What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5418066 about?

The tribunal order states: dated 4 February 2026 remains.

How much money was awarded in case 5418066?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418066?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418066?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13276075-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5418066 about?

The tribunal order states: dated 4 February 2026 remains.

How much money was awarded in case 5418066?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5418066?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Harassment, Boarding House.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5418066?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13276075-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

73 Broughton Street, Gore, Gore 9710 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5418066 — Rent arrears

Order

dated 4 February 2026 remains.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Background:
The background to this case is that the parties had two agreements, a commercial lease for the front fish and chip shop and kitchen and then a residential tenancy agreement for the house that was accessed through the kitchen of the shop, all under one roof.
The landlord’s application was heard and determined on 4 February 2026. At that time the residential tenancy agreement was terminated for rent arrears and the order provided for the refund of the bond. This concluded the landlord’s application. As at today’s date, the amount for the arrears has not been paid.
I am advised that the issue with the commercial lease is to be heard in the District Court, for lease arrears and possible damage and loss of income.
The case came before me to dela with the tenant’s cross application. The tenant accepted many of her claims was in relation to the commercial lease. The tenant tribunal does not have the ability to deal with such claims, it does not have jurisdiction to do so.
However, the tenant did seek exemplary damages for some issues arising out of the tenancy agreement
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
The tenant claims that the landlord has harassed them.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A 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.
The tenants evidence is that they received a number of text messages bout rent arrears and lease payments being in arrears and that they were not respectful in relation to this.
The messages were of course in relation to the breach of the residential tenancy act in that the rent was not being paid.
I do not accept that such messaging is a breach, and the claim is not proven.
The tenant claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time as they did not receive confirmation it had been,
The evidence is that it was, and it is not a breach that the bond number may not have been forwarded to the tenant. The claim is therefore dismissed.
The tenant also claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations in relation to the healthy homes standards as its cold and drafty. Under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS heating standard.
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. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The heating standard requires landlords to provide one or more ‘qualifying heaters’, with a capacity to heat the room to a required level. The heating standard defines what a qualifying heater would be and confirms that certain types of heaters are unacceptable heaters for the purpose of the HHS.
The heating standard requires that heaters in the particular tenancy have a minimum heating capacity. An on-line calculator has been produced in order to determine what level of heating is required for any particular premises, and that can be found at https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/heating-tool/
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that there was no breach. The evidence is the tenant saying it was cold, there are no videos or photos or independent reports. There is a healthy homes compliance certificate attached to the tenancy agreement.
Considering those factors, I have determined that there has not been a breach of the standards.
Again, the tenant claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS draught stopping standard because it is drafty.
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. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The draught stopping standard requires that residential premises be free from unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise.
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that the landlord has not failed as there is insufficient evidence to prove the claim as outlined above.
The tenant accepts that the remainder of the claims are in relation to the commercial lease, a separate document and outside of the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
Both parties confirmed that they had nothing further ot ad in relation to both of their claims and this concludes all matters between the parties in relation to the residential tenancy.

Order

dated 4 February 2026 remains.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing. Background:
The background to this case is that the parties had two agreements, a commercial lease for the front fish and chip shop and kitchen and then a residential tenancy agreement for the house that was accessed through the kitchen of the shop, all under one roof.
The landlord’s application was heard and determined on 4 February 2026. At that time the residential tenancy agreement was terminated for rent arrears and the order provided for the refund of the bond. This concluded the landlord’s application. As at today’s date, the amount for the arrears has not been paid.
I am advised that the issue with the commercial lease is to be heard in the District Court, for lease arrears and possible damage and loss of income.
The case came before me to dela with the tenant’s cross application. The tenant accepted many of her claims was in relation to the commercial lease. The tenant tribunal does not have the ability to deal with such claims, it does not have jurisdiction to do so.
However, the tenant did seek exemplary damages for some issues arising out of the tenancy agreement
The applicant is required to establish the claim to the civil law standard of proof, on the balance of probabilities.
The tenant claims that the landlord has harassed them.
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises. See section 38(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
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. See section 38(3) and Schedule 1A 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.
The tenants evidence is that they received a number of text messages bout rent arrears and lease payments being in arrears and that they were not respectful in relation to this.
The messages were of course in relation to the breach of the residential tenancy act in that the rent was not being paid.
I do not accept that such messaging is a breach, and the claim is not proven.
The tenant claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time as they did not receive confirmation it had been,
The evidence is that it was, and it is not a breach that the bond number may not have been forwarded to the tenant. The claim is therefore dismissed.
The tenant also claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations in relation to the healthy homes standards as its cold and drafty. Under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS heating standard.
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. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The heating standard requires landlords to provide one or more ‘qualifying heaters’, with a capacity to heat the room to a required level. The heating standard defines what a qualifying heater would be and confirms that certain types of heaters are unacceptable heaters for the purpose of the HHS.
The heating standard requires that heaters in the particular tenancy have a minimum heating capacity. An on-line calculator has been produced in order to determine what level of heating is required for any particular premises, and that can be found at https://www.tenancy.govt.nz/heating-tool/
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that there was no breach. The evidence is the tenant saying it was cold, there are no videos or photos or independent reports. There is a healthy homes compliance certificate attached to the tenancy agreement.
Considering those factors, I have determined that there has not been a breach of the standards.
Again, the tenant claims that the landlord has breached the landlord’s obligations under section 45(1)(bb) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). The tenant considers that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS draught stopping standard because it is drafty.
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. b. All boarding houses must comply by 1 July 2021. c. All houses rented by Kāinga Ora and registered Community Housing Providers must comply by 1 July 2024.
The draught stopping standard requires that residential premises be free from unreasonable gaps and holes that are not an intentional part of the building, which allow draughts to arise.
The HHS does provide exemptions in specific circumstances.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A).
In this case I have determined that the landlord has not failed as there is insufficient evidence to prove the claim as outlined above.
The tenant accepts that the remainder of the claims are in relation to the commercial lease, a separate document and outside of the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
Both parties confirmed that they had nothing further ot ad in relation to both of their claims and this concludes all matters between the parties in relation to the residential tenancy.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418066 — Rent arrears at 73 Broughton Street, Gore, Gore 9710

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5418066 — Rent arrears at 73 Broughton Street, Gore, Gore 9710

At a glance

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