What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5407976 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] has applied for suppression of his name and identifying details

How much money was awarded in case 5407976?

Property Damage: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $6,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,253.73 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $566.13 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5407976?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5407976?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13715822-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5407976 about?

The tribunal order states: [The tenant/s] has applied for suppression of his name and identifying details

How much money was awarded in case 5407976?

Property Damage: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $6,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord; Rent Arrears: $6,253.73 awarded to landlord; Water Rates: $566.13 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5407976?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5407976?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13715822-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

34 Pembroke Street, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5407976 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5407976 — net $30.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 19 April 2026 (minus 40	$6,253.73		Rent arrears to 19 April 2026 (minus 40
Water rates	$566.13		d the landlord has not convinced me of the amount and I order the tenant to pay $566.13 in water bills. This is the full and final settlement of the water bill…
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages (s13 RTA		$350.00	Exemplary damages (s13 RTA
Exemplary damages (s45 RTA		$6,500.00	Exemplary damages (s45 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$6,847.96	$6,878.00
Net award		$30.04
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$30.04

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5407976 — net $30.04 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 19 April 2026 (minus 40	$6,253.73		Rent arrears to 19 April 2026 (minus 40
Water rates	$566.13		d the landlord has not convinced me of the amount and I order the tenant to pay $566.13 in water bills. This is the full and final settlement of the water bill…
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00		Filing fee reimbursement
Exemplary damages (s13 RTA		$350.00	Exemplary damages (s13 RTA
Exemplary damages (s45 RTA		$6,500.00	Exemplary damages (s45 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Total award	$6,847.96	$6,878.00
Net award		$30.04
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$30.04

Order

[The tenant/s] has applied for suppression of his name and identifying details and as he has been successful, I am granting suppression of his name and details.
Prem Chandra must pay [The tenant/s] $30.04 immediately, as calculated and set out below:

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. There have been two previous hearings relating to this landlord application and tenant cross application.
The matter was before Adjudicator Merrett on 14 April 2026 when she terminated the tenancy by agreement between the parties and set the remaining claims down for a full day in person hearing.
The matter was assigned to me for hearing the claims. Adjudicator Merrett made directions in her order that the landlord was to confirm that his remaining claims were for rent arrears and water bills.
The tenant was to confirm that his claims were for payment of the bond, compensation, and exemplary damages for failing to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair, failure to comply with Healthy Homes Standards and failure to provide a written tenancy agreement, including insurance and healthy homes statements.
Only these claims were to be heard at the substantive hearing unless the parties advise the Tribunal 14 days before the hearing that they wish to add or amend their claims.
Neither party has advised the Tribunal that there are other claims to be added or amended for hearing. Therefore, the matters set out in paragraphs 3 and 4 are the claims before me for determination. Standard and Burden of Proof
In the Tenancy Tribunal, the standard of proof is the balance of probabilities. This means that the person making a claim must prove that it is more likely than not that their version of events is correct. The burden of proof rests with the party bringing the claim; they must provide sufficient evidence to support their case. Conflicting Evidence
When the evidence from each party is in direct conflict, it is the role of the Tribunal to assess the credibility and reliability of the evidence presented. If the person making the claim cannot provide evidence that persuades the Tribunal, on the balance of probabilities, that their version is more likely to be true, then the claim cannot succeed. Where the evidence is evenly balanced and the Tribunal cannot prefer one version over the other, the claim must be dismissed because the standard of proof has not been met. Tenants claim: Failure to maintain / Breach of Health Homes standards:
[The tenant/s] claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 45 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 ( RTA).
Under section 45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness, 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 , 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.
This is a property that was built in the 1970’s. The property was in a poor condition during this tenancy. The landlord purchased the property in 2015 and admits that he has not repainted or refurbished the interior or exterior of the property during that time.
The tenant has provided a series of photos to show the condition of the property. The photos show a laundry with severe water damaged walls that are warped and have large holes in it. The kitchen stove is broken with sparks and flames coming out of a broken side of the cook top and a taped up broken electrical switch above the stove. The kitchen cupboards have missing doors, there is no hot water coming out of the kitchen taps. The landlord had attempted to fix the broken tap several years earlier but could not so and left the sink with only running cold water. An old disused fireplace remained unsealed in the house, the back doorstep and porch were propped up by blocks, the windowsills were rotten, there was severe mould in the eves under the exterior of the house and in the ceiling in the laundry. There were cracks in the ceiling and walls of the house , missing bricks off the exterior walls and missing under house door. Rusted light fitting and down pipes.
A number of windows in the house and the outside porch were broken and cracked and have been since the start of the tenancy. Despite asking for the windows to be fixed they remained broken and cracked and lets cold air in, according to a witness for the tenant.
A witness called by the tenant talked about the landlord digging up the ground in the yard to remove tree roots. However, the landlord left the mound of rocks and dirt in the yard rather than completing the job and filing in the hole. The tenant said the holes were a safety issue for the young children that lived at the property. The tenant provided a photo of the mound in the yard. The landlord did not dispute the claim.
The tenants complained about the terrible bugs and cockroach infestation in the property. The tenant provided photos of slugs and snails crawling up the inside and outside walls at the property and cockroaches throughout the property.
The landlord said that the cockroaches were because the tenants were not clean.
The tenant claimed that the ceiling and exterior cladding contained asbestos. The tenant said that the ceiling would flake off and drop onto the floor and people below. The tenant was very concerned about piece of asbestos material contaminating the property and putting his family at serious risk.
The tenant says that he complained to the landlord about the condition of the property, but that nothing was done to fix the property.
The landlord claimed that he was not aware of the condition of the house, despite living 4 houses away from the property. Furthermore, the landlord had been into the property to do the occasional repairs and to talk to the tenant. I find the landlord has committed an unlawful act.
This property was one of the worst I have seen, and I do not accept that the landlord was not aware of the poor condition of the property. The landlord said that the tenant was not always paying rent and so he was not in a position to pay for repairs and do maintenance to the property. Healthy Homes Standards:
In additional to the lack of maintenance and repairs, the property failed five out the six healthy homes standards.
The landlord and tenant both had their own independent Healthy Homes Assessments (HHA) done of the property. The landlord provided the Tribunal with their HHA dated 23 April 2026 which showed the following: a) The ceiling insulation was not at least 120mm thick and/or does not have an R-value of at least 2.3, is not in a reasonable condition and is not compliant. b) The underfloor insulation does not have an R-value of 1.3 or more and is not compliant. c) There was no ground moisture barrier. The property failed the insulation and moisture ingress standard. d) Most of the windows don’t open/or close properly and require new window latches/restrictors/stays and the windows in the living room are cracked and need replacing. The property failed the draught stopping standard. e) There were no fans in the kitchen or bathroom and the failure of the draught stopping meant that air flow was hindered. The property failed the ventilation standard. f) The external cladding was damaged and missing bricks. g) There were no smoke alarms installed in the property.
The report writer comments on general repairs and maintenances and says the laundry wall and ceiling was damaged and needs to be repaired, the carpet was in a real poor condition and needs relacing and the bathroom ceiling and walls need to be cleaned.
The tenant called two witnesses, Mr Faiga who was a boarder at the property and Shiti Chand who is the tenants adult daughter who resided at the property for a period.
Both witnesses describe the condition of the property and that the tenant would ask the landlord to make repairs, but they were never attended to. The tenant would try to maintain the property when he could by repairing broken fixtures and repainting rooms. Mr Faiga talked about the terrible cockroach infestation and the efforts they took to keep on top of it, and the condition of the laundry that just got worse over the years. Mr Faiga had been at the property as a boarder throughout the tenancy and recalled the landlord coming to the property to fix windows on a few occasions. On one occasion Mr Faiga said he saw the tenant giving the landlord cash for the rent in the early part of the tenancy.
Ms Chand talked about washing dishes for years with cold water, because the hot water had been disconnected by the landlord and not fixed. She described the cockroach infestation, the broken windows, and dangerous stove.
Ms Chand overheard her father asking the landlord repeatedly to do repairs at the home. She talked about the landlord digging up tree roots in 2023 and leaving the dirt and stones in the yard without filing in the holes he made.
Ms Chand told the Tribunal about the landlord turning up at the property on three difference times and harassing her mother for rent arrears. Ms Chand’s mother is unwell and would become distressed at the landlord’s behaviour. Ms Chand claims the landlord knew full well about the poor condition of the property.
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.
The landlord had a statutory obligation to comply with Healthy Homes Standard at the latest by 1 July 2025. There can be no excuse because the property is not compliant nearly one year after the compliance date.
This landlord owns 4-5 rental properties yet does not comply with the basic obligations of a landlord. Exemplary damages:
When awarding exemplary damages for breaches of the landlord’s obligations to maintain the premises and comply with the Healthy Homes Standards, the Tribunal is limited to awarding a single amount for a breach of a particular section, even if there are multiple failures (see Manage my Rental v Baxter NZDC 12011).
Section 109(3) of the RTA sets out the statutory test for awarding exemplary damages. The Tribunal must consider:
The intent of the person committing the unlawful act.
The effect of the unlawful act.
The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed.
The public interest; and
Whether it is just to make the award.
For breaches of the Healthy Homes Standards and maintenance obligations under section 45(1)(b) and (c) of the RTA the maximum exemplary damages are set out in Schedule 1A of the Act. As of the most recent update, the maximum for each unlawful act is $7,200.
In this case, I am satisfied that the landlord’s breaches of the Healthy Homes Standards and maintenance obligations were intentional. The property failed 5 out of 6 Healthy Homes Standards and was in a disgraceful and unsafe condition—one of the worst I have seen. The effect on the tenants was significant, and there is a strong public interest in deterring landlords from allowing properties to fall into such a state.
Taking into account the intent, the serious effect on the tenants, the interests of the tenants, and the public interest, I am satisfied that it is just to make an award near the maximum level. Accordingly, I order exemplary damages of $6,500.
Orders near the maximum are reserved for the most egregious cases, where the landlord’s conduct is deliberate, ongoing, and has had a significant impact on the tenant. Failure to provide a tenancy agreement:
[The tenant/s] claims the landlord has not ensured the tenancy agreement is in writing and/or did not sign the tenancy agreement and provide a copy to the tenant.
A landlord must ensure the tenancy agreement is in writing, signed and a copy provided to the tenant prior to the tenancy commencing. See section 13 RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act, for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $750.00. See section 13(4) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
There is no dispute that the landlord did not prepare a tenancy agreement for this tenancy. Despite this being an experienced landlord, having 4 other rental properties, the landlord did not prepare a tenancy agreement, nor insurance details nor a healthy homes statement. The landlord offers no explanation for this failure.
Ms Chand talked about her father asking the landlord several times over the last few years for a tenancy agreement. The reason she is aware of this is that she came to live in the property in 2023 and needed a tenancy agreement to get assistance from WINZ. WINZ required a tenancy agreement, which is why the landlord was asked several times that she knows of.
The landlord did not provide the tenant with a tenancy agreement. I find they have committed an unlawful act.
There a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied that 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.
A written tenancy agreement is an important document as it records the rights and obligations of both the landlord and the tenant. It provides clarity about the terms of the tenancy, including matters such as rent, bond, duration, and any special conditions agreed between the parties.
The RTA requires landlords to provide a written tenancy agreement. Failure to do so can lead to uncertainty and disputes about the terms of the tenancy and does not meet the standards expected of landlords under the RTA. In this case, the landlord did not prepare a tenancy agreement at the start of the tenancy or at any time during the tenancy, despite requests from the tenant and without any explanation. This is not acceptable practice.
I am awarding the of $350.00 to the tenant for the landlord’s breach of the RTA. Landlord’s claims: Water bills:
The landlord is claiming that the tenant owes water bills. The tenant accepts water bills are owing. However, the actual amount of water bills owing is not clear. The landlord initially provided a water bill to the Tribunal, dated March 2026 showing that there was $1712.82 owing in water bills.
However, prior to this hearing Water Care has sent the debt of $1493.26 to the debt collection agency in February 2026.
The tenant was notified by the debt collection agency of the debt. The tenant paid $1000 directly to the debt collector on 23 March 2026 and 11 April 2026.
The tenant has confirmation from the debt collection agency that the remaining balance for him to pay was $373.86 off this debt. The tenant provided email confirmation from Water Care about the amount of $373.86 owing on the debt. The landlord says the debt collection agency told him it was $585.88.
There is a new water bills, for 25 February 2026 to 27 March 2026 period which was $192.27 after deduction of the landlord’s portion for the fixed wastewater charges. Unfortunately, the invoice provided initially by the landlord still has the $1493.26 on the bill along with the new charges.
I must make a determination on the amount of water bills owed given the conflicting accounts by the parties and Water Care. The landlord claims the amount the tenant owes $1127.14 but I cannot equate this amount with the evidence I have received.
By my calculations, the tenant owes $566.13, ($373.86 and $192.27). There is a clear conflict between the landlord and tenants claims and their supporting evidence. I find the landlord has not convinced me of the amount and I order the tenant to pay $566.13 in water bills. This is the full and final settlement of the water bills for this tenancy. How much is owed for rent- and rent abatement:
The tenancy ended on 19 April 2026. The landlord provided rent records which prove the amount owing at the end of the tenancy is $10,422.85. That is rent arrears from 26 December 2025 to 19 April 2026.
The landlord has applied for rent arrears. The tenant claims the premises were in poor condition and that the landlord failed to maintain the property, including breaches of the Healthy Homes Standards.
I am satisfied that the landlord has failed to maintain the premises as required by section 45 of the RTA . There were 5 out of 6 Healthy Homes Standards breached during the tenancy. These failures significantly reduced the tenant’s enjoyment and use of the premises.
Under section 78A of the RTA, the Tribunal must not order the tenant to pay rent arrears unless it would be unjust not to do so, having regard to the special circumstances, including the nature of the premises and the extent of the landlord’s breaches.
Given the seriousness and duration of the landlord’s breaches, I find it just to reduce the rent arrears owing. I award a rent abatement of 40% for the period from 26 December 2025 to 19 April 2026, being the period during which the premises were non-compliant.
The tenant owes $10,422.85 in rent arrears, minus a 40% rent rebate for the landlord’s failure to maintain and breach of healthy homes standards. The rent rebate of 40% of $10,422.85 is $4169.12. The tenant is to pay the landlord the sum of $6253.73 in rent arrears. Bond:
The tenant states that he paid a bond to the landlord and has produced a document from his employer to say he borrowed money from him to pay his bond. However, I have no proof that the money was provided and that it was put towards a bond payment.
The tenant has not proven to me that he paid a bond top the landlord, therefore I cannot award the refund of an alleged bond payment. Filing Fee/ Suppression:
Because Prem Chandra has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
Because Prem Chandra has partly succeeded with the claim I have reimbursed the filing fee.
The tenant seek suppression of his name and details and as he has been successful, I am granting suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5407976 — Exemplary damages at 34 Pembroke Street, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5407976 — Exemplary damages at 34 Pembroke Street, Papatoetoe, Auckland 2025

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