What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4570349?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4570349?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4570349?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4570349?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9289449-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

What was the outcome of Tenancy Tribunal case 4570349?

The tribunal order states: No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision.

How much money was awarded in case 4570349?

Individual award amounts are in the official MoJ PDF. Claim amounts appear on this page when claims and net totals reconcile.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 4570349?

The primary dispute was Rent arrears. Related themes: Exemplary damages.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 4570349?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/9289449-Tenancy_Tribunal_Order.pdf.

228 Robertson Road, Mabel Bush, RD 2, Invercargill 9872 Tenancy Tribunal Case 4570349 — Rent arrears

Order

No suppression orders apply around publication of this decision. 2.
44 Total award Less bond landlord retained $3,148.56 $1520.00 $1,820.44 Net award$191.88 $191.88 Total payable by landlord to the tenant

Reasons

All parties attended the hearing. The tenant made an application to have her solicitor represent her on the basis of the claim exceeding $6000.00. The landlord consented to this representation.
By way of background, the tenancy agreement commenced on 21 June 2022 and came to an end on 21 June 2023. This was following termination by the landlord and the tenant choosing to vacate earlier than the notice given by the landlord.
The tenant has applied for compensation, costs, and reimbursement of the filing fee following the end of the tenancy.
One of the claims of the tenants is for compensation given the landlord failed to lodge the bond. The landlord has retained the bond. There is no appl;icaiton before me to retain the bond.
I am taking a pragmatic approach to this. There is agreement to deal with the bond issue today to avoid the landlord having to make an application for the bond at a later date. Dealing with this matter today will resolve all outstanding matters in relation to this tenancy. Suppression Orders
The tenant, in her application seeks suppression orders as she marked the application “Yes”.
Section 95A of the Residential Tenancies Act states that a 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 identification is in the public interest or is justified because of the parties conduct or any other circumstances.
The tenant in this case has been ‘substantially’ successful. However, the parties agreed for me to deal with the issue of rent arrears. The rent outstanding was in ;excess of $3,000.00. Tension between the parties arose due to issues of cleanliness of the property. Although the landlord did not claim clean-up costs.
On this basis and on the evidence in this case it would not be in the interests of Justice to award name suppression for the tenant alone. Therefore, a suppression order is not granted.

How much is owed for rent?

Both parties agreed that the tenant owed $3148.56. The tenant stated that WINZ would be4 paying this for her. I make the order on the basis of an agreed ‘oral application’ to deal with all matters today given there was consent to this amount. The landlord did not claim for clean-up costs although it is clear that there were costs incurred. Is the landlord liable for exemplary damages for entering the premises without consent or notice?
claims the landlord has entered the premises without consent or notice.
A landlord may not enter the premises during the tenancy except with the tenant's consent, in an emergency, or after giving the required notice for inspections and repairs and maintenance. See section 48(1) and (2) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 48 (4)(a) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The evidence is very scarce and uncertain.
The landlord claims that the tenant’s boyfriend allowed the landlord to enter the premises on one occasion as she spoke to him while having a cigarette. There was evidence of notice being given for property inspections previously and the tenant changing the date and this was agreed to.
There is insufficient evidence to support the claim on the balance of probabilities that the landlord entered the premises on a specific time and day to award damages for breaching the Residential Tenancies Act. I therefore dismiss this part of the claim.

Is the landlord liable for exemplary damages for failing to lodge the bond?

claims the landlord has not lodged the bond with the Bond Centre within the required time.
A landlord must send any bond payment to the Bond Centre within 23 working days after the payment is received. See section 19(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Breaching this obligation is an unlawful act for which the Tribunal may award exemplary damages up to a maximum of $1,500.00. See section 19(2) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord accepts that they failed to lodge the bond. I must therefore find that 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.
Landlord’s are required to understand their responsibilities to tenants and I acknowledge this by making a monetary award as it is in the public interest to do so. However, the tenant acknowledges that there has been no harm caused to her as she owes in excess of $3000.00 in rent. The effect of the breach has had no effect on her. This is reflected in the monetary award.

Is the landlord liable to pay exemplary damages for a retaliatory notice?

On 16 April the tenant received a text advising that she and a real estate would be attending the property at 10am the following morning. The tenant replied that she needed more notice. The landlord then replied that she tried to call her “yesterday“ and that would have made it 48 hours. She further text the message “Agent and myself will be there and as of today this is your notice termination of tenancy agreement”.
The tenant claims the notice is retaliatory. The landlord confirms that the agent was carrying out a valuation not because the property was being listed for sale.
For a notice to be declared retaliatory, the tenant must prove that in terminating the tenancy, the landlord was motivated wholly or partly by the tenant exercising a right under the tenancy agreement or any Act, or by any complaint against the landlord. See section 54(1) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
Giving a termination notice which is declared to be retaliatory is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded, up to a maximum of $6,500.00. See section 54(2), (3) and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord I find has committed an unlawful act.
Where a party has issued a retaliatory notice, the Tribunal may award exemplary damages where it is satisfied it would be just to do so taking into account the effect of the unlawful act, the interests of the other party, and the public interest. For completeness giving of a retaliatory notice does not have to be intentional to award exemplary damages for a breach. See section 109(3) and (3A) Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The way in which the termination was carried out was in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act. The tenant replied to the message seeking when the tenancy was then to come to an end. She was given “three months” the landlord stated in evidence.
I do find that the text was retaliatory in response to the tenant seeking the 48 hours’ notice required under the act. Is the landlord liable for exemplary damages for terminating the tenancy knowing they are not entitled to?
The tenant claims that the landlord has breached their obligations under section 60AA.
Under Section 60AA a landlord must not give a notice to terminate the tenancy or apply to the Tribunal for such an order, knowing they are not entitled to do so.
Breaching any of these obligations without a reasonable excuse is an unlawful act for which exemplary damages may be awarded up to a maximum of $6500.00. See section 60AA and Schedule 1A Residential Tenancies Act 1986.
The landlord terminated the tenancy stating that they did so because they were sick of the failed inspections. There were not written records of the inspections and alleged breaches. The landlord has been a landlord prior and made no reasonable submissions to defend this claim. On the evidence I find they have committed an unlawful act and compensation is appropriate.
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.

Is the landlord liable for the solicitors costs the tenant incurred?

Section 78 of the Residential tenancies Act gives the Tribunal jurisdiction to make an order that a party pay money to another.
The tenant was required to seek legal advice in relation to the text messages the tenant received on the last day of the tenancy threatening to dump her possessions. This was before her final day of the tenancy ended. She was also required to seek advice in relation to the way then tenancy came to an end.
The landlord was concerned given the claims before the tribunal given the rent arrears and clean up she was required to do.
However, both parties have rights that can be enforced in the tribunal. The landlord has not filed an application and both parties need to be aware of their obligations under the Residential Tenancies Act and ensure they carry out the correct process in dealing with matters that arise.
In relation to these claims the amounts awarded are reflected in the ‘effect’ on the tenant of such breaches. She found alternative accommodation and moved approximately three weeks before the ‘notice’ period came to an end.

Tenancy Tribunal case 4570349 — Rent arrears at 228 Robertson Road, Mabel Bush, RD 2, Invercargill 9872

Tenancy Tribunal case 4570349 — Rent arrears at 228 Robertson Road, Mabel Bush, RD 2, Invercargill 9872

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the landlord liable for exemplary damages for failing to lodge the bond?

Is the landlord liable to pay exemplary damages for a retaliatory notice?

Is the landlord liable for the solicitors costs the tenant incurred?

Order

Reasons

How much is owed for rent?

Is the landlord liable for exemplary damages for failing to lodge the bond?

Is the landlord liable to pay exemplary damages for a retaliatory notice?

Is the landlord liable for the solicitors costs the tenant incurred?