What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5434629 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5434629?

Compensation: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5434629?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5434629?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13315719-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5434629 about?

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

How much money was awarded in case 5434629?

Compensation: $700.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5434629?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5434629?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13315719-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5434629 — Tenancy dispute

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5434629 — net $728.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$700.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$728.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$728.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Progressive Realty Limited As Agent For Yiewei Ye Andrew Main must pay [The tenant/s] $528.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below: DescriptionTenant Compensation $700.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $728.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $728.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants claim compensation and exemplary damages for alleged breaches of the landlord’s obligations under s45 Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) and for alleged breaches of s38 RTA.
The tenants viewed the property in December 2025. The tenancy started on 7 January 2026 and was for a 1 year fixed term.
When the tenants went to move in, they were concerned about the condition of the property. They claim this it was unsanitary, uninhabitable and unsafe. They say that it did not comply with Healthy Homes requirements.
The tenants also say that when they raised these issues, the landlord’s representative was rude and dismissive to the extent that it interfered with their reasonable peace and comfort. The tenants were so distressed by the condition of the premises that they did not properly move into the property.
The landlord said they took steps to address the tenants’ concerns and, when that was not successful, they allowed the tenancy to end with no rent being paid and full reimbursement of the bond. Cleanliness & Maintenance
Under s45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to their age and character).
The premises were not reasonably clean at the start of the tenancy. The tenant provided photographs from inside cupboards, around the toilet, in the bathroom/shower and down the side of the oven that were filthy. There was also evidence of mould in the bathroom.
The landlord’s failure to acknowledge the tenant’s concerns in this regard have led to the breakdown in the relationship and to this application. Even at the start of the hearing, the landlord was attempting to argue that the premises were reasonably clean, when clearly, they were not.
That said, the condition of the property was not “uninhabitable” or “unsafe”. The tenant put significant weight on a sewing needle she found on the carpet. While unfortunate, the presence of one sewing needle does not render the entire premises unsafe.
The carpet and curtains needed to be replaced. The landlord identified that after the previous tenants had moved and had made plans to address that within the first two weeks of this tenancy. The tenant maintains that that was not enough, and that the existing carpets should have been professionally cleaned and made hygienic.
Mould should have been removed bathroom surfaces before the tenancy started and some of the interior paintwork on widow frames was quite worn.
Overall, there was some work required at the start of the tenancy, but it was not to the extent that the premises were uninhabitable and were not to the extent that would justify ending the tenancy. Healthy Homes Standards
Under s45, the landlord must comply with Healthy Homes Standards.
The tenant claims that the premises did not comply with the ventilation standard in relation to the kitchen extraction. She also suggested other areas of possible non-compliance.
The landlord accidentally provided the tenant with an old Healthy Homes assessment report which identified areas of non-compliance. The landlord provided evidence that all those issues were addressed, including the installation of a new extraction system which vents to the exterior of the property.
The tenant has the onus of proving its claim. There was no compelling or independent evidence of current non-compliance. Quiet Enjoyment
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (see s 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 s 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
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 s 109(3) RTA).
The tenant claims that the landlord’s representative was dismissive, rude and aggressive when she attempted to raise concerns about the condition of the property. She described the conduct as hostile and intimidating. The landlord rejected that, but did not bring the staff member to the hearing for the Tribunal to consider his evidence or observe his demeanour.
I find it likely that the landlord’s representative was dismissive of the tenant’s concerns. I also consider that there was likely a relationship breakdown regarding expectations. While the tenant was rightly disappointed about the condition of the premises on 7 January, I consider that their almost immediate rejection of the premises was out of proportion to the issues which existed.
The tenant has not established that it is more likely than not that the landlord has breached s38 RTA. Result
I find that the landlord breached its obligations under s45 RTA by failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean condition or in a reasonable state of repair.
The tenant has suffered inconvenience and additional moving and utilities costs as a result of those failures. I award compensation of $700.00
However, I do not consider it necessary to award exemplary damages in this instance. While the landlord did not accept all the tenant’s concerns, it did take steps to remedy them (including engaging another cleaner). It also offered to defer the start of the tenancy until all issues were addressed or allow the tenant to cancel the agreement.
As the tenant was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee and granted its request for suppression of its details.

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5434629 — net $728.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Compensation	$700.00	Compensation
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$728.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$728.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
Progressive Realty Limited As Agent For Yiewei Ye Andrew Main must pay [The tenant/s] $528.00 immediately, calculated as shown in table below: DescriptionTenant Compensation $700.00 Filing fee reimbursement $28.00 Total award $728.00 Total payable by Landlord to Tenant $728.00

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing.
The tenants claim compensation and exemplary damages for alleged breaches of the landlord’s obligations under s45 Residential Tenancies Act (RTA) and for alleged breaches of s38 RTA.
The tenants viewed the property in December 2025. The tenancy started on 7 January 2026 and was for a 1 year fixed term.
When the tenants went to move in, they were concerned about the condition of the property. They claim this it was unsanitary, uninhabitable and unsafe. They say that it did not comply with Healthy Homes requirements.
The tenants also say that when they raised these issues, the landlord’s representative was rude and dismissive to the extent that it interfered with their reasonable peace and comfort. The tenants were so distressed by the condition of the premises that they did not properly move into the property.
The landlord said they took steps to address the tenants’ concerns and, when that was not successful, they allowed the tenancy to end with no rent being paid and full reimbursement of the bond. Cleanliness & Maintenance
Under s45, a landlord must provide the premises in a reasonable state of cleanliness and provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair (having regard to their age and character).
The premises were not reasonably clean at the start of the tenancy. The tenant provided photographs from inside cupboards, around the toilet, in the bathroom/shower and down the side of the oven that were filthy. There was also evidence of mould in the bathroom.
The landlord’s failure to acknowledge the tenant’s concerns in this regard have led to the breakdown in the relationship and to this application. Even at the start of the hearing, the landlord was attempting to argue that the premises were reasonably clean, when clearly, they were not.
That said, the condition of the property was not “uninhabitable” or “unsafe”. The tenant put significant weight on a sewing needle she found on the carpet. While unfortunate, the presence of one sewing needle does not render the entire premises unsafe.
The carpet and curtains needed to be replaced. The landlord identified that after the previous tenants had moved and had made plans to address that within the first two weeks of this tenancy. The tenant maintains that that was not enough, and that the existing carpets should have been professionally cleaned and made hygienic.
Mould should have been removed bathroom surfaces before the tenancy started and some of the interior paintwork on widow frames was quite worn.
Overall, there was some work required at the start of the tenancy, but it was not to the extent that the premises were uninhabitable and were not to the extent that would justify ending the tenancy. Healthy Homes Standards
Under s45, the landlord must comply with Healthy Homes Standards.
The tenant claims that the premises did not comply with the ventilation standard in relation to the kitchen extraction. She also suggested other areas of possible non-compliance.
The landlord accidentally provided the tenant with an old Healthy Homes assessment report which identified areas of non-compliance. The landlord provided evidence that all those issues were addressed, including the installation of a new extraction system which vents to the exterior of the property.
The tenant has the onus of proving its claim. There was no compelling or independent evidence of current non-compliance. Quiet Enjoyment
A landlord must not interfere with the reasonable peace, comfort or privacy of the tenant in their use of the premises (see s 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 s 38(3) and Schedule 1A RTA).
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 s 109(3) RTA).
The tenant claims that the landlord’s representative was dismissive, rude and aggressive when she attempted to raise concerns about the condition of the property. She described the conduct as hostile and intimidating. The landlord rejected that, but did not bring the staff member to the hearing for the Tribunal to consider his evidence or observe his demeanour.
I find it likely that the landlord’s representative was dismissive of the tenant’s concerns. I also consider that there was likely a relationship breakdown regarding expectations. While the tenant was rightly disappointed about the condition of the premises on 7 January, I consider that their almost immediate rejection of the premises was out of proportion to the issues which existed.
The tenant has not established that it is more likely than not that the landlord has breached s38 RTA. Result
I find that the landlord breached its obligations under s45 RTA by failing to provide the premises in a reasonably clean condition or in a reasonable state of repair.
The tenant has suffered inconvenience and additional moving and utilities costs as a result of those failures. I award compensation of $700.00
However, I do not consider it necessary to award exemplary damages in this instance. While the landlord did not accept all the tenant’s concerns, it did take steps to remedy them (including engaging another cleaner). It also offered to defer the start of the tenancy until all issues were addressed or allow the tenant to cancel the agreement.
As the tenant was partially successful, I have awarded reimbursement of the Tribunal application fee and granted its request for suppression of its details.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5434629 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5434629 — Tenancy dispute

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