What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5435453 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 5435453?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435453?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435453?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13493057-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5435453 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 5435453?

Property Damage: $1,000.00 awarded to tenant; Filing Fee: $28.00 awarded to tenant

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5435453?

The primary dispute was Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5435453?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13493057-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

Room 9, 1 Westney Road, Mangere, Auckland 2022, Airport Tenancy Tribunal Case 5435453 — Exemplary damages

Reasons

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435453 — net $4,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Refund of the bond	$3,000.00	Refund of the bond
Exemplary damages: s 19/109 RTA	$1,000.00	s 19/109 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,028.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$4,028.00

The tenants attended the hearing. The landlord did not connect to the MS Teams link provided to them and nor did they connect via telephone as instructed in the Notice of Hearing sent to them.

A day before the hearing the landlord emailed the registry seeking an adjournment due to unavailability. The registry requested documentary evidence to support the application for an adjournment. This was not provided, and the landlord was not advised that the adjournment had been granted. I did not adjourn there hearing due to a lack of information about why the landlord was unavailable. The hearing proceeded in their absence.

The tenant has applied for a refund of their bond and exemplary damages for failure by the landlord to lodge the bond.

RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.

REFUND OF BOND

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond which was paid by MSD (confirmation was provided by the tenant). Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, if 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.

The landlord holds the bond; therefore, I make an order that the landlord pay the bond of $3,000 to the tenants.

BOND NOT LODGED

The tenants claim the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre. I have confirmed with the Bond Centre that no bond has been lodged in respect of this tenancy.

A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. 1 Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. 2 I find the landlord has 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 1 See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 2 See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. 3

Intent –While the landlord did not attend the hearing it is clear the landlord was aware of the obligation to lodge the bond (as noted in her communication with the tenants) and has chosen not to do so.

Effect - The effect of the tenant for the bond not being lodged is that they have been without these funds for a number of months. They have a debt with MSD which is causing them stress. The situation has created a power imbalance the process of lodging of the Bond with the bond centre is intended to level.

Interest of tenant - It is in the tenant’s interest to receive exemplary damages for the unlawful acts committed against her.

Public interest - There is a public interest in ensuring landlords lodge tenant’s bonds. The bond belongs to the tenant, and it is therefore important that it is protected at the Bond Centre so that it can be paid out automatically by way of a Tribunal order.

The Tribunal’s usual approach to exemplary damages is to award one third of the maximum unless there are aggravating or mitigating factors in play. 4 The situation is aggravated by the landlord not attending the hearing to explain why the bond has not been lodged or refunded to the tenants’ months after the tenancy has ended. In having regards to the above factors, I consider an award of exemplary damages of two/thirds of the maximum is appropriate and I make an order for exemplary damages of $1,000.00. FILING FEE / SUPPRESSION

Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $28.

The tenants applied for name suppression and as the tenants have had substantial success with the claim I order name suppression for the tenants. 5

Claims and awards in Tenancy Tribunal application 5435453 — net $4,028.00 NZD. Amounts reconciled from the published order (claims sum and net total). Verify on MoJ.
Claim	Tenant	Reason
Refund of the bond	$3,000.00	Refund of the bond
Exemplary damages: s 19/109 RTA	$1,000.00	s 19/109 RTA
Filing fee reimbursement	$28.00	Filing fee reimbursement
Net award	$4,028.00
Total payable by Landlord to Tenant	$4,028.00

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants names and identifying details.
Registered Suppliers Limited As Agent For Westney Lodge must pay [The tenant/s] $4,028.00 immediately as calculated in the table below:

Reasons

The tenants attended the hearing. The landlord did not connect to the MS Teams link provided to them and nor did they connect via telephone as instructed in the Notice of Hearing sent to them.
A day before the hearing the landlord emailed the registry seeking an adjournment due to unavailability. The registry requested documentary evidence to support the application for an adjournment. This was not provided, and the landlord was not advised that the adjournment had been granted. I did not adjourn there hearing due to a lack of information about why the landlord was unavailable. The hearing proceeded in their absence.
The tenant has applied for a refund of their bond and exemplary damages for failure by the landlord to lodge the bond.

RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISIONS

The relevant law that applies is found in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (RTA). With any claim before the Tenancy Tribunal, the Tribunal applies the usual civil law standards and expectations. That includes a requirement that the applicant, establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. The balance of probabilities means more likely than un-likely, or in mathematical terms, has a fractionally more than 50% likelihood. The Tribunal does not need to be certain or very sure about any claim, only that what is claimed is likely. This obligation carried by the applicant is referred to as the “burden of proof”. Independent witnesses, corroborating documents and photographs are an important part of discharging this burden.

REFUND OF BOND

The tenant has applied for refund of the bond which was paid by MSD (confirmation was provided by the tenant). Section 22B(2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986 provides that, where a tenant applies for refund of the bond, if 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.
The landlord holds the bond; therefore, I make an order that the landlord pay the bond of $3,000 to the tenants.

BOND NOT LODGED

The tenants claim the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre. I have confirmed with the Bond Centre that no bond has been lodged in respect of this tenancy.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. 1 Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. 2 I find the landlord has 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 1 See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986. 2 See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986. regard to the party’s intent, the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. 3
Intent –While the landlord did not attend the hearing it is clear the landlord was aware of the obligation to lodge the bond (as noted in her communication with the tenants) and has chosen not to do so.
Effect - The effect of the tenant for the bond not being lodged is that they have been without these funds for a number of months. They have a debt with MSD which is causing them stress. The situation has created a power imbalance the process of lodging of the Bond with the bond centre is intended to level.
Interest of tenant - It is in the tenant’s interest to receive exemplary damages for the unlawful acts committed against her.
Public interest - There is a public interest in ensuring landlords lodge tenant’s bonds. The bond belongs to the tenant, and it is therefore important that it is protected at the Bond Centre so that it can be paid out automatically by way of a Tribunal order.
The Tribunal’s usual approach to exemplary damages is to award one third of the maximum unless there are aggravating or mitigating factors in play. 4 The situation is aggravated by the landlord not attending the hearing to explain why the bond has not been lodged or refunded to the tenants’ months after the tenancy has ended. In having regards to the above factors, I consider an award of exemplary damages of two/thirds of the maximum is appropriate and I make an order for exemplary damages of $1,000.00. FILING FEE / SUPPRESSION
Because the tenant has substantially succeeded with the claim, I have reimbursed the filing fee of $28.
The tenants applied for name suppression and as the tenants have had substantial success with the claim I order name suppression for the tenants. 5

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435453 — Exemplary damages at Room 9, 1 Westney Road, Mangere, Auckland 2022, Airport

At a glance

Tenancy Tribunal case 5435453 — Exemplary damages at Room 9, 1 Westney Road, Mangere, Auckland 2022, Airport

At a glance

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISIONS

REFUND OF BOND

BOND NOT LODGED

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Award balance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

RELEVANT LEGAL PROVISIONS

REFUND OF BOND

BOND NOT LODGED

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions