How much money was awarded in case 5427537?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5427537?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5427537?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13051457-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

How much money was awarded in case 5427537?

Property Damage: $300.00 awarded to landlord; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to landlord

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5427537?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5427537?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13051457-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

42 McMeekan Avenue, Chartwell, Hamilton 3210 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5427537 — Exemplary damages

Q: What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5427537 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

Order

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5427537 — net $328.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Exemplary Damages – failing to vacate	$300.00	Exemplary Damages – failing to vacate
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$328.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$328.00

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.

[The landlord/s] is granted possession of the premises at 42 McMeekan Avenue, Chartwell, Hamilton 3210 at 11:59pm Sunday 1 February 2026.

Stacey Louise Illingworth must pay [The landlord/s] $328.00 immediately, as follows:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. There was no attendance by the tenant.

The landlord has applied for possession of the premises and exemplary damages following the termination of the tenancy.

The landlord served the tenant with a 90 day notice to terminate on 17 October 2025. The tenancy ended on 15 January 2026, which is less than 90 days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 are satisfied. The landlord says that the tenant is still in possession of the property.

[The landlord/s] claims the tenant did not vacate the premises on 15 January 2026, the date the tenancy ended.

A tenant must vacate the premises on the termination of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(e)(i) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Breaching this obligation without reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 40(3A)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

The tenant has failed without reasonable excuse to vacate the property by the date recorded in the 90 day notice to terminate. I find they have committed an unlawful act.

Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.

When considering whether to award exemplary damages under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 109(3) requires the Tribunal to have regard to the following factors: (a) The intent of the person committing the unlawful act; (b) The effect of the unlawful act; (c) The interests of the landlord or tenant against whom the unlawful act was committed; (d) The public interest; and (e) Whether it is just to make the award.

I am satisfied that the tenant has intentionally failed to vacate the premises and without reasonable excuse. This has resulted in the landlord being unable take possession of the property.

Accordingly, I award exemplary damages of $300.00 in respect of the tenant’s breach of obligations.

Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.

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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.

The landlord applied for a name suppression order. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as the application is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5427537 — net $328.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Landlord	Reason
Exemplary Damages – failing to vacate	$300.00	Exemplary Damages – failing to vacate
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$328.00
Total payable by Tenant to Landlord	$328.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the landlord name and identifying details.
[The landlord/s] is granted possession of the premises at 42 McMeekan Avenue, Chartwell, Hamilton 3210 at 11:59pm Sunday 1 February 2026.
Stacey Louise Illingworth must pay [The landlord/s] $328.00 immediately, as follows:

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing via remote video conference. There was no attendance by the tenant.
The landlord has applied for possession of the premises and exemplary damages following the termination of the tenancy.
The landlord served the tenant with a 90 day notice to terminate on 17 October 2025. The tenancy ended on 15 January 2026, which is less than 90 days ago. The requirements of section 64(1) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 are satisfied. The landlord says that the tenant is still in possession of the property.
[The landlord/s] claims the tenant did not vacate the premises on 15 January 2026, the date the tenancy ended.
A tenant must vacate the premises on the termination of the tenancy. See section 40(1)(e)(i) of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation without reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 40(3A)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The tenant has failed without reasonable excuse to vacate the property by the date recorded in the 90 day notice to terminate. I find they have committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has committed an unlawful act intentionally, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied 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.
When considering whether to award exemplary damages under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986, section 109(3) requires the Tribunal to have regard to the following factors: (a) The intent of the person committing the unlawful act; (b) The effect of the unlawful act; (c) The interests of the landlord or tenant against whom the unlawful act was committed; (d) The public interest; and (e) Whether it is just to make the award.
I am satisfied that the tenant has intentionally failed to vacate the premises and without reasonable excuse. This has resulted in the landlord being unable take possession of the property.
Accordingly, I award exemplary damages of $300.00 in respect of the tenant’s breach of obligations.
Because [The applicant/s] has wholly succeeded with the claim I must reimburse the filing fee.
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 – section 95A Residential Tenancies Act.
The landlord applied for a name suppression order. The landlord is entitled to name suppression as the application is successful – see section 95A RTA.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5427537 — Exemplary damages at 42 McMeekan Avenue, Chartwell, Hamilton 3210

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5427537 — Exemplary damages at 42 McMeekan Avenue, Chartwell, Hamilton 3210

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