What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5465920 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 5465920?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465920?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465920?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13311944-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5465920 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 5465920?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5465920?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: 14-day notice, State of repair, Healthy homes, Exemplary damages, Mould & damp, Leaks.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5465920?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/13311944-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

75A Clyde Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016 Tenancy Tribunal Case 5465920 — Rent arrears

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the Tenant name and identifying details.
[The tenant/s] must pay Michael Kinraid and John Kinraid $1,400.00 immediately from the bond, being rent arrears to 31/12/2025.
[The tenant/s] application for compensation and exemplary damages is dismissed.
The application by Michael Kinraid and John Kinraid for further rent arrears is dismissed.
The Bond Centre is to pay the bond of $2,400.00 ([Bond number suppressed]) immediately apportioned as follows: Michael Kinraid and John Kinraid: $1,400.00 [The tenant/s]: $1,000.00

Reasons

Three of the tenants attended the hearing, one in person, one via telephone and the third via WhatsApp; both landlords appeared in person.
On 2/1/2026 the tenants applied for compensation of $14,000.00 and exemplary damages for loss of possession, failure to maintain and breach of healthy homes standards.
Subsequently on 11/3/2026 the landlord applied for rent arrears of $800.00 and $2,800.00 for the 2024 and 2025 tenancies respectively.
Three of the tenants were parties to a fixed term tenancy from 1/1/2024 to 31/12/2024 at $800.00 rent per week, application 5465920.
From 1/1/2025 to 31/12/2025 four of the tenants were parties to a further fixed term tenancy at $800.00 per rent per week, application 5465947. Standard of proof
This is a civil jurisdiction which means when looking at the claims the standard of proof is on the balance of probabilities. Put simply this means the tenants and landlord must establish, with evidence, that their respective claims are more likely than not.
The Tribunal does not need to be completely certain. All evidence presented is considered and weighed to decide what is more likely.
Where there are serious allegations, or important issues at stake, the Tribunal needs a level of supporting evidence benefitting the matters to be decided.
Although I have not referred to all the evidence presented at the hearing the parties can be assured that it has been considered. For the purposes of conciseness only the most relevant or important evidence has been referred to.
The onus is on the applicants, in these cases both the tenants and the landlord, to provide the necessary evidence to support their claims. If they fail to do so then the applications will be dismissed, whether they have merit or not. Landlord’s claim

Do the tenants owe rent arrears?

The landlord claimed the tenants owed $800.00 rent arrears for the 2024 tenancy because they had failed to pay the first weeks rent.
Further the landlord claimed at the end of the 2025 tenancy that arrears of $2,800.00 were owing because the tenants had continued to pay rent at a reduced amount and failed to pay the last two weeks.
In support of their claims the landlord provided rent schedules for the respective years.
On the other hand, the tenants disputed they owed any arrears for 2024 and submitted they had not been advised of any rent owing when they transferred the bond to the new 2025 tenancy.
While agreeing that they had not paid the last two weeks rent for 2025 the tenants submitted this was because they believed the agreement was for them to pay a reduced weekly rental and someone else was living in the premises from 13/12/2025.
The claim for rent arrears of $800.00 for 2024 fails.
Despite the rent schedule the landlord has failed to persuade me that the tenants did not pay the first weeks rent.
The tenants were unaware any rent was owing when they entered into the new tenancy for 2025 and did not find out about the claim until fourteen and a half months after the end of the tenancy.
The landlord provided no correspondence between the parties about rent arrears or any 14 day notices.
I consider the landlord has proved rent arrears for the 2025 year were owing at the end of the tenancy.
However, an award has only been made for the last two weeks owing, at the reduced rate for two reasons.
First because I consider the tenants validly believed the amount they were paying of $700.00 per week was correct.
The rent schedule supports that the tenants made fifteen payments at the reduced rate and the landlord has provided no evidence to suggest they advised the tenants the weekly amount was wrong or that the reduction was for a limited period of time.
Second because I do not consider the landlord entered, allowed or facilitated one 2026 tenant to move their possessions into the premises on 12/12/2025.
The evidence is clear that possessions were moved into the premises then, but there is no persuasive evidence that it was the landlord who provided access or a key.
Further the evidence supports that the tenants were aware that at least one 2026 tenant wished to move their possessions in early, although the tenants deny they gave consent for this to happen.
There is no breach of section 48(1) by the landlord and the tenants are liable for the last two weeks rent, albeit at the reduced rate. Tenants claim

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

The tenants claim that the landlord failed to maintain the premises and breached healthy homes standards for draughts.
In particular the tenants were unhappy that the cracked window in the bedroom had not been repaired and let in water and draughts, the shower leaked creating a mould problem and the washing machine took over a year to fix.
In support of their claim the tenants submitted correspondence between themselves, and the landlord and photographs taken in November 2025 of what they believed was mould in a bedroom.
While agreeing that the bedroom window was cracked the landlord did not believe there was any draught because the glass was safety glass comprised of two thicknesses with a plastic film in between making the window watertight.
The landlord submitted that the monthly complaints about dampness due to the shower were due to the fact that the shower drain blocked because of hair blockages, which they regularly cleaned.
The landlord suggested that a permanent fix for this problem had been sorted in November.
While the landlord did not consider there was a mould problem in the premises the tenants were provided with a dehumidifier and allowed a reduction of $100.00 in their weekly rent.
Further the landlord submitted that three washing machines had been replaced in the premises during 2024 and 2025 and on at least one occasion the tenants had been allowed a weeks access to a washing machine in a neighbouring flat.
Under section 45, a landlord must, among other matters, provide and maintain the premises in a reasonable state of repair.
Section 45(1)(bb) requires compliance with the Residential Tenancies (Healthy Homes Standards) 2019 (HHS). [The tenant/s]
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.
The moisture ingress and drainage standard requires that buildings comprising residential tenancies must have efficient systems to drain storm water, surface water and ground water, and that includes gutters, downpipes and drains. The Standard requires a ground moisture barrier when there is an enclosed subfloor space.
Breaching any of these obligations is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $7,200.00. See section 45(1A) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Compliance dates for the HHS vary depending on the tenancy: a. For private rentals i. If the tenancy commenced between 28 August 2022 but before 3 March 2025, the rental must comply within 120 days of the commencement of any new or renewed tenancy. ii. All private rentals must comply by 1 July 2025.
The tenants have failed to persuade me that the premises were not provided and maintained in a reasonable state of repair or that there was any breach of healthy homes standards.
While the provision of the dehumidifier does suggest the possibility of an issue with dampness, the photographs provided by the tenants are at best inconclusive about whether there was any mould and if there was the cause of that mould.
Mould (or mildew) is a primitive form of fungal growth which grows from spores which abound everywhere. Mould will grow in any home where humidity remains high but will have difficulty in surviving in one with low humidity.
There are two ways to reduce humidity; by heating and ventilation, and ventilation is the most basic requirement. Responsibility for mould problems can rest with the tenant if the tenant fails to air and heat the premises properly. On the other hand, the landlord must provide the tenants with the necessary means to heat and air the premises. If appropriate, heating, fans and dehumidifiers should be provided. Also, devices should be fitted to windows so that they can be left open and also secure. This is especially so of the tenants are away during the daytime, as the tenants should not be required to leave the premises insecure in order to ventilate them.
Tenants must also tell the landlord where there is a mould problem so that the necessary action can be taken.
The landlord is also required to provide premises, which are not prone to mould. If the premises have an inherent problem, such as bad construction or water lying under the premises, the landlord has the responsibility to remedy the fault.
In summary premises must be able to be used and lived in, in a normal way, without mould developing. If this can't be done, then it is the landlord’s problem. If the tenants fail to ventilate and heat the premises when heating and ventilation are available, then it is the tenant’s problem.
The landlord confirmed that the outside of the premises had been inspected in mid-2025 for compliance with healthy homes standards and no issue was raised about weathertightness with the cracked bedroom window.
Although replacement of three washing machines over the timeframe is unfortunate, there is no evidence of undue delay.
Unfortunate as it may be for the tenants there is simply not enough objective evidence to support that the landlord may have breached section 45 or committed an unlawful act.
The claim for compensation of $14,000.00 by way of a rent reduction and exemplary damages fails.
No filing fees are awarded because the fees effectively cancel each other out, both parties having been only partly successful.
Suppression is granted to the tenants pursuant to section 95A(4) because I consider it is in their interests to do so.
The landlord did not ask for suppression.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5465920 — Rent arrears at 75A Clyde Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016

Tenancy Tribunal case 5465920 — Rent arrears at 75A Clyde Street, North Dunedin, Dunedin 9016

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Do the tenants owe rent arrears?

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Do the tenants owe rent arrears?

Did the landlord breach their obligations?

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Key findings

Frequently asked questions