What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5420889 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,160.00 (BN-17428318) to [The tenant/s] tenant/s] immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 5420889?

Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5420889?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5420889?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13747310-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5420889 about?

The tribunal order states: The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,160.00 (BN-17428318) to [The tenant/s] tenant/s] immediately.

How much money was awarded in case 5420889?

Compensation: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5420889?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5420889?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13747310-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat 2, 840 Whangaparaoa Road, Manly, Tenancy Tribunal Case 5420889 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5420889 — net $1,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation (breach of quiet enjoyment	$500.00	Compensation (breach of quiet enjoyment
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,028.00
Bond	$3,160.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,028.00

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,160.00 (BN-17428318) to [The tenant/s] tenant/s] immediately.
[The tenant/s] landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] tenant/s] $1,028.00 immediately.
For the avoidance of doubt, Cleone Hall was not a tenant under the tenancy agreement between Ms Goldsworthy and Ms Escobar.

Reasons

The hearing was held on 15 June 2026.
The tenant, Ms Escobar, attended the hearing. 5420889 2
The landlord, Ms Goldsworthy, did not attend the hearing. The landlord did not notify the Tribunal Registry of any reason for non-attendance and did not seek an adjournment. I was satisfied the landlord had notice of the hearing. The hearing therefore proceeded in her absence.
The tenancy commenced on 24 January 2024 and terminated on 10 December 2025. Refund of the bond
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.

Who was Cleone Hall?

A significant issue raised by the tenant concerned the appearance of the name “Cleone Hall” on correspondence from the Bond Centre relating to bond number BN-17428318.
The tenant gave evidence that she did not know who Cleone Hall was and had never authorised any person by that name to be added as a tenant.
The tenant stated that receiving an email from the Bond Centre identifying Cleone Hall as a tenant caused her considerable concern because she feared her bond money might be released to an unknown person.
The tenancy agreement clearly identifies the parties to the tenancy as the landlord, Ms [The tenant/s] landlord/s], and the tenant, Ms [The tenant/s] tenant/s]. The agreement does not identify Cleone Hall as a tenant. The tenant also gave evidence that she was unaware of the identity of Cleone Hall.
The Bond Centre had no written record explaining how Cleone Hall came to be recorded against the bond, other than an email dated 10 April 2026 which identified Cleone Hall as a tenant.
There is no evidence before me that any bond money was paid to Cleone Hall.
There is also no evidence that the landlord added Cleone Hall to the bond without the tenant’s consent, nor is there evidence explaining how the name came to be associated with the bond record.
The burden rests on the tenant to establish the facts relied upon. While I accept the tenant was distressed by the appearance of an unfamiliar name on the bond 5420889 3 record, there is insufficient evidence for me to conclude that Cleone Hall was added mistakenly, improperly, or without consent by the landlord.
I further find there is no evidence that the tenant suffered any actual financial loss arising from the inclusion of Cleone Hall’s name.
Accordingly, I find that Cleone Hall was not a tenant under the tenancy agreement. No further order is made in relation to this issue. Breach of quiet enjoyment
[The tenant/s] tenant/s] claims the landlord has breached her quiet enjoyment.
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 tenant submitted that when the tenancy commenced there was an agreement that blinds or curtains would be installed in the living and dining areas of the property.
The evidence before me establishes that the promised window coverings were not installed until 4 April 2024. As a result, between 24 January 2024 and 4 April 2024 the tenant did not have adequate privacy in the main living areas of the property.
I accept the tenant’s evidence that neighbouring properties had a direct view into the living and dining areas and that the absence of blinds substantially affected her ability to enjoy the premises in privacy.
I am satisfied the landlord’s failure to provide the promised blinds during this period amounted to an interference with the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment under s 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I also accept the tenant’s evidence that, after the blinds were installed, the landlord failed to pay the contractor responsible for supplying and installing them. Documentary evidence shows the contractor repeatedly contacted the tenant regarding the unpaid invoice and sought assistance in obtaining payment from the landlord. 5420889 4
The tenant was contacted on numerous occasions between approximately 1 July 2024 and 9 August 2024 regarding the landlord’s debt. I accept that these repeated communications caused the tenant stress and anxiety.
I find that the cumulative effect of the absence of blinds and the subsequent repeated contact from the contractor constituted a breach of the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment.
The landlord therefore committed an unlawful act.
Taking into account the nature of the breach, its duration, and the distress caused to the tenant, I consider compensation of $500 to be appropriate
Where 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord’s conduct in failing to address the privacy concerns arising from the absence of blinds and in allowing the tenant to become involved in matters relating to the landlord’s unpaid debt warrants an award of exemplary damages.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I award exemplary damages of $500. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5420889 — net $1,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation (breach of quiet enjoyment	$500.00	Compensation (breach of quiet enjoyment
Exemplary damages	$500.00	Exemplary damages
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$1,028.00
Bond	$3,160.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$1,028.00

Order

The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $3,160.00 (BN-17428318) to [The tenant/s] tenant/s] immediately.
[The tenant/s] landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] tenant/s] $1,028.00 immediately.
For the avoidance of doubt, Cleone Hall was not a tenant under the tenancy agreement between Ms Goldsworthy and Ms Escobar.

Reasons

The hearing was held on 15 June 2026.
The tenant, Ms Escobar, attended the hearing. 5420889 2
The landlord, Ms Goldsworthy, did not attend the hearing. The landlord did not notify the Tribunal Registry of any reason for non-attendance and did not seek an adjournment. I was satisfied the landlord had notice of the hearing. The hearing therefore proceeded in her absence.
The tenancy commenced on 24 January 2024 and terminated on 10 December 2025. Refund of the bond
The tenant has applied for refund of the bond.
Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, and the landlord seeks payment from the bond, the landlord must file an application setting out the details of the counterclaim. Because the landlord has not filed a counterclaim the bond is refunded in full to the tenant.

Who was Cleone Hall?

A significant issue raised by the tenant concerned the appearance of the name “Cleone Hall” on correspondence from the Bond Centre relating to bond number BN-17428318.
The tenant gave evidence that she did not know who Cleone Hall was and had never authorised any person by that name to be added as a tenant.
The tenant stated that receiving an email from the Bond Centre identifying Cleone Hall as a tenant caused her considerable concern because she feared her bond money might be released to an unknown person.
The tenancy agreement clearly identifies the parties to the tenancy as the landlord, Ms [The tenant/s] landlord/s], and the tenant, Ms [The tenant/s] tenant/s]. The agreement does not identify Cleone Hall as a tenant. The tenant also gave evidence that she was unaware of the identity of Cleone Hall.
The Bond Centre had no written record explaining how Cleone Hall came to be recorded against the bond, other than an email dated 10 April 2026 which identified Cleone Hall as a tenant.
There is no evidence before me that any bond money was paid to Cleone Hall.
There is also no evidence that the landlord added Cleone Hall to the bond without the tenant’s consent, nor is there evidence explaining how the name came to be associated with the bond record.
The burden rests on the tenant to establish the facts relied upon. While I accept the tenant was distressed by the appearance of an unfamiliar name on the bond 5420889 3 record, there is insufficient evidence for me to conclude that Cleone Hall was added mistakenly, improperly, or without consent by the landlord.
I further find there is no evidence that the tenant suffered any actual financial loss arising from the inclusion of Cleone Hall’s name.
Accordingly, I find that Cleone Hall was not a tenant under the tenancy agreement. No further order is made in relation to this issue. Breach of quiet enjoyment
[The tenant/s] tenant/s] claims the landlord has breached her quiet enjoyment.
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 tenant submitted that when the tenancy commenced there was an agreement that blinds or curtains would be installed in the living and dining areas of the property.
The evidence before me establishes that the promised window coverings were not installed until 4 April 2024. As a result, between 24 January 2024 and 4 April 2024 the tenant did not have adequate privacy in the main living areas of the property.
I accept the tenant’s evidence that neighbouring properties had a direct view into the living and dining areas and that the absence of blinds substantially affected her ability to enjoy the premises in privacy.
I am satisfied the landlord’s failure to provide the promised blinds during this period amounted to an interference with the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment under s 38 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
I also accept the tenant’s evidence that, after the blinds were installed, the landlord failed to pay the contractor responsible for supplying and installing them. Documentary evidence shows the contractor repeatedly contacted the tenant regarding the unpaid invoice and sought assistance in obtaining payment from the landlord. 5420889 4
The tenant was contacted on numerous occasions between approximately 1 July 2024 and 9 August 2024 regarding the landlord’s debt. I accept that these repeated communications caused the tenant stress and anxiety.
I find that the cumulative effect of the absence of blinds and the subsequent repeated contact from the contractor constituted a breach of the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment.
The landlord therefore committed an unlawful act.
Taking into account the nature of the breach, its duration, and the distress caused to the tenant, I consider compensation of $500 to be appropriate
Where 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) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord’s conduct in failing to address the privacy concerns arising from the absence of blinds and in allowing the tenant to become involved in matters relating to the landlord’s unpaid debt warrants an award of exemplary damages.
Having regard to the circumstances of the case, I award exemplary damages of $500. Filing fee
Because [The tenant/s] tenant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5420889 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 2, 840 Whangaparaoa Road, Manly,

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5420889 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat 2, 840 Whangaparaoa Road, Manly,

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Who was Cleone Hall?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Who was Cleone Hall?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.