the tenant has been compensated by the landlord, based on two weeks rent. However, when I consider the overall circumstances, including the supporting evidence provided by the tenant, I find that it would be reasonable for the landlord to compensate the tenant an additional $300.00, to cover expenses arising from the tenant needing to move out, and the resulting inconvenience.
In terms of the loss of hot water, taking into account the nature of the problem, duration, and the resulting impact for the tenant and her family, I consider that she ought to be compensated $100.00.
These amounts are awarded above.
In terms of the tenant’s claim for exemplary damages, the RTA states that the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally. In this case, I do not consider that an award of exemplary damages is warranted, since the required intent for exemplary damages is not met. Accordingly, I decline to award exemplary damages. Healthy Homes Standards
The tenant states the house was cold and lacks insulation. She acknowledges there is a heat pump but says she does not use it because she could not afford the power bill. A technician came to change the power meter, but she feels the landlord ought to have sent an electrician to investigate why her power bill was previously so high.
The landlord states the premises complies with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) and refers to its supporting evidence. Legal framework
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 1 July 2021 and before 28 August 2022, the rental must comply within 90 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy; or ii. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. iii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The ventilation standard sets out minimum expectations around windows and doors, and in particular, the area of doors and windows that are openable. The standard also requires that each kitchen and bathroom have extractor fans installed with a minimum defined extraction capacity. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances. Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard requires that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains. The standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
The heating standard requires landlords to provide one or more ‘qualifying heaters’, with a capacity to heat the room to a required level. The heating standard defines what a qualifying heater would be and confirms that certain types of heaters are unacceptable heaters for the purpose of the HHS. The heating standard requires that heaters in the particular tenancy have a minimum heating capacity. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
The draught stopping standard requires that residential premises be free from unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise. The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
The landlord has obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the RTA Residential Tenancies Act 1986 to insulate the premises in accordance with the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016.
From 1 July 2019, all residential premises must be insulated to a minimum standard. Where the premises were insulated before 1 July 2016, the ceiling insulation must have an R-value of at least 1.9 (or 1.5 for houses of a brick or concrete block construction). The underfloor insulation must have an R-value of at least 0.9. The insulation must be in reasonable condition. Where insulation is installed after 1 July 2016, the minimum R-value for ceiling insulation is 2.9 in Zones 1 and 2, and 3.3 for Zone 3 (Zone 3 covers the South Island and central North Island). The minimum R-value for underfloor insulation is 1.3.
There are exceptions to these requirements, for example, where it is not reasonably practicable, or where there is a habitable space above or below the ceiling or floor that would otherwise have to be insulated. Analysis
In this case, I am satisfied, from the evidence provided, that the landlord has complied with its obligations under the HHS.
The information in the landlord’s HHS compliance form shows the premises complies with the HHS in terms of heating, insulation, ventilation, draught stopping, moisture ingress and drainage. The landlord’s evidence also shows that the HHS work was completed in September 2020, with the heat pump being installed on 4 September 2020, insulation being installed on 2 September 2020. Other aspects of the HHS were checked and found to be compliant, with final confirmation being signed by the assessor on 28 January 2021.
Therefore, the landlord has met its HHS obligations within the compliance date. Accordingly, this claim is dismissed. Request for transfer to another property and overcrowding
The tenant states that she wants to be moved to another property. In her household, she currently lives with three of her children, so there are altogether four people living in the premises. At the start of the tenancy, five people lived at the house. She asked for a transfer because she wanted her children to have their own rooms. Currently, they have to share a room. She felt she had been ignored by the landlord.
The tenant spoke of the effect on her children’s mental health, and provided voice recordings made by her children. The tenant also provided other evidence, including letters of support from medical practitioners, and other professionals supporting the family.
The tenant described other incidents that have occurred in the neighbourhood, including the neighbour’s kitchen catching fire, a shooting occurring a few houses down from the current property, drug cultivation, and fighting on the street.
In response, the landlord states that the maximum number who can reside at the premises is 5 people and this had not been exceeded. The tenant had been offered another property, which had been declined.
In reply to the landlord, the tenant explained that she declined that property because it was on a busy road. It was unsuitable as her son’s medical condition put him at risk of being run over. She wished to have a 4 (or 5) bedroom home so her son can come back and live with her. She acknowledges she was offered a transfer, and had attended the landlord’s office for a meeting.
The landlord states the tenant was on the waiting list and there was limited stock of suitable properties, particularly larger properties. However, it seems the landlord had only looked at a few suburbs ([Event locations suppressed]). The tenant states she is open to considering all other areas. The landlord agrees to widen its search and look at properties outside the area initially identified.
The landlord further states that it had been in regular contact with the tenant, referring to a recent e-mail in February 2026. Whether the landlord could accommodate the tenant’s request ultimately depended on availability of housing stock. The landlord agrees to continue to work with the tenant, so a suitable property can be located for her.
In this case, the tenant has provided detailed evidence in support of her request for a transfer to another property, and her concerns about overcrowding. Her current situation, including the challenges experienced by her family, is acknowledged.
On the issue of the overcrowding, the tenancy agreement provides for a maximum of 5 people residing at the premises. The primary responsibility for not exceeding the maximum number of occupants lies with the tenant. Section 40(3) of the RTA requires the tenant to ensure the number of residents does not exceed the maximum allowed under the tenancy agreement. So, the tenant’s claim for compensation on the basis of overcrowding is dismissed.
In terms of the tenant’s request for transfer to another property, the Tribunal does not have the power to require or order the landlord to provide the tenant with a different dwelling. Therefore, this claim is also dismissed.
However, it may be noted that the landlord has agreed to work with the tenant in trying to locate premises that are more suited to her family’s needs. I would encourage both parties to work together to address the tenant’s current situation, particularly in view of her willingness to relocate to areas beyond her preferred options. Filing fee and name suppression
While successful, the landlord does not seek the filing fee.
The tenant seeks name suppression, which is granted. In granting suppression for the tenant, the Tribunal has had regard to the interests of the parties, the public interest, and notes the landlord supports the tenant’s request.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5368762 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5368762 — Property damage

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Property management

Frequently asked questions