What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5383806 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 5383806?

Ying Details. 2. By Declaration, The…: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5383806?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5383806?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12886337-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5383806 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 5383806?

Ying Details. 2. By Declaration, The…: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5383806?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5383806?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/12886337-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5383806 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5383806 — net $28.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
ying details. 2. By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025. 3. John and Helen Price are to pay [The ten	$28.00	ying details. 2. By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025. 3. John and Helen Price are to pay [The ten
Net award	$28.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$28.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant name and identifying details.
By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025.
John and Helen Price are to pay [The tenant/s] $28.00 immediately, being the filing fee for this application.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of () to immediately.

Reasons

Background

On 6 November 2025, [The tenant/s] gave notice to terminate the tenancy on 27 November. [The tenant/s] vacated on that date.
The stated grounds for terminating this fixed term tenancy was that the premises (specifically, the sleepout) is unlawful residential premises.
[The tenant/s]’s application seeks a declaration that the tenancy is terminated; and compensation / exemplary damages (if available) for unlawful residential premises.
This is the second application that [The tenant/s] has brought about this tenancy. In the decision from the previous application I noted that: a. The bathroom extractor fan vented into the garage, not to the outdoors. b. This is a breach of the relevant healthy homes regulation, unless an exemption applies. c. If a landlord seeks to rely on an exemption, the landlord must specify why the exemption applies. d. Mr & Mrs Price were obliged to clarify this and communicate it to [The tenant/s].
That decision was released on 15 October 2025. At the date that this application was filed, 6 November 2025, no clarification had been provided to [The tenant/s].
The hearing took place in [Event location suppressed] on 17 December 2025. [The tenant/s] and Mr John Price attended the hearing. Unlawful residential premises
Unlawful residential premises are: 1 a. Premises that are used as a place of residence but that cannot be lawfully used for that purpose; and b. Where the landlord’s failure to comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety, caused or contributed to the unlawful occupation.
[The tenant/s] said that: a. A real estate agent who was at the premises for the purposes of marketing it for sale made some comments about the garage and the sleep out “not being on the LIM”. b. Concerned, she made further enquiries about this with the local Council. She discovered that the garage was in fact on the LIM and that it had a firewall, but the part of the property that is now the sleepout was only ever recorded as a garage.
At the hearing, Mr Price said that: a. The previous owner converted’ the garage into a workshop area. b. After they bought the property, they needed an additional sleeping area so they converted the workshop into a sleepout. c. The conversion was done to a good standard and no-one has raised any issues or concerns about the sleepout. 1 Section 78A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)
The conversion from a ‘workshop’ to a sleepout required Council consent. It was a change from a utility / storage area into a habitable space.
No consent was obtained. This area could not be lawfully used as a sleepout. It was not consented for that type of use.
Therefore, the premises 2 were unlawful residential premises per the definition above.
A tenant of premises that were at the start of the tenancy, and that remain, unlawful residential premises may terminate the tenancy by giving not less than 2-days’ notice to the landlord. 3
[The tenant/s] gave 21-days’ notice.
The termination was lawful and effective. The tenancy ended on 27 November 2025.
The Tribunal may make other orders in respect of unlawful residential premises, including ordering a refund of all or part of the rent to the tenant 4 , and exemplary damages. 5
I will not make any monetary orders in this instance. The unlawfulness affected only a part of the property. During the tenancy, [The tenant/s] used the sleepout area as an office, and there were no issues with this area at that time. [The tenant/s] has obtained a benefit by way of the freedom to end the fixed term tenancy by notice. She has now moved into another property.
In my view it would be excessively punitive to make a monetary award of damages against the landlord in these circumstances. Bathroom ventilation fan
Mr Price said that he did not pick up on my directions about the bathroom extractor fan in the previous decision. He and Mrs Price then went on an overseas trip for several weeks and were difficult to contact.
When he saw this issue raised again in [The tenant/s]’s current application, he tried to get information from the electrician who installed the fan. The electrician was slow to respond.
[The electrician] finally responded by email on 5 December. [The electrician] states: When I was asked to install an exhaust fan in the bathroom I scoped the job out. 2 The definition of “premises” includes “any part of the premises” – section 2, RTA 3 Section 56A(1) RTA 4 Section 78A(4) RTA 5 Section 78A(5)(c) RTA The bathroom backs onto the garage and the external wall of the garage is right on the boundary. The garage is also a lean-to arrangement off the house with ventilation grills installed. To vent to the outside would be very difficult. There is plenty of ventilation in the garage and between the previous tenant and myself we decided it would be ok to vent this into the garage. After the installation I asked the tenant how it was and they informed me it was way better than no fan.
There are aspects of this that are disappointing.
It is unfortunate that the landlords did not read, understand, and take action in respect of what I wrote in the 15 October decision. I could not have been more clear.
[The electrician]’s statement provides very little helpful detail. He simply states that venting to the outside would be “very difficult”, without explaining why. The rest of his email suggests that the reason was not so much that venting to the outside was very difficult but that venting into the garage was very easy and convenient. The idea that the previous tenant could ‘sign off’ his approach and that it was better than not having a fan at all, is less than ideal.
The starting point must be that all extractor fans must vent to the outside unless it is “not reasonably practicable” to do so. The landlord has the burden of proof if they want to rely upon this exemption.
The information provided to me still does not show that the exemption applies in this instance.
However, I accept that Mr & Mrs Price took reasonable steps to achieve healthy homes compliance and they relied on their contractors including the electrician and the healthy homes assessor. Again, it is possible that an exemption may genuinely apply, albeit that this is not yet evident from [The electrician]’s limited explanation.
In the circumstances I do not think that it is appropriate to make an award of exemplary damages against the landlords.
I note that the landlords intend to sell the property. If that changes and they rent it again, they will need to get further and better information about why it is “not reasonably practicable” to vent to the exterior. If there is no good reason why, they will need to have the vent re-located from the garage to the exterior. Name suppression, filing fee, bond
[The tenant/s] was substantially successful in the proceedings. Her request for name suppression is granted. 6
On the same grounds I must also award [The tenant/s] the filing fee for this application. 7
The tenancy has ended. Mr Price confirmed that they are not seeking any end of tenancy costs. The bond will be released to the tenant.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5383806 — net $28.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
ying details. 2. By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025. 3. John and Helen Price are to pay [The ten	$28.00	ying details. 2. By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025. 3. John and Helen Price are to pay [The ten
Net award	$28.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$28.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant name and identifying details.
By declaration, the tenancy terminated on 27 November 2025.
John and Helen Price are to pay [The tenant/s] $28.00 immediately, being the filing fee for this application.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of () to immediately.

