What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395411 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenants’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be

How much money was awarded in case 5395411?

Loss Of Amenity - Beginning Of Tenan…: $531.14 awarded to tenant; Loss Of Amenity Pool: $108.64 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395411?

The primary dispute was Leaks. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Exemplary damages, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395411?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13744951-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5395411 about?

The tribunal order states: The tenants’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be

How much money was awarded in case 5395411?

Loss Of Amenity - Beginning Of Tenan…: $531.14 awarded to tenant; Loss Of Amenity Pool: $108.64 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5395411?

The primary dispute was Leaks. Related themes: State of repair, Smoke alarms, Exemplary damages, Harassment.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5395411?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13744951-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5395411 — Leaks

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5395411. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Loss of amenity - beginning of tenancy		$531.14	Loss of amenity - beginning of tenancy
Loss of amenity pool		$108.64	Loss of amenity pool

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5395411. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Loss of amenity - beginning of tenancy		$531.14	Loss of amenity - beginning of tenancy
Loss of amenity pool		$108.64	Loss of amenity pool

Order

The tenants’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be published.
[The landlord] must pay [the tenants] $639.78 immediately.
The landlord must carry out the following work to the premises, which must be completed by 1 July 2026: install curtains in bedroom 5 of the premises as required to ensure all the windows in bedroom 5 have curtains.
As an alternative to compliance with Order 3, the landlord must pay the tenants $300.00 immediately. DescriptionTenant Loss of amenity - beginning of tenancy$531.14 Loss of amenity pool $108.64 Total award$639.78

Reasons

I heard this matter on 11 June 2026 at North Shore District Court.
Both tenants attended the hearing in person.
[Property manager name], the property manager, attended the hearing for the landlord. Background
The tenancy began on 24 October 2025 and is for a fixed term due to end on 23 October 2026. The weekly rent was set at $1,690.00.
The tenants are a couple. They have three children aged 11 and 14 years and now have a baby. At the time the tenancy began the couple’s baby had not been born and Ms [tenant’s surname] was heavily pregnant.
The premises’ house is about 30 years old. It is a large, modern-style house with a floor plan 400m 2 and has extensive grounds of over 5,000m 2 . The house has seven bedrooms, four bathrooms, two toilets, a study, a three-car garage, and a swimming pool.
The property manager said the property is so extensive that completing the entry inspection for the property took three days and involved her taking over 1,650 photos.
The tenancy had an unfortunate precursor. Ms [tenant’s surname] arrived late to a pre- tenancy visit of the premises that had been organised. The property manager (who was running later for another appointment) spoke hurriedly and loudly to the tenant. The tenant interpreted her comments and their volume as aggressive yelling.
At the start of the tenancy, the tenant found many faults in the premises including that the wood fire’s chimney had a crack, leaking taps, broken window latches, windows that did not open, missing curtains, and loose pool decking exposed nails.
The tenants were distressed by the number of contractor visits to the premises to repair and maintain the premises or for other reasons. They considered they had not been given adequate notice of contractor visits, and in particular, for contractors who let themselves through a passcode protected gate to do work in the grounds.
The tenants would like a rent reduction for the period they were inconvenienced and “better management”.
The tenants’ claims under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) are: a. The landlord failed to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. b. The landlord’s contractors unlawfully entered the premises. c.The landlord interfered with their reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy. d. The landlord has not supplied curtains or blinds for one of the premises bedrooms.

Did the landlords fail to provide and maintain the premises?

The tenants claim that the landlord failed to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. They are particularly frustrated the premises had many problems when they moved in, leading to many contractor visits and inconvenience. Legal principles
Under s 45(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), landlords must maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. That provision provides: 45 Landlord’s responsibilities (1) The landlord shall— (a) ... (b) provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes...
Landlords are liable for defects that they have knowledge of. They must repair such known defects within a reasonable time once they acquire such knowledge. The author of Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand explains: 1 The landlord’s obligation of repair is not absolute. A landlord does not have to foresee a latent and unobservable defect before it causes damage... A landlord therefore must repair within a reasonable time after knowledge of the need for repair: 2 “...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 1 Stewart Benson Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand (2018) Thomson Reuters at 6.18. 2 Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington CIV 2009-085-1431, 24 February 2010 at [15]. evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be...”
Tenants have a duty to notify the landlord of damage to the premises, or of the need for any repair promptly after they discover the damage or disrepair. 3 Notwithstanding the tenant’s duty to notify, Landlords have an independent obligation to repair problems that are apparent from observation: 4 However, notice from the tenant is not needed if the landlords knew of the need for repair or the need for repair is apparent from observation...
If a landlord breaches their duty to maintain the premises, the Tribunal may order compensation; and if the failure is intentional, exemplary damages up to a maximum of $7,200.00. 5 The facts
The property manager noticed a board pulling away from the edge of swimming pool deck a few days before the tenancy began on 24 October 2025 when she carried out her entry inspection. She instructed a contractor to do the repair, which she describes as “specialised”. The work was completed on 14 November 2025, some three weeks after the tenancy began.
On 29 October 2025, the tenants alerted the landlord to problems including a leaking bathroom sink, broken window handles, windows not closing properly, a broken shower head, a crack in the side of a wood burner. The landlord had these and other matters repaired by about 14 November 2025.
One of the smoke alarms malfunctioned probably due a battery failure. It is the tenant’s duty to replace smoke alarm batteries. However, the landlord replaced the smoke alarm within a few days.
Later, on 20 November 2025, the tenants reported to the landlord that a tiled area of decking caved in, revealing rotting wooden framing underneath. The landlord had the decking rebuilt by about 28 November 2025. 3 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) s 40(1)(d). 4 See n 1. 5 RTA s 45(1A) and Schedule 1A.
In February of 2026, the tenants’ children suffered skin reactions after swimming. It transpired the pool’s chemical PH and Copper levels were elevated. It took the landlord about nine days to correct the problem and make the pool safe to swim in again. Discussion
The tenants experienced the problems as the premises they complain of. The premises had been tenants previously, and the previous tenants had not alerted the landlord of the problems that plagued the tenants. The property is extremely large with many building elements. It is about 30 years old, so naturally maintenance and repair issues will occur. The landlord repaired all of the problems within a reasonable time once it new or them.Therefore, the landlord did not fail to maintain the premises.
Exemplary damages are not available. However, the Tribunal can consider the tenants’ loss of amenity. Tenants cannot expect to be compensated for every instance of problems needing repair. However, it is appropriate to order modest compensation for loss of amenity for the early “teething issues” and the February swimming pool problem.
In respect to the pool decking and the other issues early in the tenancy, I order compensation of $531.14 (based on 10 per cent of the weekly rent 24 October to 14 November 2025). I also order $108.64 (based on 5 per cent of the weekly rent over 9 days for the unavailability of the swimming pool). Did the landlord’s contractors unlawfully enter the premises?
The tenants are concerned that the landlord’s contractors entered the grounds without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections, repairs, or maintenance. 6 Significantly for this case, “premises” do not include the grounds or facilities. Section 48(7) of the RTA provides: In this section premises does not include land or facilities.
There was no evidence that the landlord or its agents or contractors entered the house without authority. 6 RTA s 48 (4)(a).
The Tribunal dismisses this claim. Did the landlord interfere with the tenants’ reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy?
The tenants are upset abut the property manager’s communication style and with contractors and others entering the grounds unexpectedly. Legal principles
Landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. 7
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: s 38(3) and Schedule 1A of the 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.
Black’s Law Dictionary 8 defines “harassment” as: Words, conduct, or action (usu. repeated or persistent) that, being directed at a specific person annoys, alarms, or causes substantial emotional distress in that person and serves no legitimate purpose.
The New Oxford Dictionary of English 9 defines “harass” as: subject to aggressive pressure or intimidation”. Discussion
The property manager spoke brusquely and loudly to the tenant a few days prior to the tenancy beginning. The tenant was offended and felt disrespected. The property manager was rushing to another meeting and was stressed and did not mean to be unkind. She apologised shortly afterwards. I am not satisfied that this incident amounted to an interference with the tenant’s privacy in their use of the premises. 7 RTA s 38(2). 8 Bryan A Gardener (ed) Black’s Law Dictionary (8 th ed, West Group, 2004). 9 Patrick Hanks (ed) (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1998).
Contractors have entered the grounds of the premises for repairs and to service the pool and fix a water pump. On another occasion, a neighbour retrieved a ride-on mower from the grounds. That is usual practice in residential tenancies where the landlord retains responsibility for maintenance or is asked to repair external facilities.
I am not satisfied that the landlord interfered with the tenants’ reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy.
This claim is dismissed. Curtains
One of the bedrooms, Bedroom 5, which the tenants use as a guest bedroom has a window that lacks curtains or blinds.
Tenants should not be expected to supply curtains. There is an implied term in the tenancy agreement that bedrooms will have curtains or blinds.
The Tribunal makes a work order that the landlord installs curtains. 10 I make an alternative monetary order which will take effect if the landlord fails to comply with the work order. 11 Non-publication
The Tribunal may on its own initiative, having regard to the interests of the parties and to the public interest, order that the name or any identifying particulars of any party not be published. 12
The tenants are private people. I doubt they would want their names or addresses published. To protect their privacy, it is appropriate to consider an order for non- publication. The principle of open justice does not require publication of the parties’ details. The public interest favours suppression in the circumstances. The landlord’s details are suppressed also to protect the tenant’s identity. The Tribunal orders non- publication of the parties’ details including the tenancy address.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395411 — Leaks

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5395411 — Leaks

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlords fail to provide and maintain the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Did the landlords fail to provide and maintain the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions