What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5441509 about?

The tribunal order states: The compensation claim for shower step damage is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5441509?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5441509?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5441509?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14001053-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5441509 about?

The tribunal order states: The compensation claim for shower step damage is dismissed.

How much money was awarded in case 5441509?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5441509?

The primary dispute was Mould & damp.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5441509?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/14001053-Tribunal_Order.pdf.

40 Garden Heights Avenue, Glenview, Hamilton 3206 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5441509 — Mould & damp

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.

This hearing was a continuation with a prior order dated 27 May 2026 dealing with all claims other than the shower step/bathroom claim. The matter was adjourned for the landlord for seek insurer clarification prior to any determination of this final claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to shower step?

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.

Fair wear and tear has been described as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant.

In Nixon v Geal-Otter DC North Shore, 30 January 1996, [1996] RTHNZ 2, 1996 WL 35049225, Judge Thorburn stated: Adjudicators and the Court must be careful to recognise that in any tenancy there will be a deterioration of condition because of fair wear and tear. It can be no other way. Mere use of premises will by the law of inevitability produce a deterioration of condition.

The shower was an older style stainless steel base with Formica walls. A raised wooded step into the shower prevented water escape. A shower curtain rested against the step.

Near the end of the tenancy a deterioration in the visual condition of the step was observed by the landlord, noting mould such that they purchased some mould removal product for the tenant to use.

It later became apparent that the wood was suffering from rot. This is clearly evident in the exit photos.

As discussed at the hearing, to find the tenant liable requires me to consider the damage something that the tenant could have reasonably avoided or have raised the rot with the landlord. Based on the evidence, I consider it not something that the tenant should have been aware of. I considered rot from below where it joins the shower base as being an issue before any change in the paint finish/appearance on the top of the step. The visible mould as seen previously could be attributed to that underlying problem as much as any tenant failure to maintain.

The landlord has not been able to evidence the damage as more than wear and tear. The source of the rot, in my mind, was sub-surface and negates any tenant liability for any possible failure to advise the landlord of what was occurring. It was open to the landlord to investigate any possible wood damage beyond the visual inspection in August 2025. The extent of the rot as shown some four months later at exit suggest a physical inspection at that time might have evidence the underlying issue.

Given the above, the final claim of the landlord must be dismissed.

Order

The compensation claim for shower step damage is dismissed.

Reasons

The landlord attended the hearing, set down to be conducted via video conference. There was no entry into the conference by the tenant, nor any call in to the conference by one of the telephone numbers provided on the Notice of Hearing. I was satisfied adequate service had completed and I continued with the hearing.
This hearing was a continuation with a prior order dated 27 May 2026 dealing with all claims other than the shower step/bathroom claim. The matter was adjourned for the landlord for seek insurer clarification prior to any determination of this final claim.

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to shower step?

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.
Fair wear and tear has been described as the deterioration of premises due to both reasonable use and ordinary operation of natural forces, reasonable conduct on the part of the tenant being assumed. The amount of damage is not relevant.
In Nixon v Geal-Otter DC North Shore, 30 January 1996, [1996] RTHNZ 2, 1996 WL 35049225, Judge Thorburn stated: Adjudicators and the Court must be careful to recognise that in any tenancy there will be a deterioration of condition because of fair wear and tear. It can be no other way. Mere use of premises will by the law of inevitability produce a deterioration of condition.
The shower was an older style stainless steel base with Formica walls. A raised wooded step into the shower prevented water escape. A shower curtain rested against the step.
Near the end of the tenancy a deterioration in the visual condition of the step was observed by the landlord, noting mould such that they purchased some mould removal product for the tenant to use.
It later became apparent that the wood was suffering from rot. This is clearly evident in the exit photos.
As discussed at the hearing, to find the tenant liable requires me to consider the damage something that the tenant could have reasonably avoided or have raised the rot with the landlord. Based on the evidence, I consider it not something that the tenant should have been aware of. I considered rot from below where it joins the shower base as being an issue before any change in the paint finish/appearance on the top of the step. The visible mould as seen previously could be attributed to that underlying problem as much as any tenant failure to maintain.
The landlord has not been able to evidence the damage as more than wear and tear. The source of the rot, in my mind, was sub-surface and negates any tenant liability for any possible failure to advise the landlord of what was occurring. It was open to the landlord to investigate any possible wood damage beyond the visual inspection in August 2025. The extent of the rot as shown some four months later at exit suggest a physical inspection at that time might have evidence the underlying issue.
Given the above, the final claim of the landlord must be dismissed.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5441509 — Mould & damp at 40 Garden Heights Avenue, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5441509 — Mould & damp at 40 Garden Heights Avenue, Glenview, Hamilton 3206

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to shower step?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.

Order

Reasons

Is the tenant responsible for the damage to shower step?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

Reduce avoidable tribunal risk with proper tenant checks.