Reasons

Background

On 6 November 2025, [The tenant/s] gave notice to terminate the tenancy on 27 November. [The tenant/s] vacated on that date.
The stated grounds for terminating this fixed term tenancy was that the premises (specifically, the sleepout) is unlawful residential premises.
[The tenant/s]’s application seeks a declaration that the tenancy is terminated; and compensation / exemplary damages (if available) for unlawful residential premises.
This is the second application that [The tenant/s] has brought about this tenancy. In the decision from the previous application I noted that: a. The bathroom extractor fan vented into the garage, not to the outdoors. b. This is a breach of the relevant healthy homes regulation, unless an exemption applies. c. If a landlord seeks to rely on an exemption, the landlord must specify why the exemption applies. d. Mr & Mrs Price were obliged to clarify this and communicate it to [The tenant/s].
That decision was released on 15 October 2025. At the date that this application was filed, 6 November 2025, no clarification had been provided to [The tenant/s].
The hearing took place in [Event location suppressed] on 17 December 2025. [The tenant/s] and Mr John Price attended the hearing. Unlawful residential premises
Unlawful residential premises are: 1 a. Premises that are used as a place of residence but that cannot be lawfully used for that purpose; and b. Where the landlord’s failure to comply with all requirements in respect of buildings, health, and safety, caused or contributed to the unlawful occupation.
[The tenant/s] said that: a. A real estate agent who was at the premises for the purposes of marketing it for sale made some comments about the garage and the sleep out “not being on the LIM”. b. Concerned, she made further enquiries about this with the local Council. She discovered that the garage was in fact on the LIM and that it had a firewall, but the part of the property that is now the sleepout was only ever recorded as a garage.
At the hearing, Mr Price said that: a. The previous owner converted’ the garage into a workshop area. b. After they bought the property, they needed an additional sleeping area so they converted the workshop into a sleepout. c. The conversion was done to a good standard and no-one has raised any issues or concerns about the sleepout. 1 Section 78A(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (“RTA”)
The conversion from a ‘workshop’ to a sleepout required Council consent. It was a change from a utility / storage area into a habitable space.
No consent was obtained. This area could not be lawfully used as a sleepout. It was not consented for that type of use.
Therefore, the premises 2 were unlawful residential premises per the definition above.
A tenant of premises that were at the start of the tenancy, and that remain, unlawful residential premises may terminate the tenancy by giving not less than 2-days’ notice to the landlord. 3
[The tenant/s] gave 21-days’ notice.
The termination was lawful and effective. The tenancy ended on 27 November 2025.
The Tribunal may make other orders in respect of unlawful residential premises, including ordering a refund of all or part of the rent to the tenant 4 , and exemplary damages. 5
I will not make any monetary orders in this instance. The unlawfulness affected only a part of the property. During the tenancy, [The tenant/s] used the sleepout area as an office, and there were no issues with this area at that time. [The tenant/s] has obtained a benefit by way of the freedom to end the fixed term tenancy by notice. She has now moved into another property.
In my view it would be excessively punitive to make a monetary award of damages against the landlord in these circumstances. Bathroom ventilation fan
Mr Price said that he did not pick up on my directions about the bathroom extractor fan in the previous decision. He and Mrs Price then went on an overseas trip for several weeks and were difficult to contact.
When he saw this issue raised again in [The tenant/s]’s current application, he tried to get information from the electrician who installed the fan. The electrician was slow to respond.
[The electrician] finally responded by email on 5 December. [The electrician] states: When I was asked to install an exhaust fan in the bathroom I scoped the job out. 2 The definition of “premises” includes “any part of the premises” – section 2, RTA 3 Section 56A(1) RTA 4 Section 78A(4) RTA 5 Section 78A(5)(c) RTA The bathroom backs onto the garage and the external wall of the garage is right on the boundary. The garage is also a lean-to arrangement off the house with ventilation grills installed. To vent to the outside would be very difficult. There is plenty of ventilation in the garage and between the previous tenant and myself we decided it would be ok to vent this into the garage. After the installation I asked the tenant how it was and they informed me it was way better than no fan.
There are aspects of this that are disappointing.
It is unfortunate that the landlords did not read, understand, and take action in respect of what I wrote in the 15 October decision. I could not have been more clear.
[The electrician]’s statement provides very little helpful detail. He simply states that venting to the outside would be “very difficult”, without explaining why. The rest of his email suggests that the reason was not so much that venting to the outside was very difficult but that venting into the garage was very easy and convenient. The idea that the previous tenant could ‘sign off’ his approach and that it was better than not having a fan at all, is less than ideal.
The starting point must be that all extractor fans must vent to the outside unless it is “not reasonably practicable” to do so. The landlord has the burden of proof if they want to rely upon this exemption.
The information provided to me still does not show that the exemption applies in this instance.
However, I accept that Mr & Mrs Price took reasonable steps to achieve healthy homes compliance and they relied on their contractors including the electrician and the healthy homes assessor. Again, it is possible that an exemption may genuinely apply, albeit that this is not yet evident from [The electrician]’s limited explanation.
In the circumstances I do not think that it is appropriate to make an award of exemplary damages against the landlords.
I note that the landlords intend to sell the property. If that changes and they rent it again, they will need to get further and better information about why it is “not reasonably practicable” to vent to the exterior. If there is no good reason why, they will need to have the vent re-located from the garage to the exterior. Name suppression, filing fee, bond
[The tenant/s] was substantially successful in the proceedings. Her request for name suppression is granted. 6
On the same grounds I must also award [The tenant/s] the filing fee for this application. 7
The tenancy has ended. Mr Price confirmed that they are not seeking any end of tenancy costs. The bond will be released to the tenant.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5383806 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5383806 — Tenancy dispute

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