What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5411360 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 5411360?

Compensation: Section 13A Breaches: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 16A Breach: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: section 30 and 39 brea…: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 38 Breaches: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 45 Breaches: $400.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Refund Over Paid Rent: $420.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5411360?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5411360?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13579690-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5411360 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 5411360?

Compensation: Section 13A Breaches: $150.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 16A Breach: $50.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: section 30 and 39 brea…: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 38 Breaches: $200.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Section 45 Breaches: $400.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Refund Over Paid Rent: $420.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5411360?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5411360?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13579690-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

12 Mount Street, Greymouth, Greymouth 7805 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5411360 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5411360 — net $3,643.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: section 13A breaches	$150.00	section 13A breaches
Compensation: section 45 breaches	$400.00	section 45 breaches
Compensation: section 30 and 39 breaches	$200.00	section 30 and 39 breaches
Compensation: section 38 breaches	$200.00	section 38 breaches
Compensation: section 16A breach	$50.00	section 16A breach
Exemplary damages: failure to lodge bond	$500.00	failure to lodge bond
Refund over paid rent	$420.00	Refund over paid rent
Refund bond	$1,695.00	Refund bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,643.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,643.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Layla Dowthwaite must pay [The tenant/s] $3,643.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The application for a declaration that the notice to terminate the tenancy was retaliatory, and for compensation, is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing. The landlord, who resides in Australia, chose not to attend by phone, approval having been granted. She has provided her written response to the tenant’s application together with her documentary evidence.
The tenant has applied for compensation for alleged breaches by the landlord of her statutory responsibilities, and in some instances for exemplary damages for breaches that are defined unlawful acts. She also seeks a rent refund, her bond, and a declaration that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was retaliatory. Background
The tenancy started on 22 September 2024 and ended on 12 January 2026 after the landlord gave notices to terminate the tenancy.
The tenant accepted the landlord’s 90-day notice to end the tenancy. The tenant believes that the landlord sold the property around February 2026.
The tenant paid a bond at the start of the tenancy of $1,695.00. The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre. She retains the bond. The tenant alleges that she wanted to take costs from the bond.
The tenant lodged her application with the Tribunal on 10 December 2025, about one month before the tenancy ended. There is no landlord application before the Tribunal.
I have considered all the material placed before the Tribunal by both parties even if I do not specifically refer to it. Directions conference
I held a directions conference on 17 March 2026. I set out the tenant’s claims in that order and made directions for the parties to file submissions and evidence. Both parties complied with the directions.
I directed that the hearing take place in Christchurch even though the tenancy was in Greymouth. The tenant now resides in Christchurch, the landlord in Australia.
The landlord set out reasons why she did not wish to attend the hearing by phone. I agreed to accept and consider her written submissions which is what I have done. Issues
The issues the Tribunal must determine are these: •Did the landlord fail to include all the required statements in the tenancy agreement? •Did the landlord breach her responsibilities by failing to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) and by failing to maintain and repair the premises? •Did the landlord fail to provide rent records and properly account for utilities charged? •Did the landlord breach the tenant’s quiet enjoyment? •Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent? •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond? •Was the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy a retaliatory notice? •Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent? Relevant law
The following sections of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) are relevant: •Section 13A RTA sets out what must be contained in a tenancy agreement. •Section 16A RTA requires a landlord to appoint an agent if out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days •Section 19 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities on receipt of a bond. •Section 24 RTA sets out when rent may be increased •Section 30 RTA requires a landlord to keep proper business records (rent and bond) •Section 38 RTA provides that a tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without interruption by the landlord and that the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant •Section 39 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities for outgoings •Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to provide the premises in a reasonably clean state; to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to the age and character of the premises); and to comply with the HHS. •Section 54 RTA allows a tenant to apply for a declaration that a notice to terminate a tenancy was retaliatory and sets out what the consequence of that is. Compensation and exemplary damages
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: • The intention of the person; • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord fail to include all the required statements in the tenancy agreement?
The tenancy agreement is woefully inadequate. It fails to comply with numerous requirements of the RTA. The landlord refers to the tenancy as an ‘informal tenancy’.
The landlord accepts that the tenancy agreement did not contain the statements required under section 13A RTA which include (but are not limited to) insurance and insulation statements and a statement about HHS compliance. She states that the tenant never requested them. That is no defence to this claim. The onus is on the landlord to provide them. 1 [2020] NZDC 17667
The failure to comply with section 13A RTA is a defined unlawful act. However, the tenant confirmed that she was seeking compensation only, not exemplary damages.
The importance of these statements is that they enable a tenant to make an informed choice about whether to rent the premises.
The failure to include the statements meant that the tenant felt unprepared as to the extent to which she needed to heat the premises.
I award the tenant compensation of $150.00 for this breach. Did the landlord breach her responsibilities by failing to comply with the

HHS and by failing to maintain and repair the premises?

I have dealt with these issues together since they are both breaches of a landlord’s section 45 RTA responsibilities.
The tenant said there was no externally vented fan in the ensuite bathroom which required her to leave open an external door which meant it was difficult to keep heat in.
The tenant also referred to repairs that were not completed – there were on-going issues with two faulty stove elements which made cooking difficult and unsafe; the kitchen tap continually malfunctioned; and the deck door did not seal properly, causing the lino flooring to bubble and lift, and allowing draught to enter.
The tenant served a 14-day notice on the landlord after which a plumber repaired the tap.
The landlord said she was unaware that an externally vented fan was required. She said that she was unaware of the repair issues until the tenant served a 14- day notice. She alleges that the tenant failed to inform her of the door not closing properly which in turn caused damage to the flooring.
The landlord was in breach by not ensuring that the bathroom had an externally vented fan. That she was unaware one was required is not defence. The repair issues are less significant, since the communications between the parties broke down. The landlord responded to the breach notice and had the tap fixed.
The tenant confirmed that she did not seek exemplary damages for these breaches.
I award her compensation of $400.00 for the inconvenience caused by these issues. Did the landlord fail to provide rent records and properly account for utilities charged?
The tenant gave evidence that the utilities charged by the landlord changed during the tenancy and were confusing as to how much she owned and when payment was required. On 18 August 2025, the landlord then increased the rent and required power and internet to be paid weekly in advance.
The tenant served a 14-day breach notice requesting a full rent statement and billing records.
In summary, the tenant said the landlord failed to keep and provide clear rental and utilities records which made it difficult for her to understand and verify payments.
The landlord said that the tenant would not agree to having the utilities in her name. She said she made a genuine mistake when she sent a broadband account as it was a billing error.
Both parties have commented at length about these issues.
The landlord agreed that her rent records were not sufficiently detailed.
In the overall context of this tenancy, I find that the tenant is entitled to some, but limited, compensation for the landlord’s confusing records. She was entitled to have access to clear and correct rent and utility records and charges. I award her compensation of $200.00. Did the landlord breach the tenant’s quiet enjoyment?
The tenant referred to harassment by the landlord. However, she confirmed that she did not seek exemplary damages.
Harassment is a serious or repeated breach of a tenant’s quiet enjoyment.
Some communications from the landlord were rude and inappropriate, the tenant says hostile and threatening. I will not detail those communications here. But I agree that there was an aggressive and unfortunate tone to many of them.
The landlord agrees that some of her communications were ‘hurtful for both of us’. She said she was experiencing significant personal health challenges. The landlord has stated: I have admitted, acknowledged, and I apologise for any hurt caused when I said inappropriate things to someone, I had been trying to be a friend to and thought was a friend of mine...I was highly triggered by my tenant’s communication and threats which I saw as unnecessary and in fact as a protest to being asked to leave in 90 days.
The Tribunal encounters tenancies from time to time that are represented as informal arrangements between friends. Rudeness or communications that flow from a breakdown in that kind of relationship do not always constitute a breach of quiet enjoyment. Often there are faults both ways. In this case I need not consider harassment since the tenant is not seeking exemplary damages: harassment is the unlawful act that potentially triggers an award of damages.
While the landlord had her challenges, she was nevertheless a landlord and had responsibilities under the RTA.
I find that the tenant is eligible for some compensation for breaches of her quiet enjoyment, but a limited amount given the context of this tenancy. I award her compensation of $200.00.

Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent?

The landlord failed to appoint an agent, but she made efforts to do so.
The tenant states that she left New Zealand on or about 14 November 2025. She later attempted to appoint someone to ‘help with communications’ on or about 10 December 2025, more than 21 days after she moved. That person then withdrew from assisting, and no other manager for the tenancy was appointed.
I have considered the landlord’s response to this claim. It is established that she failed to properly appoint an agent. This is one of the claims where the tenant seeks exemplary damages. Taking account of the factors in Birch, I do not find that the landlord acted with intent. She took advice, and she acted, but her agent did not work out. The tenancy ended on 12 January 2026.
I do not find the section 109 RTA factors met in this case. I decline to award exemplary damages.
I award the tenant token compensation for not having a clear agent to deal with for part of this short period of time. I award her $50.00.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond?

The landlord accepts that she did not lodge the bond. She has explained why, believing it to be an informal tenancy. Then at the end she had costs she believed the tenant was liable for.
Section 22B(2) RTA provides that if the tenant applies to the Tribunal and the landlord seeks payment of the bond in whole or in part, the landlord must file an application with the Tribunal setting out a counterclaim.
The landlord has not filed any application with the Tribunal so has no claim on the bond.
The failure to lodge a bond within 23-working-days after payment is made is an unlawful act.
A landlord holds a bond in trust. The failure to lodge the bond is a significant breach. It had an effect on the tenant, was against the tenant’s interests, and was against the public interest.
For this unlawful act, I award the tenant exemplary damages of $500.00.
Additionally, the landlord must refund the bond to the tenant. Was the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy a retaliatory notice?
I make no declaration that the landlord’s notice (or notices) to terminate the tenancy was a retaliatory notice. Even though the relationship between the parties had broken down, the landlord was genuinely selling the property as part of her move to Australia.
In other words, the tenant has failed to prove that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was in retaliation for the exercise or proposed exercise by the tenant of any right, power, authority or remedy conferred on the tenant by the tenancy agreement, the RTA or any other Act or any complaint against the landlord relating to the tenancy, as section 54(2) RTA requires. That there was a relationship breakdown does not establish retaliatory notice, especially when, as here, the landlord was selling and did sell the property that was subject to the tenancy.

Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent?

The tenant said that the landlord by email dated 18 August 2025 increased the rent by $20.00 per week.
The landlord said she made a genuine error as she did not know that 60 days’ notice was required for a rent increase. She said the rent increase was discussed and agreed verbally.
Parties cannot contract out of the RTA to a tenant’s detriment. That the tenant verbally agreed to the increase, cannot make the increase lawful when it is not.
Ignorance of a landlord’s responsibilities is not a defence to a claim for and unlawful rent increase.
I cannot award exemplary damages. An unlawful rent increase is not a defined unlawful act. The remedy is to order a refund of the overpaid rent. The landlord must therefore refund the difference in rent, a total of $420.00. Result
The landlord will refund the bond to the tenant, refund the overpaid rent, pay compensation of $1,000.00 and exemplary damages of $500.00. As well I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression
The tenant sought, and is entitled to, an order for name suppression as the application is successful. The landlord is not entitled to name suppression as her defence to the application is mostly unsuccessful 2 .

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5411360 — net $3,643.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation: section 13A breaches	$150.00	section 13A breaches
Compensation: section 45 breaches	$400.00	section 45 breaches
Compensation: section 30 and 39 breaches	$200.00	section 30 and 39 breaches
Compensation: section 38 breaches	$200.00	section 38 breaches
Compensation: section 16A breach	$50.00	section 16A breach
Exemplary damages: failure to lodge bond	$500.00	failure to lodge bond
Refund over paid rent	$420.00	Refund over paid rent
Refund bond	$1,695.00	Refund bond
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$3,643.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$3,643.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenant’s name and identifying details.
Layla Dowthwaite must pay [The tenant/s] $3,643.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below:
The application for a declaration that the notice to terminate the tenancy was retaliatory, and for compensation, is dismissed.

Reasons

The tenant attended the hearing. The landlord, who resides in Australia, chose not to attend by phone, approval having been granted. She has provided her written response to the tenant’s application together with her documentary evidence.
The tenant has applied for compensation for alleged breaches by the landlord of her statutory responsibilities, and in some instances for exemplary damages for breaches that are defined unlawful acts. She also seeks a rent refund, her bond, and a declaration that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was retaliatory. Background
The tenancy started on 22 September 2024 and ended on 12 January 2026 after the landlord gave notices to terminate the tenancy.
The tenant accepted the landlord’s 90-day notice to end the tenancy. The tenant believes that the landlord sold the property around February 2026.
The tenant paid a bond at the start of the tenancy of $1,695.00. The landlord did not lodge the bond with the Bond Centre. She retains the bond. The tenant alleges that she wanted to take costs from the bond.
The tenant lodged her application with the Tribunal on 10 December 2025, about one month before the tenancy ended. There is no landlord application before the Tribunal.
I have considered all the material placed before the Tribunal by both parties even if I do not specifically refer to it. Directions conference
I held a directions conference on 17 March 2026. I set out the tenant’s claims in that order and made directions for the parties to file submissions and evidence. Both parties complied with the directions.
I directed that the hearing take place in Christchurch even though the tenancy was in Greymouth. The tenant now resides in Christchurch, the landlord in Australia.
The landlord set out reasons why she did not wish to attend the hearing by phone. I agreed to accept and consider her written submissions which is what I have done. Issues
The issues the Tribunal must determine are these: •Did the landlord fail to include all the required statements in the tenancy agreement? •Did the landlord breach her responsibilities by failing to comply with the Healthy Homes Standards (HHS) and by failing to maintain and repair the premises? •Did the landlord fail to provide rent records and properly account for utilities charged? •Did the landlord breach the tenant’s quiet enjoyment? •Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent? •Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond? •Was the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy a retaliatory notice? •Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent? Relevant law
The following sections of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) are relevant: •Section 13A RTA sets out what must be contained in a tenancy agreement. •Section 16A RTA requires a landlord to appoint an agent if out of New Zealand for longer than 21 consecutive days •Section 19 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities on receipt of a bond. •Section 24 RTA sets out when rent may be increased •Section 30 RTA requires a landlord to keep proper business records (rent and bond) •Section 38 RTA provides that a tenant shall be entitled to have quiet enjoyment of the premises without interruption by the landlord and that the landlord shall not cause or permit any interference with the reasonable peace, comfort, or privacy of the tenant in the use of the premises by the tenant •Section 39 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities for outgoings •Section 45 RTA sets out a landlord’s responsibilities. Included among them are the responsibility to provide the premises in a reasonably clean state; to provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to the age and character of the premises); and to comply with the HHS. •Section 54 RTA allows a tenant to apply for a declaration that a notice to terminate a tenancy was retaliatory and sets out what the consequence of that is. Compensation and exemplary damages
The Tribunal may award compensation to a party for losses arising from a proven breach or breaches by the other party of their statutory responsibilities.
Compensation is generally awarded for actual losses and sometimes for less tangible effects of proven breaches such as a loss of enjoyment of the tenancy and the accompanying stress and anxiety.
In Birch v Otautahi Community Housing Trust 1 the District Court confirmed that the Tribunal must consider the following factors when deciding to award compensation: • The nature of the breach; • The duration of the breach; and • The effect of the breach on the party.
Exemplary damages are different. They are designed to punish and to deter. They are like a fine.
Exemplary damages are awarded at the Tribunal’s discretion when one party has proved that the other party has committed a defined unlawful act. If that is proven, and before the Tribunal may award exemplary damages, it must take account of the factors set out in section 109 RTA. Those factors are: • The intention of the person; • The effect of the unlawful act; • The interests of the party against whom the unlawful act was committed; and • The public interest. Discussion Did the landlord fail to include all the required statements in the tenancy agreement?
The tenancy agreement is woefully inadequate. It fails to comply with numerous requirements of the RTA. The landlord refers to the tenancy as an ‘informal tenancy’.
The landlord accepts that the tenancy agreement did not contain the statements required under section 13A RTA which include (but are not limited to) insurance and insulation statements and a statement about HHS compliance. She states that the tenant never requested them. That is no defence to this claim. The onus is on the landlord to provide them. 1 [2020] NZDC 17667
The failure to comply with section 13A RTA is a defined unlawful act. However, the tenant confirmed that she was seeking compensation only, not exemplary damages.
The importance of these statements is that they enable a tenant to make an informed choice about whether to rent the premises.
The failure to include the statements meant that the tenant felt unprepared as to the extent to which she needed to heat the premises.
I award the tenant compensation of $150.00 for this breach. Did the landlord breach her responsibilities by failing to comply with the

HHS and by failing to maintain and repair the premises?

I have dealt with these issues together since they are both breaches of a landlord’s section 45 RTA responsibilities.
The tenant said there was no externally vented fan in the ensuite bathroom which required her to leave open an external door which meant it was difficult to keep heat in.
The tenant also referred to repairs that were not completed – there were on-going issues with two faulty stove elements which made cooking difficult and unsafe; the kitchen tap continually malfunctioned; and the deck door did not seal properly, causing the lino flooring to bubble and lift, and allowing draught to enter.
The tenant served a 14-day notice on the landlord after which a plumber repaired the tap.
The landlord said she was unaware that an externally vented fan was required. She said that she was unaware of the repair issues until the tenant served a 14- day notice. She alleges that the tenant failed to inform her of the door not closing properly which in turn caused damage to the flooring.
The landlord was in breach by not ensuring that the bathroom had an externally vented fan. That she was unaware one was required is not defence. The repair issues are less significant, since the communications between the parties broke down. The landlord responded to the breach notice and had the tap fixed.
The tenant confirmed that she did not seek exemplary damages for these breaches.
I award her compensation of $400.00 for the inconvenience caused by these issues. Did the landlord fail to provide rent records and properly account for utilities charged?
The tenant gave evidence that the utilities charged by the landlord changed during the tenancy and were confusing as to how much she owned and when payment was required. On 18 August 2025, the landlord then increased the rent and required power and internet to be paid weekly in advance.
The tenant served a 14-day breach notice requesting a full rent statement and billing records.
In summary, the tenant said the landlord failed to keep and provide clear rental and utilities records which made it difficult for her to understand and verify payments.
The landlord said that the tenant would not agree to having the utilities in her name. She said she made a genuine mistake when she sent a broadband account as it was a billing error.
Both parties have commented at length about these issues.
The landlord agreed that her rent records were not sufficiently detailed.
In the overall context of this tenancy, I find that the tenant is entitled to some, but limited, compensation for the landlord’s confusing records. She was entitled to have access to clear and correct rent and utility records and charges. I award her compensation of $200.00. Did the landlord breach the tenant’s quiet enjoyment?
The tenant referred to harassment by the landlord. However, she confirmed that she did not seek exemplary damages.
Harassment is a serious or repeated breach of a tenant’s quiet enjoyment.
Some communications from the landlord were rude and inappropriate, the tenant says hostile and threatening. I will not detail those communications here. But I agree that there was an aggressive and unfortunate tone to many of them.
The landlord agrees that some of her communications were ‘hurtful for both of us’. She said she was experiencing significant personal health challenges. The landlord has stated: I have admitted, acknowledged, and I apologise for any hurt caused when I said inappropriate things to someone, I had been trying to be a friend to and thought was a friend of mine...I was highly triggered by my tenant’s communication and threats which I saw as unnecessary and in fact as a protest to being asked to leave in 90 days.
The Tribunal encounters tenancies from time to time that are represented as informal arrangements between friends. Rudeness or communications that flow from a breakdown in that kind of relationship do not always constitute a breach of quiet enjoyment. Often there are faults both ways. In this case I need not consider harassment since the tenant is not seeking exemplary damages: harassment is the unlawful act that potentially triggers an award of damages.
While the landlord had her challenges, she was nevertheless a landlord and had responsibilities under the RTA.
I find that the tenant is eligible for some compensation for breaches of her quiet enjoyment, but a limited amount given the context of this tenancy. I award her compensation of $200.00.

Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent?

The landlord failed to appoint an agent, but she made efforts to do so.
The tenant states that she left New Zealand on or about 14 November 2025. She later attempted to appoint someone to ‘help with communications’ on or about 10 December 2025, more than 21 days after she moved. That person then withdrew from assisting, and no other manager for the tenancy was appointed.
I have considered the landlord’s response to this claim. It is established that she failed to properly appoint an agent. This is one of the claims where the tenant seeks exemplary damages. Taking account of the factors in Birch, I do not find that the landlord acted with intent. She took advice, and she acted, but her agent did not work out. The tenancy ended on 12 January 2026.
I do not find the section 109 RTA factors met in this case. I decline to award exemplary damages.
I award the tenant token compensation for not having a clear agent to deal with for part of this short period of time. I award her $50.00.

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond?

The landlord accepts that she did not lodge the bond. She has explained why, believing it to be an informal tenancy. Then at the end she had costs she believed the tenant was liable for.
Section 22B(2) RTA provides that if the tenant applies to the Tribunal and the landlord seeks payment of the bond in whole or in part, the landlord must file an application with the Tribunal setting out a counterclaim.
The landlord has not filed any application with the Tribunal so has no claim on the bond.
The failure to lodge a bond within 23-working-days after payment is made is an unlawful act.
A landlord holds a bond in trust. The failure to lodge the bond is a significant breach. It had an effect on the tenant, was against the tenant’s interests, and was against the public interest.
For this unlawful act, I award the tenant exemplary damages of $500.00.
Additionally, the landlord must refund the bond to the tenant. Was the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy a retaliatory notice?
I make no declaration that the landlord’s notice (or notices) to terminate the tenancy was a retaliatory notice. Even though the relationship between the parties had broken down, the landlord was genuinely selling the property as part of her move to Australia.
In other words, the tenant has failed to prove that the landlord’s notice to terminate the tenancy was in retaliation for the exercise or proposed exercise by the tenant of any right, power, authority or remedy conferred on the tenant by the tenancy agreement, the RTA or any other Act or any complaint against the landlord relating to the tenancy, as section 54(2) RTA requires. That there was a relationship breakdown does not establish retaliatory notice, especially when, as here, the landlord was selling and did sell the property that was subject to the tenancy.

Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent?

The tenant said that the landlord by email dated 18 August 2025 increased the rent by $20.00 per week.
The landlord said she made a genuine error as she did not know that 60 days’ notice was required for a rent increase. She said the rent increase was discussed and agreed verbally.
Parties cannot contract out of the RTA to a tenant’s detriment. That the tenant verbally agreed to the increase, cannot make the increase lawful when it is not.
Ignorance of a landlord’s responsibilities is not a defence to a claim for and unlawful rent increase.
I cannot award exemplary damages. An unlawful rent increase is not a defined unlawful act. The remedy is to order a refund of the overpaid rent. The landlord must therefore refund the difference in rent, a total of $420.00. Result
The landlord will refund the bond to the tenant, refund the overpaid rent, pay compensation of $1,000.00 and exemplary damages of $500.00. As well I order reimbursement of the filing fee. Name suppression
The tenant sought, and is entitled to, an order for name suppression as the application is successful. The landlord is not entitled to name suppression as her defence to the application is mostly unsuccessful 2 .

Tenancy Tribunal case 5411360 — Exemplary damages at 12 Mount Street, Greymouth, Greymouth 7805

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5411360 — Exemplary damages at 12 Mount Street, Greymouth, Greymouth 7805

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

HHS and by failing to maintain and repair the premises?

Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent?

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond?

Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

HHS and by failing to maintain and repair the premises?

Did the landlord fail to appoint an agent?

Did the landlord fail to lodge the bond?

Did the landlord unlawfully increase the rent?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions