What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5406508 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5406508?

Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5406508?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5406508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13564178-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5406508 about?

The tribunal order states: The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.

How much money was awarded in case 5406508?

Property Damage: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5406508?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5406508?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13564178-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 1, 72 Dyers Pass Road, Cashmere, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5406508 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5406508 — net $198.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond shortfall	$20.00	Bond shortfall
Exemplary damages for late lodgment of bond	$150.00	Exemplary damages for late lodgment of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$198.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$198.00

Both parties attended the hearing.

[The tenant/s] claim the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.

A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’).

Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The landlord received the bond of $2,320.00 at the start of the tenancy in April 2025 but only lodged $2,300.00 of the bond on 24 September 2025. I find they have 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.

I have had regard to the landlord’s explanation for late lodgment of the bond. The landlord say that they merely “forgot” to lodge the bond. The landlord has a record of lodging other tenants’ bonds, past and present.

Here, the tenant texted the landlord about the bond on 24 September 2025 and on realising their “mistake”, the landlord immediately lodged the bond but in their “panicked state”, only lodged $2,300 instead of the full bond of $2,320.

The tenant is less forgiving of the landlord’s mistake, due largely to the manner in which the fixed term tenancy later came to a premature end in October 2025. The tenant submits that the landlord must have decided to hang on to their bond to cover exigencies of the tenancy.

My focus however must be directed on the landlord’s intent (or lack of intent) when the landlord lodged the bond 6 months into the tenancy in breach of the 23 working days’ requirement set out in section 19(1) RTA. The full bond should have been lodged by the end of May 2025 at the latest.

To some extent, and somewhat ironically, the landlord’s shortfall of $20 in the late lodgment of the bond speaks to the “panic” that they were in at the time.

The landlord is an experienced landlord, having rented out their property as well as having utilised the Tenancy Tribunal is past applications before it.

They should be aware of their obligations on timely lodgment of bonds.

Having regard to the landlord’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act on the tenant, the interests of the tenant, and the public interest that bonds are dutifully lodged within the allocated time, I am satisfied it would be just to award exemplary damages to the tenant in the sum of $150.00 in this instance.

The bond was ultimately lodged, late and short of $20.00. It should not attract an award of exemplary damages on the higher end of the scale. But some form of recognition of the landlord’s failed obligation and upholding of the tenant’s rights are necessary.

Along with the award of exemplary damages, I also direct the landlord to return the shortfall of $20.00 and reimburse the tenant’s filing fee paid for this application.

The tenant is successful in this claim; there will be an order of suppression of the tenant’s name accordingly.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5406508 — net $198.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Bond shortfall	$20.00	Bond shortfall
Exemplary damages for late lodgment of bond	$150.00	Exemplary damages for late lodgment of bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$198.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$198.00

Order

The Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Shane Adler and Sachie Kawamura must pay [The tenant/s] $198.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
[The tenant/s] claim the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (‘RTA’).
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord received the bond of $2,320.00 at the start of the tenancy in April 2025 but only lodged $2,300.00 of the bond on 24 September 2025. I find they have 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.
I have had regard to the landlord’s explanation for late lodgment of the bond. The landlord say that they merely “forgot” to lodge the bond. The landlord has a record of lodging other tenants’ bonds, past and present.
Here, the tenant texted the landlord about the bond on 24 September 2025 and on realising their “mistake”, the landlord immediately lodged the bond but in their “panicked state”, only lodged $2,300 instead of the full bond of $2,320.
The tenant is less forgiving of the landlord’s mistake, due largely to the manner in which the fixed term tenancy later came to a premature end in October 2025. The tenant submits that the landlord must have decided to hang on to their bond to cover exigencies of the tenancy.
My focus however must be directed on the landlord’s intent (or lack of intent) when the landlord lodged the bond 6 months into the tenancy in breach of the 23 working days’ requirement set out in section 19(1) RTA. The full bond should have been lodged by the end of May 2025 at the latest.
To some extent, and somewhat ironically, the landlord’s shortfall of $20 in the late lodgment of the bond speaks to the “panic” that they were in at the time.
The landlord is an experienced landlord, having rented out their property as well as having utilised the Tenancy Tribunal is past applications before it.
They should be aware of their obligations on timely lodgment of bonds.
Having regard to the landlord’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act on the tenant, the interests of the tenant, and the public interest that bonds are dutifully lodged within the allocated time, I am satisfied it would be just to award exemplary damages to the tenant in the sum of $150.00 in this instance.
The bond was ultimately lodged, late and short of $20.00. It should not attract an award of exemplary damages on the higher end of the scale. But some form of recognition of the landlord’s failed obligation and upholding of the tenant’s rights are necessary.
Along with the award of exemplary damages, I also direct the landlord to return the shortfall of $20.00 and reimburse the tenant’s filing fee paid for this application.
The tenant is successful in this claim; there will be an order of suppression of the tenant’s name accordingly.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5406508 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat Flat 1, 72 Dyers Pass Road, Cashmere,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5406508 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat Flat 1, 72 Dyers Pass Road, Cashmere,

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