What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5421421 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] and [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $3,795.65

How much money was awarded in case 5421421?

Compensation: Refund Of Power Paid: $137.74 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Refund Of Water Paid: $139.91 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,490.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421421?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421421?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13816863-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5421421 about?

The tribunal order states: [The landlord/s] and [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $3,795.65

How much money was awarded in case 5421421?

Compensation: Refund Of Power Paid: $137.74 awarded to tenant; Compensation: Refund Of Water Paid: $139.91 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $500.00 awarded to tenant; Property Damage: $1,500.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Arrears: $1,490.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5421421?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5421421?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13816863-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

Unit/Flat Flat 1, 324 Beach Road, Campbells Bay, Auckland Tenancy Tribunal Case 5421421 — Exemplary damages

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421421 — net $3,795.65 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 17/02/2026	$1,490.00		Rent arrears to 17/02/2026
Exemplary damages: Harassment		$1,500.00	Harassment
Exemplary damages: Failing to lodge the bond		$500.00	34. I order the landlord to pay $500.00 as exemplary damages.
Compensation: Refund of water paid		$139.91	Refund of water paid
Compensation: Refund of power paid		$137.74	Refund of power paid
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Refund of the bond		$2,980.00	Refund of the bond
Total award	$1,490.00	$5,285.65
Net award		$3,795.65
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$3,795.65

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5421421 — net $3,795.65 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent arrears to 17/02/2026	$1,490.00		Rent arrears to 17/02/2026
Exemplary damages: Harassment		$1,500.00	Harassment
Exemplary damages: Failing to lodge the bond		$500.00	34. I order the landlord to pay $500.00 as exemplary damages.
Compensation: Refund of water paid		$139.91	Refund of water paid
Compensation: Refund of power paid		$137.74	Refund of power paid
Filing fee reimbursement		$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Refund of the bond		$2,980.00	Refund of the bond
Total award	$1,490.00	$5,285.65
Net award		$3,795.65
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant		$3,795.65

Order

[The landlord/s] and [The landlord/s] must pay [The tenant/s] $3,795.65 immediately, calculated as shown in table below. This includes the refund of $2,980.00 held as the bond by the landlord.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing on 5 June 2026. The landlord attended in person and the tenant attended via teleconference. 5421421, 54686922
The tenancy started on 21 October 2025 originally for a fixed term for a year.
On 3 February 2026, the tenant gave “formal notice” that he was going to be ending the tenancy on 17 February 2026.
Under a fixed-term tenancy, the tenant cannot simply give a “formal notice” to end the tenancy any earlier.
However, on 11 February 2026, the landlord emailed the tenant accepting the tenant’s formal notice. The landlord said that there was a new tenant moving into the apartment on 18 February 2026.
Therefore, by agreement, the tenancy ended on 17 February 2026.
Shortly before the tenancy ended, the tenant applied to the Tribunal for compensation and exemplary damages for the following claims: a. Landlord interfered with the quiet enjoyment of the tenant and harassed him by contacting his employer; b. Landlord failed the lodge the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time; c. Landlord interfered with essential services; d. Landlord charged for outgoings not properly apportioned, and required payments that exceeded actual cost; and e. Landlord had a pattern of harassment and there was ongoing intimidation.
The tenant sought compensation for emotional distress and anxiety, medical costs, relocation costs, loss of enjoyment of the premises and reputational stress caused by employer contact. In addition to the exemplary damages, compensation and refund of the full bond, the tenant sought a restraining order and termination of the tenancy.
As the tenancy was already terminated by the time of the hearing, and that the Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to issue restraining orders, this order focuses only on the compensation and exemplary damage claims.
The landlord made a cross-application for: a. rent, water, and power arrears; b. cost for relisting the premises, c. cost of replacement of key lever on front yard gate; d. cost of repair of gravel carpark damaged by aggressive driving; e. cost to replace the yard gate remote due to it not being returned; and f. cost to change the lock on front door of the apartment due to the keys not being returned. 5421421, 54686923
At the hearing, the landlord withdrew the claims to do with the yard gate remote and the keys as they had been returned to the landlord prior to this hearing. The tenant’s claims
I deal with the tenant’s application first. Breach of quiet enjoyment and harassment
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 (“RTA”).
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.
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) RTA.
The tenant raised issues about the landlord making direct contact with his employer. On 9 February 2026, the landlord emailed the tenant’s employer: Attention: Key Account Manager or to whom it may concern, Subject: Unlawful action by a senior member of your sales staff. [The tenant] recently arrived in Auckland from Australia. We understand [the tenant] has been employed as your sales manager for the northern region of New Zealand. We are writing to advise your company that this new member of your staff, [the tenant], is currently unlawfully occupying our apartment property by refusing to pay outstanding rent and use of electricity. This is unacceptable. We request that [the company] take some responsibility for these unlawful activities by a senior member of your staff. We look forward to your urgent attention to this notice and your reply by return mail. Rob and [The landlord/s]. 5421421, 54686924
On 10 February 2026, the company emailed back stating that the matter related to the tenant’s private living arrangements and was a personal issue for him to resolve directly with the landlord through the appropriate channels. The company said it was not a listed party of the tenancy agreement and therefore was not going to be involved.
On the same day, the landlord emailed back saying: Hello, Thank you for your quick reply to my email of yesterday. We appreciate that [the company] is not a party to [the tenant]’s residential contract. He signed a 12 month Residential Lease agreement on the 20 th October 2025 with us. However, his unlawful behaviour does have an impact on the company he represents. He is currently a senior member of your sales team, out in the New Zealand market flying [the company] flag very badly..... We suggest your HR Department need to look into the standards that [the tenant] is displaying before continuing to let him loose on your valued customers throughout Northland and the South Island. Please accept this note is sent with genuine concern for [the company] and we expect further advice on any action you may take as a result of this 2 nd note from us. Rob and [The landlord/s]
When asked about these emails, the landlord said that the tenant had been warned that this would happen if he did not pay the arrears. The landlord had sent a text message to the tenant in relation to rent and electricity arrears of $745.00 and $47.32: Please clearly understand that should these outstanding bills not be paid by you within 24 hours of this notice then I will be speaking with the manager of your employer and making them aware of your unlawful behaviour. Please take note that time is of the essence with this notice. Rob and [The landlord/s]. 4.40 pm 08.02.26
The landlord confirmed this again by email sent on 8 February 2026 at 5:01 PM: RENT OUTSTANDING $745.00 ELECTRICITY USAGE OUTSTANDING $47.32 5421421, 54686925 As advised by TXT, should this payment not be received by this deadline time tomorrow (Monday) then take notice that I will be making contact and speaking with the management of your employer and making them aware of your unlawful behaviour. I trust you are sensible and timely with your action and do not allow this small outstanding payment on your side to impact your employment records. [The landlord/s].
The landlord said that the tenant had been warned of their intention and that they simply carried out what they had warned him would happen if the rent and electricity arrears were not paid. The landlord said that “he knew how to get things done.”
I find that this was entirely inappropriate. The landlord knew that the tenant was disputing the arrears as claimed by the landlord at the time. The text message and the emails to the employer were sent during the tenancy. The landlord made no efforts to resolve the issue via mediation or via the Tribunal. The landlord simply asserted that his calculations were right and took inappropriate means to pressure the tenant. I find that this interfered with the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment of the premises and amounted to harassment.
I find that this has impacted the tenant significantly, and there is public interest in denouncing this behaviour and deterring other landlords from doing anything remotely similar.
I order the landlord to pay the tenant $1,500.00 as exemplary damages. Failure to lodge the bond
The tenant claimed that 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) 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 RTA.
The tenant paid the bond of $2,980.00 to the landlord on 12 October 2025.
The bond should have been lodged with the Bond Centre by 12 November 2025, but it was not.
The landlord accepted not having lodged the bond and did not provide any good explanation for this breach. 5421421, 54686926
The landlord exacerbated the power imbalance between the parties by retaining the bond in their personal account rather than at the Bond Centre.
I find that there is public interest in denouncing this conduct and deterring other landlords from doing the same.
I order the landlord to pay $500.00 as exemplary damages. Interference with essential services
The tenant claimed the landlord has interfered with the services to the premises by threatening to disconnect electricity in demanding disputed payments.
A landlord must not interfere with the supply of water, gas, electricity, telephone of other service to the premises, except where the interference is necessary to avoid danger to any person or to enable maintenance or repairs to be carried out. See section 45(2) RTA.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,800.00. See section 45(2A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord accepted having sent text messages with the threats to disconnect power if the power arrears were not paid. However, he said that the power was never actually disconnected.
The landlord blamed the tenant for not wanting to speak with the landlord face to face and said that has resulted in the tenant spoiling the landlord’s peaceful living environment.
As the power was never disconnected, I do not find that the landlord has interfered with the services to the premises. However, I find that even threatening the tenant with disconnection was breaching the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment of the premises. I note this only as observation and do not order any extra exemplary damages for it. Charging for outgoings that exceed actual cost
The tenant claimed that the landlord was charging for utilities that exceeded the actual bills. The tenant relied on section 39 of the RTA.
Under section 39, the tenant is responsible for all outgoings in respect of the premises that are exclusively attributable to the tenant’s occupation of the premises or to the tenant’s use of the facilities. The tenant is responsible for electricity and water, but the landlord must be able show how much of it was exclusively attributable to the tenant. The landlord is responsible for any fixed costs. 5421421, 54686927
This means for a premises that shares water or power between the landlord and the tenant, there must be a submeter to accurately calculate how much the tenant has used.
At this premises, the landlord was living upstairs and the tenant was living downstairs.
For water, the landlord had simply adopted a 50/50 approach between the landlord and the tenant.
The landlord said that the 50/50 split for water services was stipulated in the tenancy agreement that had been signed by both parties.
Under section 11 RTA, the parties cannot agree to any tenancy conditions that are inconsistent with the RTA. To do so, the Tribunal must permit for the inconsistency to allowed. However, section 11(3) clearly states that any purported waiver by a tenant of any right or power conferred upon the tenant by the RTA is of no effect. This means that the tenant cannot legally agree to 50/50 split for water bills.
I do not allow for the tenant to incur 50/50 responsibility for the water. The landlord should have installed a submeter for the tenanted premises. The landlord must refund the tenant the payments made towards water during the tenancy.
In relation to the power, the landlord explained in depth how the charges had been calculated. There was a submeter for the power downstairs, but the landlord still only had one account from the power company.
There were 3 meters shown on the power invoice. The landlord took the sum of the three meters and considered that as the “total usage”. The tenant then took the actual meter readings from the tenant’s submeter and worked out the percentage of usage by the tenant over the total usage. The landlord then added the “all day”, “daily charge” and “night usage” charges and worked out the tenant’s dollar amount using the percentage calculated from before.
At the hearing, I had found that the “daily charge” should not have been charged to the tenant as that was a fixed cost. That indicated a slight overcharge.
However, having had another careful look at the invoice and the meter attributions, I find the landlord’s calculations to be simply wrong.
Taking the invoice issued by PowerEdge on 3 January 2026, it shows that meter 251506391/1 had a total usage of 308.03 which is same as the 308.03 kWh used for the “All Day” rate under the detailed “Usage Charges” section. The meter 251506391/2 shows total usage of 140.92 which is the same as “Night Usage” quantity of 140.92 kWh. The third meter 251506391/3 which shows 613.61 total usage, is the same as 613.61 kWh under “Solar Credit”. The 5421421, 54686928 invoice shows the landlord receiving $106.71 as credit for the power absorbed solar panels installed at the premises.
The landlord had noted that the tenant’s submeter had a reading of 9,962.80 on 20 October 2025 and 10,591.40 on 30 November 2025. The landlord calculated that the tenant had used 628.60 kWh of power during that period.
However, the actual day and night usage combined between 26 October 2025 and 25 November 2025 was the sum of 308.03 and 140.92 which was 448.95 kWh. I suspect the tenant’s submeter may not have been using the kWh units or it is also possible the decimal point was wrong. The landlord did not have photos of the tenant’s actual submeter readings.
The solar credit is for when the solar panels have generated more power than the house was using. The excess energy is sold back to the power provider unless it is stored in the battery system at home.
The solar credit shown in the invoice shows that 613.61 kWh was bought back by the Power company at a rate of $0.1739 per kWh. This cannot be attributed as the power consumed at the premises.
From this, I find that the first meter was recording the “all day usage”, second meter recording “night usage” and the third meter recording “solar credit” back to the power company.
Therefore, I do not find that the landlord’s calculation had ever been correct. Therefore, the landlord must pay the tenant back for any power paid during the tenancy.
I order the landlord to reimburse the tenant $139.91 for water rates paid and $137.74 for power bills paid during the tenancy. Landlord’s pattern of harassment and ongoing intimidation
The tenant claimed that the landlord showed a pattern of behaviour that amounted to harassment and intimidation. The tenant said that there had been repeated unannounced attendances, verbal abuse, threats, false allegations of property damage, utility disconnection threats, employer contact and attempts to pressure the tenant to vacate.
The landlord said that these collectively constituted a breach of the tenant’s right to quiet enjoyment.
The tenant said that he had to take medication due to the stress caused by the landlord’s behaviour.
The tenant also described times when the landlord was standing behind him with mail as an excuse to talk to him, and said that the landlord even entered the premises without permission. 5421421, 54686929
The landlord denied ever having entered the premises without permission and said that these were examples of the tenant’s “strange behaviour” and “ludicrous claims”.
Having heard from both parties, I do not find that the tenant has proven that there was any unlawful entry. However, it became obvious that the landlord did not see any fault with their own behaviour despite the intimidation and harassment being evident.
I find that the tenant has proven that there was a pattern of harassment and ongoing intimidation. However, I do not order any extra exemplary damages in addition to what was ordered already. This simply reinforces the need for exemplary damages to be awarded against the landlord. Compensation claims
The tenant sought compensation for emotional distress, anxiety, medical costs, relocation costs, loss of enjoyment, and reputational stress.
I have considered the claims but make no separate awards for any of these. The exemplary damages awarded for harassment takes into account these claims. The landlord’s claims
I now consider the landlord’s claims. Rent, water, and power arrears
The landlord has applied for rent, water and power arrears. The tenant did not dispute that there was $1,490.00 owing for rent and asked that this be taken out from the bond.
The landlord had also tried to claim for 12 week’s rent in lieu of the original fixed term tenancy ending earlier. As the tenancy had ended earlier by agreement, that calculation is simply wrong. The landlord can only charge rent to the last date of the tenancy.
For water and power arrears, these are not granted for the reasons already given above. Cost for relisting the premises
The landlord applied for reimbursement of $279.00 to find a replacement tenant. 5421421, 546869210
Had the landlord incurred costs to find the immediate subsequent tenant, this would have been granted. However, the landlord’s text message from 11 February 2026 makes it clear that the landlord was able to find a subsequent tenant without having to relist the tenancy on Trade Me. The text message noted that there was a new tenant moving into the apartment on 16 February 2026.
The landlord explained that the subsequent tenancy did not go ahead as originally planned and the landlord had to list the premises on Trade Me.
However, as the landlord had accepted the early termination of the tenancy without any condition requiring the tenant to find a replacement tenant or to pay for relisting fees, the landlord cannot claim the cost for relisting the premises from the tenant.
This claim is dismissed. Cost of replacement of key lever on front yard gate
The landlord applied for compensation for the replacement of key lever on front yard gate. The landlord claimed that the tenant damaged this by driving too close to the mechanism.
For damage claims, a landlord must prove that damage to the premises occurred during the tenancy and is more than fair wear and tear. If this is established, to avoid liability, the tenant must prove they did not carelessly or intentionally cause or permit the damage. Tenants are liable for the actions of people at the premises with their permission. See sections 40(2)(a), 41 and 49B RTA.
Where the damage is caused carelessly, and is covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to the lesser of the insurance excess or four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(a) RTA.
Where the damage is careless and is not covered by the landlord's insurance, the tenant's liability is limited to four weeks' rent. See section 49B(3)(b) RTA. Where insurance money is irrecoverable because of the tenant's conduct, the property is treated as if it is not insured against the damage. See section 49B(3A)(a) RTA.
Tenants are liable for the cost of repairing damage that is intentional or which results from any activity at the premises that is an imprisonable offence. This applies to anything the tenant does and anything done by a person they are responsible for. See section 49B(1) RTA.
But fundamentally, the landlord must be able to prove that the tenant had caused damage in the first place. This premises was shared between the tenant and the landlord, and the damage was found after the tenancy. The landlord 5421421, 546869211 simply could not prove that the tenant had caused this damage. Accordingly, this claim is dismissed. Cost of repair of gravel carpark damaged by aggressive driving
The landlord claimed that the gravel carpark was damaged by the aggressive driving, braking and parking by the tenant. The tenant said that if there was any damage, that was fair wear and tear.
The landlord provided photos of the gravel carpark. However, I was unable to find that there was any damage beyond fair wear and tear.
Accordingly, this claim is dismissed. Filing fee reimbursement
Because the tenant has wholly succeeded with the claim, the landlord must reimburse the tenant’s filing fee. Refund of the bond
The bond held by the landlord must be returned to the tenant in full.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421421 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat Flat 1, 324 Beach Road, Campbells Bay, Auckland

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5421421 — Exemplary damages at Unit/Flat Flat 1, 324 Beach Road, Campbells Bay, Auckland

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