What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5379108 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 5379108?

Compensation: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5379108?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5379108?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13599037-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5379108 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 5379108?

Compensation: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $2,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5379108?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5379108?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13599037-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5379108 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5379108 — net $3,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$1,500.00	Compensation
Exemplary damages	$2,000.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,528.00
Bond	$1,080.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,528.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Robyn O'Donnell must pay [The tenant/s] $3,528.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below: DescriptionTenant Compensation $1,500.00 Exemplary damages $2,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $3,528.00 Bond $1,080.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $3,528.00
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
[The tenant/s] claims for breach of quiet enjoyment and failure to repair and maintain are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for refund of her bond. The landlord did not submit a cross-application. 1 The bond is refunded to the tenant.
The tenant also claimed that the landlord has breached its repair and maintenance obligations, interfered with her peace, quiet & enjoyment of the premises and issued a notice to terminate that was unlawful and/or retaliatory.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. They must prove that the other party has breached its obligations and the loss (or consequence) they have suffered because of that breach. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof. Repair and Maintenance Obligations
Under s45 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant issued a 14-day notice for repairs in September 2025. The work requested included replacement carpets, replacement curtains, wall repairs. The parties met to view the work required on 12 October 2025. The work was requested in response to a $70 per week rent increase.
The tenant has the onus of proving that the premises were not maintained to a reasonable standard. Her evidence was relatively vague. Her main concern seemed to be in a relation to carpet which was worn and had a tear. She claimed that the tear created a safety hazard. The tenant provided some photographs which show that the carpet was very old, and there was a tear. However, the carpet still appeared to be serviceable.
The tenant’s requests were reasonable in the context of a $70 per week (almost 20%) rent increase. However, the tenant has not established that it is more likely than not that the landlord has breached its obligations under s45 RTA. This aspect of the claim is dismissed. 1 Refer s22B Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Breach of Quiet Enjoyment
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has interfered with her reasonable peace, quiet and enjoyment of the premises.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenant gave evidence of the landlord’s partner bashing on her door on 27 December 2024 and claiming that rent (due on Christmas day) had not been paid. The tenant says that she checked her bank records and showed the landlord’s partner that rent had been paid. She also says that he came to the property frequently and she felt watched. She did not provide specific details, except for one incident on 5 November 2025, when the partner walked up and down the drive a few times and then bashed on the door. The tenant provided text messages sent to a friend at the time. The landlord’s partner did not attend the hearing to respond to the claims. The landlord did not say the visits did not occur or provide an explanation, rather she described the tenant’s evidence as “manipulative”.
The tenant has established that it is more likely than not the incidents on 27 December 2024 and 5 November 2025 occurred. However, she has not established that the conduct of the landlord’s partner amounted to “harassment”. I am likely to have formed a different view if the tenant had been able to provide details or corroborative evidence of other similar incidents.
This aspect of the claim is dismissed. Termination Notice
On 5 November 2025, the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 4 February 2026. The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory and that the landlord issued the notice without proper cause.
Under s60AA RTA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so. The notice was a 90-day notice issued under s51(1) RTA. No reason was given for ending the tenancy, and none was required. The claim under s60AA is dismissed.
The landlord seemed to suggest that, as this was a no cause termination, I could not consider whether the notice was retaliatory. That submission is incorrect.
Section 54 RTA provides that the Tribunal may declare a termination notice to be retaliatory, and of no effect, if: [I]n giving the notice, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the exercise or proposed exercised by the tenant of any right, power, authority, or remedy conferred on the tenant by the tenancy agreement or by this or any other Act or any complaint by the tenant against the landlord relating to the tenancy.
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 (see s 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
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. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where there is a short period of time between the tenant raising an issue about the tenancy and the landlord serving a notice, this may lead to a strong inference that the landlord was at least partly motivated by the tenant exercising their rights. In this situation, the evidential onus shifts to the landlord to show that there was a legitimate reason for the notice.
The landlord gave notice of a $70 per week rent increase. The tenant asked for curtains and carpets to be replaced to justify such a large increase. Essentially, the tenant believed that she should receive a better-quality home given the amount of the increase. The parties met on 12 October 2025 to discuss the issues and repairs required. It seems that some work was done, but it was not clear to me from either party’s evidence how extensive that work was. The tenant followed up in late October seeking a date for the carpet to be replaced.
The landlord issued a notice to terminate the tenancy on 5 November 2025. The landlord claimed that the notice was issued on “legitimate non-retaliatory reasons”.
The notice was issued in the context of the tenant requesting and upgrade to the property and raising concerns with the amount of the rent increase. This creates an inference that the landlord was at least partly motivated by the tenant exercising their rights. So, the landlord had the onus of proving that there was a legitimate reason for the notice.
I explained this to the landlord at the hearing and invited her to explain why the notice was issued. Her responses were evasive, at best. She initially claimed that the decision to terminate was based on advice from her accountant. It transpired that “advice” was a brief exchange in reception while she was at the office for another purpose. She then maintained that this is her property, and she can do as she pleases.
I then referred to her written statement to the Tribunal which stated that the notice was given for legitimate reasons and asked what those reasons were. The landlord responded that it was “time for a change”.
I find that it is more likely than not that the landlord was at least partially motivated by the tenant exercising its rights and that the notice to terminate was retaliatory. The tenant did move at the end of the notice period. If she hadn’t, I would have set aside the notice to terminate.
The tenant claimed that she has incurred moving costs, the cost of another bond and has been stressed and inconvenienced by the landlord’s action. She seeks compensation and exemplary damages.
If the tenant complies with her obligations, she will recover the bond from her new tenancy. She will have incurred moving costs as a result of the retaliatory notice. She has been stressed and inconvenienced. I award her compensation of $1,500.
Issuing a retaliatory notice is an unlawful act. I find that the landlord made a deliberate, intentional decision to end the tenancy. The landlord’s attitude to the tenant was dismissive. An award of exemplary damages is warranted. I award $2,000.
As the tenant was partially successful, I also award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee and grant her request for suppression of her details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5379108 — net $3,528.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$1,500.00	Compensation
Exemplary damages	$2,000.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,528.00
Bond	$1,080.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,528.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Robyn O'Donnell must pay [The tenant/s] $3,528.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below: DescriptionTenant Compensation $1,500.00 Exemplary damages $2,000.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $3,528.00 Bond $1,080.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $3,528.00
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $1,080.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) to [The tenant/s] immediately.
[The tenant/s] claims for breach of quiet enjoyment and failure to repair and maintain are dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenant has applied for refund of her bond. The landlord did not submit a cross-application. 1 The bond is refunded to the tenant.
The tenant also claimed that the landlord has breached its repair and maintenance obligations, interfered with her peace, quiet & enjoyment of the premises and issued a notice to terminate that was unlawful and/or retaliatory.
A party who brings a claim to the Tenancy Tribunal must prove on the balance of probabilities (more likely than not) that their version of events took place. They must prove that the other party has breached its obligations and the loss (or consequence) they have suffered because of that breach. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden of proof. Repair and Maintenance Obligations
Under s45 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), a landlord must provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, comply with all requirements in respect of smoke alarms and insulation set out in the Residential Tenancies (Smoke Alarms and Insulation) Regulations 2016 and comply with any relevant enactment in relation to buildings, health and safety.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant issued a 14-day notice for repairs in September 2025. The work requested included replacement carpets, replacement curtains, wall repairs. The parties met to view the work required on 12 October 2025. The work was requested in response to a $70 per week rent increase.
The tenant has the onus of proving that the premises were not maintained to a reasonable standard. Her evidence was relatively vague. Her main concern seemed to be in a relation to carpet which was worn and had a tear. She claimed that the tear created a safety hazard. The tenant provided some photographs which show that the carpet was very old, and there was a tear. However, the carpet still appeared to be serviceable.
The tenant’s requests were reasonable in the context of a $70 per week (almost 20%) rent increase. However, the tenant has not established that it is more likely than not that the landlord has breached its obligations under s45 RTA. This aspect of the claim is dismissed. 1 Refer s22B Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Breach of Quiet Enjoyment
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has interfered with her reasonable peace, quiet and enjoyment of the premises.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA.
Harassment means "to trouble, worry or distress" or "to wear out, tire, or exhaust" and "indicates a particular pattern of behaviour directed towards another person". MacDonald v Dodds, CIV-2009-019-001524, DC Hamilton, 26 February 2010.
The tenant gave evidence of the landlord’s partner bashing on her door on 27 December 2024 and claiming that rent (due on Christmas day) had not been paid. The tenant says that she checked her bank records and showed the landlord’s partner that rent had been paid. She also says that he came to the property frequently and she felt watched. She did not provide specific details, except for one incident on 5 November 2025, when the partner walked up and down the drive a few times and then bashed on the door. The tenant provided text messages sent to a friend at the time. The landlord’s partner did not attend the hearing to respond to the claims. The landlord did not say the visits did not occur or provide an explanation, rather she described the tenant’s evidence as “manipulative”.
The tenant has established that it is more likely than not the incidents on 27 December 2024 and 5 November 2025 occurred. However, she has not established that the conduct of the landlord’s partner amounted to “harassment”. I am likely to have formed a different view if the tenant had been able to provide details or corroborative evidence of other similar incidents.
This aspect of the claim is dismissed. Termination Notice
On 5 November 2025, the landlord gave the tenant a notice ending the tenancy on 4 February 2026. The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory and that the landlord issued the notice without proper cause.
Under s60AA RTA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so. The notice was a 90-day notice issued under s51(1) RTA. No reason was given for ending the tenancy, and none was required. The claim under s60AA is dismissed.
The landlord seemed to suggest that, as this was a no cause termination, I could not consider whether the notice was retaliatory. That submission is incorrect.
Section 54 RTA provides that the Tribunal may declare a termination notice to be retaliatory, and of no effect, if: [I]n giving the notice, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the exercise or proposed exercised by the tenant of any right, power, authority, or remedy conferred on the tenant by the tenancy agreement or by this or any other Act or any complaint by the tenant against the landlord relating to the tenancy.
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 (see s 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
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. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Where there is a short period of time between the tenant raising an issue about the tenancy and the landlord serving a notice, this may lead to a strong inference that the landlord was at least partly motivated by the tenant exercising their rights. In this situation, the evidential onus shifts to the landlord to show that there was a legitimate reason for the notice.
The landlord gave notice of a $70 per week rent increase. The tenant asked for curtains and carpets to be replaced to justify such a large increase. Essentially, the tenant believed that she should receive a better-quality home given the amount of the increase. The parties met on 12 October 2025 to discuss the issues and repairs required. It seems that some work was done, but it was not clear to me from either party’s evidence how extensive that work was. The tenant followed up in late October seeking a date for the carpet to be replaced.
The landlord issued a notice to terminate the tenancy on 5 November 2025. The landlord claimed that the notice was issued on “legitimate non-retaliatory reasons”.
The notice was issued in the context of the tenant requesting and upgrade to the property and raising concerns with the amount of the rent increase. This creates an inference that the landlord was at least partly motivated by the tenant exercising their rights. So, the landlord had the onus of proving that there was a legitimate reason for the notice.
I explained this to the landlord at the hearing and invited her to explain why the notice was issued. Her responses were evasive, at best. She initially claimed that the decision to terminate was based on advice from her accountant. It transpired that “advice” was a brief exchange in reception while she was at the office for another purpose. She then maintained that this is her property, and she can do as she pleases.
I then referred to her written statement to the Tribunal which stated that the notice was given for legitimate reasons and asked what those reasons were. The landlord responded that it was “time for a change”.
I find that it is more likely than not that the landlord was at least partially motivated by the tenant exercising its rights and that the notice to terminate was retaliatory. The tenant did move at the end of the notice period. If she hadn’t, I would have set aside the notice to terminate.
The tenant claimed that she has incurred moving costs, the cost of another bond and has been stressed and inconvenienced by the landlord’s action. She seeks compensation and exemplary damages.
If the tenant complies with her obligations, she will recover the bond from her new tenancy. She will have incurred moving costs as a result of the retaliatory notice. She has been stressed and inconvenienced. I award her compensation of $1,500.
Issuing a retaliatory notice is an unlawful act. I find that the landlord made a deliberate, intentional decision to end the tenancy. The landlord’s attitude to the tenant was dismissive. An award of exemplary damages is warranted. I award $2,000.
As the tenant was partially successful, I also award reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee and grant her request for suppression of her details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5379108 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5379108 — Exemplary damages

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions