What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5425804 about?

The tribunal order states: The parties’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be

How much money was awarded in case 5425804?

Compensation: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Landlord’S Additional Rent From New…: $220.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Due: $6,082.86 awarded to landlord

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425804?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13851046-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5425804 about?

The tribunal order states: The parties’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be

How much money was awarded in case 5425804?

Compensation: $350.00 awarded to tenant; Compensation: $250.00 awarded to tenant; Landlord’S Additional Rent From New…: $220.00 awarded to tenant; Rent Due: $6,082.86 awarded to landlord

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5425804?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13851046-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5425804 — Leaks

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5425804 — net $2,702.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent due to 13 February 2026	$6,082.86		Rent due to 13 February 2026
Landlord’s additional rent from new tenant		$220.00	Landlord’s additional rent from new tenant
Compensation for lighting, leak, etc		$350.00	Compensation for lighting, leak, etc
Compensation for toilet door lock and leak		$250.00	Compensation for toilet door lock and leak
Total award	$6,082.86	$820.00
Net award	$2,702.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,702.86

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5425804 — net $2,702.86 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Tenant	Reason
Rent due to 13 February 2026	$6,082.86		Rent due to 13 February 2026
Landlord’s additional rent from new tenant		$220.00	Landlord’s additional rent from new tenant
Compensation for lighting, leak, etc		$350.00	Compensation for lighting, leak, etc
Compensation for toilet door lock and leak		$250.00	Compensation for toilet door lock and leak
Total award	$6,082.86	$820.00
Net award	$2,702.86
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$2,702.86

Order

The parties’ names and identifying details including the tenancy address must not be published.
[The tenant] must pay [the landlord] $2,702.86 immediately, calculated as shown in table below.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,560.00 to [the landlord] immediately.

Reasons

I heard this matter at North Shore District Court on 30 June 2026.
The landlord attended with her son as a support person.
The tenants attended for themselves.
The landlord claims for rent arrears and the cost of cleaning the premises after the tenants moved out.
The tenants dispute the landlord’s claim and seek compensation and exemplary damages for the landlord failing to comply with the healthy homes standards for draught stopping and failing to maintain the premises to a reasonable state of repair. Background
The tenancy was initially a fixed-term tenancy that began on 12 October 2024 and was due to end on 12 October 2025.
On 9 September 2025, about a month before the tenancy was due to end, the male tenant emailed the landlord: As our annual contract is coming to an end shortly, I’m expecting we are hanging [sic] to a month to month tenancy. 1
The landlord responded about seven minutes later: Will come complete a home inspection and update tenancy fixed term contract with you.
On 7 October 2025, the landlord met the tenant at the premises. She took with her a pre-typed document that stated, “We have mutually confirmed an extension of your FIXED TERM TENANCY until”, with a blank left for the date. The document also stated, “With an increase of rent to $”, with a blank left for the amount. The document continued, “Starting on” with a blank left for the date and notice period. 1 The word “hanging” appears to be a typo. It should have said, “changing”.
The document ended “Many Thanks” and was signed by the landlord and the male tenant.
On 18 November 2025, the tenants sent the landlord a text message purporting to end the tenancy on 15 December 2025.
The landlord refused to accept the notice on the basis that the tenants had agreed to a fixed term until 15 July 2025.
On 21 November 2025, the tenants asked for a copy of the “full tenancy agreement/renewal paperwork”:

Could you please send me the full tenancy agreement/renewal paperwork?

My partner also needs to sign it, but we only received that one page. The page I signed looked like a rent increase notice for 90 days, so I want to make sure we have the correct tenancy documents.

On 1 December 2025, the tenant emailed the landlord that the 7 October 2025 signed agreement was invalid for not containing necessary information: To clarify, there was no continuous fixed-term tenancy in place. Our fixed term ended on 12 October 2025. I refer to sections 13 and 13b of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 in regard to having an agreement in writing with signatures from all tenants. The document you are referring to did not contain the mandatory contents required of a tenancy agreement and was a rent increase notice. I will continue to pay until the end of the 28-day notice period.
The tenants moved out on 15 December 2025 and ceased paying rent.
The landlord re-tenanted the premises on 14 February 2026.
The issues for determination are: a. What date did the tenancy end? b. Is the purported rent increase valid? c. How much rent must the tenants pay the landlord? d. Is the landlord’s cleaning claim proven? e. Did the landlord fail to comply with the healthy homes standards for draught stopping? f. Did the landlord fail to maintain the premises to a reasonable state of repair?

What date did the tenancy end?

Legal principles

Ordinary contract law principles apply to tenancy agreements. The six essential elements for a valid and enforceable contract are offer, acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations, and capacity. 2 An offer must be made with “[s]ufficient certainty as to...the proposed essential terms”. 3
Essential terms for a residential tenancy contract include, the weekly rent, the address, the parties to the contract, commencement date of the tenancy, and the period of the tenancy, the type of the tenancy including whether the tenancy was for a fixed period or was periodic (ongoing but terminable by the tenants giving 28 days’ notice).
Landlords must ensure that the tenancy agreement is in writing and the tenancy agreement must contain minimum information including names, addresses, addresses for service, a list of chattels, healthy homes compliance information, and many other matters. 4 However, verbal/unwritten or incomplete tenancy agreements are still enforceable. 5
Fixed-term tenancies automatically become periodic tenancies unless the parties otherwise agree or give notice ending the tenancy. The parties can agree to “renew or extend the existing tenancy agreement”. 6
It is also open to the parties to an existing fixed-term tenancy agreement to agree to a new fixed-term tenancy which was not a renewal or and extension of the previous tenancy agreement. Discussion
The tenants submit that on 7 October 2025, the tenant and the landlord verbally agree that the fixed term agreement was conditional on the landlord sending through the full tenancy agreement documentation and the tenant’s wife signing the agreement. The landlord denies there being any such discussion. 2 Ian Bassett Contract Law in New Zealand – Lawyers’ Handbook (Southern Cross Publishing, Auckland, 2007 at 3. 3 Ibid. 4 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) ss 13, and 13A. 5 RTA s 13C. 6 RTA s 60A.
The memorandum is simple and clear. It makes no mention of the agreement being conditional on fuller documentation or the other tenant signing. In practical terms it was obvious to the parties that all the terms and conditions of the earlier agreement would continue of be adopted into a new agreement. The landlord had prepared the template for only one tenant, probably for convenience.
The tenant says he was rushed, pressured and distracted. However, the landlord and the tenant had been discussing the future of the tenancy for some months and there is no evidence that the landlord acted in an oppressive manner. Moreover, the landlord’s demeanour in the hearing was pleasant, professional, and reasonable. I doubt that she would succeed in trying to be overbearing or aggressive.
The landlord did not consult with the other tenant. That is not surprising. Since the tenants are husband and wife, it would be natural to expect that one or other of the tenants could speak for the other.
I find that the tenant agreed to an extension of the existing fixed term tenancy. The extension did not include the tenant’s wife because she did not sign it. If I am wrong in finding that the agreement was an extension, then I would find that it was new fixed term agreement. Conclusion
It follows from the above discussion that the tenancy continued as a fixed-term tenancy and did not end until the landlord found replacement tenants who commenced a new tenancy on 14 February 2026.
The tenancy ended on 13 February 2026.

Is the purported rent increase valid?

The 7 October 2025 memorandum purports to increase rent by agreement on 6 December 2025, a date for which only 59 days’ notice would be provided under the memorandum. However, the memorandum ambiguously records “with a 60 day notice”. The contra proferentem rule applies. I interpret the memorandum against the landlord who prepared the agreement, as requiring the landlord to give a 60-day notice in compliance with the Act.
Therefore, I find the landlord’s purported rent increase is invalid for providing insufficient notice.

How much rent does the tenant owe the landlord?

The tenant must pay rent until 13 February 2026 even though he moved out in accordance with his notice on 15 December 2025. The notice was not valid to terminate the tenancy because it was a fixed-term tenancy not terminable by notice.
The landlord’s new tenants paid a higher rate of rent than the tenant was liable to pay (given I have found the purported rent increase was invalid). The additional rent must be credited against the tenant’s arrears.
I set out the rent arrears and rent credit in the table above. In summary, the tenants paid the landlord $38,717.14 for rent. The tenants are liable to pay the landlord $44,800.00 for rent, being $640.00 per week for the period 12 October 2024 to 13 February 2026. The landlord’s new tenants were paying $10.00 per week more rent than the tenants were obliged to pay for the final 22 weeks of the tenancy, so the tenants are eligible to receive a $220.00 rent credit. Is the landlord’s cleaning claim proven?
The landlord claimed a modest amount for the cost of having the premises clean. Tenants must leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy and remove all rubbish. 7
“Reasonably clean” means clean to the standard an objective bystander would consider was reasonably clean. A “reasonable” state of cleanliness does not mean spotless, immaculate, commercially clean, or hotel standard. Even where the tenant leaves the premises reasonably clean, the landlord may still have some work to get the premises up to standard for a new tenant and cannot claim the cost of that to the tenant.
It is the overall standard of cleanliness of the premises that matters. One or two isolated areas of minor uncleanliness do not mean the premises are not reasonably clean overall. A tenant does not have to leave the premises cleaner and tidier than at the start of the tenancy. A claim for cleaning may be dismissed if there is no proof of the premises’ condition at the start of the tenancy.
The onus for establishing the claim sits with the person making it on the balance of probabilities. In this case, the landlord is seeking to recover costs. Therefore, the 7 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) s 40(1)(e)(iii). landlord must prove that the tenants did not leave the premises reasonably clean and tidy.
The landlord had no entry photographs to show how clean and tidy the premises was at the beginning of the tenancy. The landlord said the oven needed cleaning at the end of the tenancy. However, the tenants said they never used the oven, so it must have already been unclean before the tenants’ tenancy began.
The Tribunal dismisses this claim for lack of proof.

Did the landlord breach the draught stopping standard?

The tenants claimed the premises suffered from excessive draught and therefore that the landlord has failed to comply with the HHS draught stopping standard.
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. 8
The tenants could not adduce any probative evidence of excess draughts such as photographs demonstrating excessive gaps in window joinery, or a healthy homes assessment prepared by a professional.
This claim is dismissed.

Did the landlord fail to maintain the premises?

The tenants claim the landlord failed to maintain the premises in respect to malfunctioning bathroom lights, a leaking kitchen tap, a leaking toilet and an untrimmed hedge that obstructed the entrance to the property, and a toilet door handle that could not be locked. Legal principles
Under s 45(1)(b) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA), landlords must maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair. That provision provides: 45 Landlord’s responsibilities (1) The landlord shall— 8 RTA s 45(1)(bb), which requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) Regulations 2019 (HHS). (a) ... (b) provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair having regard to the age and character of the premises and the period during which the premises are likely to remain habitable and available for residential purposes...
Landlords are liable for defects that they have knowledge of. They must repair such known defects within a reasonable time once they acquire such knowledge. The author of Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand explains: 9 The landlord’s obligation of repair is not absolute. A landlord does not have to foresee a latent and unobservable defect before it causes damage... A landlord therefore must repair within a reasonable time after knowledge of the need for repair: 10 “...the obligation of the landlord, under s 45, is to investigate and repair a defect brought to its attention within a timeframe which is reasonable in the circumstances and as to what that time is, I think, depends not only on the gravity of the problem but also on the objective evidence of the attempts made by the landlord to investigate, and put right, whatever the problem might be...”
Tenants have a duty to notify the landlord of damage to the premises, or of the need for any repair promptly after they discover the damage or disrepair. 11 Notwithstanding the tenant’s duty to notify, Landlords have an independent obligation to repair problems that are apparent from observation: 12 However, notice from the tenant is not needed if the landlords knew of the need for repair or the need for repair is apparent from observation...
If a landlord breaches their duty to maintain the premises, the Tribunal may order compensation; and if the failure is intentional, exemplary damages up to a maximum of $7,200.00. 13 Discussion
The tenants emailed the landlord on 21 May 2025: •Light in the bathroom. •One out of 3 lights is not working, and the other two are continuously flashing when turned on 9 Stewart Benson Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand (2018) Thomson Reuters at 6.18. 10 Collins v Professionals Hutt City Ltd DC Wellington CIV 2009-085-1431, 24 February 2010 at [15]. 11 Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA) s 40(1)(d). 12 See n 8. 13 RTA s 45(1A) and Schedule 1A. •Kitchen tap is leaking from the side •Toilet •This is not constant but water is leaking from it on the side from time to time. •Entry hedge •It needs trimming as the entryway has been overgrown
The landlord emailed her handyperson that day forwarding the tenant’s email.
The handyperson responded the same day saying they would contact the tenant and make a suitable time to call in to do the work.
The handyperson invoiced the landlord on 10 June 2025 for lighting, tap, and hedge. The toilet was leaking intermittently from the cistern, and he could not fix that. The landlord’s plumber invoiced her on 23 July 2025 for that repair.
The tenant says at the 7 October 2025 inspection he told the landlord the broken toilet lock and a leaking tap in the bathroom. He says these issues remained unrepaired throughout the remainder of the tenants’ stay until 15 December.
I am satisfied that the tenants did experience the issues they complain of. The first lot of issues except the toilet leak were promptly fixed. The toilet repair was slightly delayed.
It is probable that the landlord entirely overlooked the latter repairs because they were reported orally and were relatively minor in nature. It does not appear the landlord documented the inspection, or that the tenants followed up the problems in writing with the landlord. Conclusion
For the first set of issues, I order damages of $350.00 for loss of amenity. For the second I order $250.00.
I do not order exemplary damages because I am not satisfied the landlord intentionally failed to maintain the premises by knowingly failing to repair the reported problems within a reasonable period. 14 Bond 14 RTA s 109(3).
The Tribunal will direct the Bond Centre to pay out the bond to the landlord in part payment of the tenant’s debt under this order. Non-publication
The parties seek non-publication of their names and identifying details.
The Tribunal must, on the application of a party that has wholly or substantially succeeded in proceedings, order that the party’s name or identifying particulars not be published, unless the Tribunal considers that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
Both parties have substantially succeeded in their proceedings. I do not consider that publication is in the public interest or is justified because of the party’s conduct or any other circumstances of the case.
It follows, non-publication is ordered as set out in the orders above.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425804 — Leaks

At a glance

Award balance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5425804 — Leaks

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Could you please send me the full tenancy agreement/renewal paperwork?

What date did the tenancy end?

Is the purported rent increase valid?

How much rent does the tenant owe the landlord?

Did the landlord breach the draught stopping standard?

Did the landlord fail to maintain the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Claims & awards

Dismissed claims

Order

Reasons

Could you please send me the full tenancy agreement/renewal paperwork?

What date did the tenancy end?

Is the purported rent increase valid?

How much rent does the tenant owe the landlord?

Did the landlord breach the draught stopping standard?

Did the landlord fail to maintain the premises?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions